Systemwide Cost Benefit Analysis of Major Capital Improvements Final Report January 16, 2019 Metra Systemwide Cost Benefit Analysis of Major Capital Improvements Prepared for: Metra Prepared by: AECOM 303 East Wacker Drive Chicago, IL 60601 aecom.com In association with: Cambridge Systematics Connetics Transportation Group EJM Engineers Wight & Company This report was prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and the Illinois Department of Transportation. The contents reflect the views of the author who is responsible for the facts and accuracy presented. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of IDOT or U.S. DOT. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. AECOM i Metra Systemwide Cost Benefit Analysis of Major Capital Improvements Table of Contents ..........................................................................................................................1 1. Introduction ....................................................................4 2. Data Inputs, Assumptions and Methodology Project Definition 4 2.1 Operating Plans 5 2.2 Capital Improvement Plans 6 2.3 O&M Costs 6 2.4 Capital Costs 7 2.5 Ridership 7 2.6 State of Good Repair Impacts 7 2.7 Reliability Impacts 8 2.8 Project Timeframe 8 2.9 Potential Funding Sources 8 2.10 Connecting Services 9 2.11 Tier 1 and 2 Synergies 9 2.12 ..............................................................................................................10 3. Projects Analyzed .................................................................................................................15 4. Analysis Metrics Ridership and Revenue 15 4.1 Costs 15 4.2 Cost-Effectiveness 15 4.3 Other Metrics 16 4.4 ................................................................................................................. 17 5. Analysis Results ................................................................................ A-1 Appendix – Project Description Index Figures Figure 1-1. Metra Improvement and Expansion Projects Evaluated 3 Tables 7 Table 2-1. O&M Cost Model Elements 8 Table 2-2. State of Good Repair Percentages of Project Improvements 10 Table 3-1. Cost Benefit Analysis Projects 11 Table 3-2. Cost Benefit Analysis Project by Focus Area 13 Table 3-3. Tier 1 Weekday Trains by Project 14 Table 3-4. Tier 2 Weekday Trains by Project 18 Table 5-1. Tier 1 Project Summaries 19 Table 5-2. Tier 2 Project Summaries AECOM ii Metra Systemwide Cost Benefit Analysis of Major Capital Improvements Abbreviations and Acronyms AA Alternatives Analysis BUILD Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development grants (replaced TIGER) CATS Chicago Area Transportation Study (replaced by CMAP) CBA Cost Benefit Analysis CIG Capital Investment Grants CIP Corridor Improvement Program CMAP Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning CN Canadian National Railway Company CP Canadian Pacific Railway CREATE Chicago Region Environmental and Transportation Efficiency CUS Chicago Union Station DMU diesel multiple unit EJ&E Elgin Joliet & Eastern (now part of CN Railway) EMU electric multiple unit FAA Federal Aviation Administration FAST Future Agenda for Suburban Transportation FTA Federal Transit Administration GTFS General Transit Feed Specification HC Metra Heritage Corridor Line MD-N Metra Milwaukee District North Line MD-W Metra Milwaukee District West Line MED Metra Electric District Line MIS Major Investment Studies MPO metropolitan planning organization MSF Maintenance & Storage Facilities NCS Metra North Central Service Line NICTD Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District O&M Operating & Maintenance Off-Pk Off-Peak Period P-3 Public-Private Partnership PTC Positive Train Control Rev Reverse Peak Period RID Metra Rock Island District Line ROW right-of-way RTA Regional Transportation Authority SCC Standard Cost Category (FTA’s capital cost workbook) SES SouthEast Service SGR State of Good Repair SSA South Suburban Airport STAR Line Suburban Transit Access Route STOPS Simplified Trips-on-Project Software ridership model SWS Metra SouthWest Service Line TIGER Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery UP-N Metra Union Pacific North Line UP-NW Metra Union Pacific Northwest Line UP-W Metra Union Pacific West Line US DOT United States Department of Transportation WSOR Wisconsin & Southern Railroad Co. AECOM iii Metra Systemwide Cost Benefit Analysis of Major Capital Improvements 1. Introduction Since the introduction of passenger rail service in the mid nineteenth century, the rail system in Chicago has grown to take its current shape. As the region’s travel The study examined a total of 38 market evolves and changes, Metra, the commuter rail operator for Northeast Illinois, must position itself to best projects including improvements respond to those changes. One of the greatest needs for this legacy system is to maintain the existing assets, to each of Metra’s existing and current funding does not fully support that. However, rail lines as well as all feasible it is important to look to the future with a balanced approach to capital investment. If sufficient capital extensions and new lines within funding from state, federal, or other sources is provided to both maintain the existing system and grow it to meet the seven counties of the Chicago the needs of the future, Metra could entertain some of these improvements so long as funding is also available Metropolitan Agency for Planning to operate and maintain them. In this time of decreasing capital budgets, it is more important than ever to (CMAP) region. evaluate the potential uses of scarce capital funds and determine the best uses of those funds. To this end, Metra commissioned this study, the Systemwide Cost some cases, lines have multiple proposals that were Benefit Analysis of Major Capital Improvements. analyzed during this study as separate projects. A map and list of the potential projects that were evaluated are Over the years, dozens of potential major expansions represented in Figure 1-1. The potential projects are of Metra service have been suggested or proposed organized into two tiers: by Metra and local stakeholders. The list of projects evaluated in this study was drawn from past Metra 1. Improvements to the existing network of Metra plans, regional transportation plans, and feedback routes (21 projects), and received during Metra’s strategic planning process. These potential projects had been evaluated at 2. Network expansions through extensions of existing different times under different methodologies, ranging lines or new lines (17 projects) from feasibility studies and alternatives analyses, to environmental assessments and some level of While this study does not, by itself, set priorities engineering. However, they were never evaluated all at for future spending for Metra or for future capital once, making it difficult to compare the results between programming, it endeavors to provide decision makers projects. The Systemwide Cost Benefit Analysis of with the necessary information to assist in such Major Capital Improvements brings all of these potential a prioritization process. The results highlight the projects into a single analysis on a level playing field. tradeoffs between different investment choices. Note A consistent set of assumptions was used across all that Metra has not yet completed this prioritization, so the potential projects to ensure that apples-to-apples there is no commitment by Metra to act on any of the comparisons could be made. evaluated projects, as Metra’s focus for the foreseeable future is to work toward achieving a state of good The study examined a total of 38 projects including repair for its existing assets. Also note that this report improvements to each of Metra’s existing rail lines as was an internal process completed by Metra staff well as all feasible extensions and new lines within the and the consultant team. The study did not include seven counties of the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for coordination with freight railroads or other stakeholders, Planning (CMAP) region. Proposed line extensions to but such coordination will proceed as Metra moves areas beyond the CMAP region were not evaluated. In forward with project prioritization. AECOM 1 Metra Systemwide Cost Benefit Analysis of Major Capital Improvements As priorities for future investment are established, the results of this analysis will help to inform future funding decisions. The project definitions and results from this study have already informed ON TO 2050, CMAP’s next regional comprehensive plan and the 2018-2023 Regional Transit Strategic Plan, Invest in Transit. Having solid data that defines the projects and clearly illustrates the costs and benefits of each one is critical to developing plans, securing grant funding and attracting funding partners. The priorities that are set will help identify the most effective services to move Metra forward. Metra anticipates that the results of this study will help identify a subset of projects to be studied in more detail and more fully developed for possible long term implementation. While the potential projects were defined as independent sets of improvements, it is clear that improvements to one line may benefit or reduce the cost of one or more projects on another line. These effects will be considered as priorities are established based on the study results. However, it must be stressed that before any of these