Item 11.1 - Attachment 1 |
Detail Report - Review
of the M4 Toll |
DETAIL REPORT -
REVIEW OF THE M4 TOLL
BACKGROUND ON THE M4
The NSW State Government started constructing the M4
motorway in the 1970s. In 1989,
Statewide Roads Limited was awarded the contract to build the last 10km between
Mays Hills and Prospect, upgrade existing sections and operate and manage the
M4. The M4 became a toll road in 1992
with the Cashback scheme introduced in 1997.
The M4 passes to RTA control in February 2010.
BACKGROUND ON
Road tolls are a form of road pricing of which there are two types. The first type is revenue generation which is generally used to fund new infrastructure, and to some degree maintenance. The second type is demand management to control the use of road space to reduce congestion or green house gas emissions.
The tolls in
When the tolls in
Other types of demand management road pricing include road tax, fuel tax, congestion charging and parking charges. The revenue from these schemes is often used for general revenue which can include new road infrastructure and maintenance. However, the revenue is often hypothecated to fund public transport or road improvements to make the fee more publicly acceptable.
There are two classes of toll, Class2 applies to cars and
motorcycles and Class4 to trucks. This
report considers the toll applicable for cars for simplicity. Table 1 also shows the toll per km which
varies greatly across
1. Recommend that the RTA
consider a Sydney-wide toll system that is equitable.
Table 1 – Existing
Road Tolls in
Road |
Passes
to RTA ownership |
Length (km) |
Toll ($) |
Actual
Toll per km ($) |
Theoretical
Toll per km ($) |
M4 |
2010 |
46 |
2.75 |
1.10 |
0.06* |
M2 |
2042 |
21 |
4.40 |
0.21 |
same |
M5 |
2033 |
22 |
3.80 |
0.38* |
0.17* |
M7 |
2040 |
40 |
0.33/km |
0.16** |
0.33** |
|
RTA |
1.2 |
3.00 |
2.50*** |
1.25*** |
Harbour Tunnel |
2022 |
2.3 |
3.00 |
1.30*** |
0.65*** |
Lane Cove Tunnel |
2037 |
3.6 |
2.69 |
0.75 |
same |
Eastern
Distributor |
2042 |
6 |
5.00 |
0.83 |
same |
Cross city tunnel |
2035 |
2.1 |
4.07 |
1.94 |
same |
Notes
* The M4 toll only applies
between
** The M7 toll is $0.33/km and
capped at $6.57 so the actual toll is $0.16/km
*** The toll applies to southbound
journeys only and theoretical toll assumes two-way trips
REMOVE OR RETAIN THE
TOLL
Removing the M4 toll after 2010, when the RTA takes
ownership, will increase traffic congestion on the M4 and the surrounding roads
including Parramatta Road Granville. The
toll is a valuable source of revenue for maintenance of the road in the same
way the
2. Recommend that the RTA retain
the M4 toll as demand management tool.
CASHBACK SCHEME
During the 1995 NSW State Election, Bob Carr MP pledged to scrap the toll on the M4 and M5. However, this was not feasible due to existing contractual agreements with the motorway operators and as a result the Cashback scheme was introduced. The Cashback, which the RTA introduced in January 1997 offers motorists who use electronic tolling for private trips on the M4 and M5, a refund of the toll excluding GST. On the M4 this reduces the toll for cars, from $2.75 to 27c. Motorists need to submit a claim every quarter to receive the refund.
According to the RTA 2007 Annual Report there were approximately 238,000 Cashback customers in 2006/07 that made 695,000 claims for both the M4 and M5. For 2007/08 the cost of the Cashback scheme was $97m and for 2008/09 the budget is $102m. It is difficult to establish the value of the Cashback scheme attributed to the M4, however, in crude terms it could be as much as $50m per annum. It is estimated that by the end of 2008/09 the scheme will have costed over $750m since it was introduced and likely to exceed $1b by 2010.
The continued operation of the Cashback scheme raises
several issues. Firstly, there is the
lack of equality as it does not apply to other road toll schemes in Sydney,
particularly the M2. Secondly, it raises
the appropriateness of State funds to subsidise (and support) private car use particularly
when public transport provision in
The future of the Cashback scheme after 2010 is unclear, however if the NSW State Government removes the M4 toll then the Cashback will not be applicable.
