4.1. SR 09-16-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Northstar Commuter Rail Benefit-Cost Analysis Aug 29, 2002 A January 1999 report titled "Final Summary Report of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Commuter Rail Feasibility Study, Phase I1" lists benefit-cost ratios computed for six corridors that were under consideration for future commuter rail. The primary purpose of computing these was to prioritize the corridors into an order for further analysis and, possibly, implementation. Each corridor's computation included benefits for the value of: time saved (or lost) by drivers and bus riders switching to rail, avoided vehicle operating costs, avoided traffic accidents, avoided emissions and noise pollution, and avoided construction of parking in downtown Minneapolis. The method of computing the benefit-cost ratios used in this study did not include consideration of the remaining capital value of the investment at the end of the analysis period. The benefit-cost ratio in that January 1999 report for "Route B" running from Minneapolis to Elk River was 0.26. This was often erroneously cited as the benefit-cost ratio for the Northstar Commuter Rail. The Northstar Commuter Rail as currently defined is far different than the January 1999 Minneapolis to Elk River "Route B." Northstar today extends from Minneapolis to Rice. It offers 18 trains per day rather than the ten on "Route B." Additional analysis and engineering has led to an operating plan that can equip today's 18 trains from only four train sets (each train set is a locomotive, and four double-decked passenger cars) plus spares. Route B's ten trains required five train sets (locomotive and three double- decked passenger cars) plus spares. The longer corridor and additional daily commuter trains are expected to draw 9,594 trips per day at opening rather than the 3,452 opening day trips cited for "Route B" in the 1999 study. The increase in trips improves the benefits while the effective use of train sets helps manage operating and maintenance costs. The benefit-cost has now been computed for the current, more refined definition of the Northstar Corridor Rail Project. It also incorporates the remaining capital value of the project in 2020, the end of the analysis period. The result is a benefit-cost ratio of 0.84. The benefit-cost ratio still does not include benefits of commuter rail that are difficult to quantify. These include: · Economic development in the corridor · A strong, growing central business district in the state's major metropolitan area · Productive use of travel time by commuter rail riders · Time savings by highway travelers after some highway users switch to commuter rail This should not be viewed as an endorsement by Mn/DOT of applying benefit-cost ratios to decisions in transportation project implementation. Not all benefits and costs can be quantified. Until they can, government is obligated to deliver projects and services according to the public need, not based on benefit-cost analysis. If benefit- cost analysis determines delivery of projects, then most libraries, schools, parks and rural highways will not be funded.