Withdrawing the Cashback scheme is likely to have a noticeable impact in the first few weeks as private motorists initially use alternative routes to avoid having to pay the full toll. After a few weeks traffic flows on the M4 and surrounding road network are likely to reach equilibrium as with any significant road network changes. It is predicted that in the long term there may a slight decrease in M4 use/increase in alternative routes. Car drivers who take advantage of the Cashback scheme pay the toll electronically and therefore to continue using the M4 after the Cashback scheme is withdrawn requires no change of travel behaviour.
The impact of withdrawing the M4 Cashback scheme in terms of
funding could release up to $50m per annum which could be used to improve access
to the M4 or public transport in
· 50 new public buses including their operation for 1 year, or
· 15 new 4-carriage trains, or
· new Rivercats for the Parramatta ferry service, or
· RTA’s Strategic Bus Corridor program (bus priority) for 2 years, or
· new access ramps to the M4 from James Ruse Drive, or
· significant contribution for new access ramps to the M4 from Church Street, or
· significant contribution to the West Metro project.
3. Recommend that the Cashback
scheme be withdrawn after 2010 and the budget reallocated to fund transport improvements
in Western Sydney
ELECTRONIC PAYMENT OF
TOLL
There are two methods of toll payment, cash or
electronic. The cash payment option is
available on most of
The electronic payment method uses an e-tag and e-pass. An e-tag is an electronic smart card that is attached to the windscreen with the toll “collected” when the vehicle passes the toll collection point. The e-pass is a virtual pass for infrequent users such as non-Sydney residents whereby the motorist registers their vehicle registration and payment details with a service provider prior to using a toll road. The vehicle registration is recorded at the toll collection point and the user charged for usage.
The advantage of the electronic payment method is that it
eliminates congestion at toll collection points by removing the need for
vehicles to stop and pay, and reduces the cost of toll collection. It can be introduced cost effectively using
existing toll and sign infrastructure. The RTA has a policy of moving towards
increased use of the electronic payment method to reduce traffic
congestion. The M7, Lane Cove Tunnel,
Harbour Tunnel and Cross City Tunnel are electronic payment only. The
4. Recommend that the M4 toll be
electronic payment collection only to reduce traffic congestion and increase
capacity
FLAT FEE &
DISTANCE BASED TOLLS
There are two ways in which the toll is applied in
The toll on the M7 motorway is applied according to the distance travelled (distance based toll), with the toll capped (currently after 19.5km of travel). A distance based toll is considered by the public as a fairer method of tolling in the same way that bus and trains fares are based on distance. Distance based tolling will require additional infrastructure but some existing toll and signage infrastructure could be utilise.
There appears to be a significant amount of traffic that
diverts from the M4 to
It is suggested that if the M4 toll was distance based and
applied over a longer length than currently then motorists would be less likely
to use alternative routes. It is
suggested that if the existing toll ($2.75) were applied as distance based toll
($0.20/km) between North Strathfield and the Cumberland Highway (a distance of
14km) then the traffic and cost of using Parramatta Road and Victoria Road
between James Ruse Drive and Silverwater Road is less at $0.50. There may be a decrease in short trips on the
M4 and an increase on alternative parallel routes including the
5. Recommend that a distance
based toll be introduced between the Cumberland Highway and North Strathfield
as fairer method of tolling and to reduce toll avoidance
LIMITED ACCESS TO THE
M4 IN
There is limited access to the M4 at both
At the
· the M4 westbound from James Ruse Drive southbound,
· James Ruse Drive northbound to the M4 southbound.
At the
· the M4 westbound to Church Street,
· Church Street to the M4 eastbound.
The limited intersection access has implications for traffic
to and from
Both toll avoidance and the limited intersection access
contribute to the traffic congestion on
6. Recommend that additional
access ramps to the be considered at James Ruse Drive and Church Street Parramatta.
POSSIBILE FUTURE RTA
SCENARIOS AFTER FEBUARY 2010
It is not clear what the State Government or the RTA’s position is on the future of the M4 toll or the Cashback scheme when it passes to RTA control in February 2010.
There are several possible future scenarios that the RTA may consider and implement once it passes to their control and these are outlined in table 2. Note these are Council suggested scenarios and have not been proposed, suggested or knowingly considered by the RTA or State Government.
The possible impacts of the scenarios presented below in Table 3 are initial predications by Council’s Transport Planning officers. More detailed analysis such as traffic modelling would be required to test these possible outcomes. The traffic impact of the scenarios will take several weeks to reach equilibrium as with any significant road network changes.
Item 11.1 - Attachment 1 |
Detail Report - Review
of the M4 Toll |
Table 2 Possible
future RTA scenarios for the M4 after February 2010
Possible scenarios |
1 Existing |
2 Cashback
withdrawn |
3 No toll |
4 Electronic
payment with Cashback |
5 Electronic
payment without Cashback |
6 Distance
toll by electronic payment without Cashback |
Toll |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Cashback |
Yes |
No |
N/A |
Yes |
No |
No |
Payment method |
Cash & electronic |
Cash & electronic |
N/A |
Electronic |
Electronic |
Electronic |
Flat or distance based toll |
Flat |
Flat |
N/A |
Flat |
Flat |
Distance |
Table 3 Possible
impacts of the future M4 scenarios |
||||||
Impacts |
1 Existing |
2 Cashback
withdrawn |
3 No toll |
4 Electronic
payment with Cashback |
5 Electronic
payment without Cashback |
6 Distance
toll by electronic payment without Cashback |
Traffic on the M4 |
· No
change |
· Less
traffic (congestion) over tolled section of M4 |
· More
traffic (congestion) especially on previous tolled section |
· Traffic
flows improved through former toll plaza |
· Traffic
flows improved through former toll plaza |
· Traffic
flows improved through former toll plaza · Traffic
flows along M4 more balanced |
Traffic on alternative
parallel routes (Parramatta Rd & Victoria Rd) |
· No
change |
· More
traffic (congestion) |
· More
traffic (congestion) on roads that directly feed to previously tolled section
(James Ruse Drive & Silverwater Rd) |
· Insignificant
traffic changes |
· Possibly
more traffic (congestion) |
· Traffic
flows along alternative routes more balanced with no toll avoidance through
Granville |
Cost |
· Cost of
providing Cashback scheme · Toll
revenue maintained |
· Savings
from Cashback scheme · Toll
revenue unchanged |
· Savings
from Cashback scheme · No toll
revenue |
· Cost of
proving Cashback scheme · Potential
increased toll revenue · Savings
by removing cash payment |
· Savings
from Cashback scheme · Potential
toll revenue decreased |
· Savings
from Cashback scheme · Savings
by removing cash payment · Capital
cost of implementing distance based tolls |
Toll avoidance impacts |
· No
change |
· Increased |
· Removed |
· No
change |
· Significant
increase |
· Significantly
reduction |
Item 11.1 - Attachment 1 |
Detail Report - Review
of the M4 Toll |
Below are concluding comments on the above scenarios.
Scenarios 1 & 2
Maintaining the toll beyond February 2010 could be controversial but maintaining the toll and withdrawing Cashback will be politically charged. Continuing it will be very costly and against State Government policy.
Scenario 3
Discontinuing the toll will eliminate revenue that could be used to maintain the M4, but more importantly the cost (or barrier) to using the M4 is removed which will result in more traffic on the M4 and the roads that are connected to it. It will encourage people to drive rather than use public transport with patronage on the Western Line likely to drop. A similar impact occurred on the East Hills Line when the M5 opened.
Scenario 4 & 5
Moving to electronic toll payment only on the M4 will increase traffic capacity and reduce travel times. Withdrawing the Cashback as well will be politically charged but continuing it is very costly and against State Government policy.
Scenario 6
Charging the M4 toll from flat fee to distance based allows the toll is spread along a length of road rather than at one at point which currently creates toll avoidance problems for Parramatta Road Granville.
It is difficult to recommend a scenario as there is limited public data relating to the toll and also the RTA and State Government have not publicly considered their options for the M4 after February 2010. However scenario 6 is preferred with the toll retained as a distance based electronic payment only toll with the Cashback scheme withdrawn.
ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION - M4 EAST PROPOSAL
Any changes to the M4 toll needs to consider the proposed M4
East scheme which the RTA has planned for several years. The M4 East is an extension of the M4 from
· the additional traffic generated along the M4 and M4 East corridor
· the existing traffic congestion on the City West Link and ANZAC bridge to which the M4 East will contribute additional traffic
· the possible cost of the M4 East toll which has been predicted to be $5
· the failure of the last two road tunnel schemes: Cross City Tunnel and Lane Cove Tunnel which both have significantly lower traffic flows (and revenue) than predicted
· the impact of the proposed West Metro which would significantly reduces the demand for the M4 East