Puerto Rico pioneers express toll lanes on a toll road

In this issue:

• Puerto Rico pioneers express toll lanes on a toll road
• South Carolina may be the next choice lanes state
• New Zealand plans conversion to nationwide RUC
• America’s strangest Interstate highway
• When is a trust fund not a trust fund?
• The tale of two Brightlines, continued
• Transit recovery depends on who is served
• News Notes
• Quotable Quotes

Puerto Rico Pioneers Express Toll Lanes on a Toll Road

To the best of my knowledge, the only locale where express toll lanes are in operation on a toll road is San Juan, Puerto Rico. This situation exists on the PR-22 toll road in San Juan, which includes a two-lane reversible dynamic toll lane (DTL) corridor, 7.7 miles long. I recently came upon an academic study of this phenomenon, dated Sept. 2021. The study was funded by the U.S. Department of Transportation’s University Transportation Centers program.

An obvious question is, “Why not just use variable pricing for all the lanes?” And the obvious answer is “different values of time and values of reliability.” Data from the 2021 study illustrate this point. To begin with, the main toll lanes of PR22 use time-of-day pricing. The DTLs use dynamic variable pricing, like most U.S. express toll lanes. The study found that those choosing the DTLs saved an average of seven minutes, compared with those in the regular toll lanes.

The researchers used an online survey to get users’ estimates of their willingness to pay (WTP), whose self-declared WTP for the DTLs ranged between $1.00 and $2.79, which is well below the maximum DTL toll of $4.95. Data from the DTL tolling system found that the toll was at or above $2.70 about 50% of the time. In other words, what DTL users claim as their WTP is not reflected in the actual extent of their use.

The researchers also estimated DTL users’ price elasticity of demand as being 1.21 in the morning period and 1.66 in the afternoon. The report states that “The higher elasticity for the afternoon period aligns with the higher value of time in the afternoon.”

There is far more detail in the 81-page report, but I’d rather offer a few thoughts about the idea of adding express toll lanes on a road that is already a toll road. The Puerto Rico PR-22 data suggest that other toll roads may be underserving their customers (at least in urban areas) by not offering premium lanes for trips with higher values of time (VOT) and values of reliability (VOR). In a broader version of PR-22, the regular lanes might offer variable pricing for those with lower VOT and VOR, while the premium lanes would use dynamic pricing aimed at trips with higher VOT and VOR. That combination would likely be a better fit for the wide range of commuters using the toll road.

To the best of my knowledge, no mainland toll road has considered or implemented premium toll lanes. Yet some have facilities that could accommodate such choices. For example, the southernmost portion of Florida’s Turnpike, from Miami to U.S. 1 just above Key Largo, is equipped with “through lanes” that focus on those customers with longer journeys that bypass many off-ramps. Yet those potential express lanes charge only the standard Florida Turnpike tolls. (And they are still equipped with signs saying “Sunpass Only,” left over from the days when the Turnpike still had toll booths accepting cash.) These are essentially DTLs in waiting, which could easily charge a higher toll for faster and more reliable trips.

» return to top

South Carolina May Be the Next Choice Lanes State

Legislators in South Carolina are discussing the possible addition of express toll lanes (which some states have referred to as “choice lanes”) on several congested highways. One location would be on I-77 just south of Charlotte, NC. That is where the North Carolina Department of Transportation is planning to extend its I-77 express toll lanes to the South Carolina border. Connecting the NC express lanes to comparable ones across the border would make excellent sense. South Carolina state Sen. Sean Bennett pointed out that “There’s constant flow back and forth across the border. You can’t have one side doing something and the other side not.” State Sen. Larry Grooms, chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee, said that the South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT) will be able to partner with private companies to build the express toll lanes, citing examples of public-private partnerships in Georgia, North Carolina, and Tennessee.

In addition to I-77, SCDOT is also considering choice lanes for other congested Interstates, such as I-526 and I-26 in the Low Country part of the state. Legislation is underway in the state Senate, via Bill S. 831, which would give SCDOT broad authority for toll-supported infrastructure on new or expanded highways.

Express toll lanes are in service on some major highways in 11 states, and are underway in Tennessee. The other states are California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Minnesota, North Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Washington State. Tennessee has approved three choice lanes projects, and it will be the 12th state to implement express toll lanes.

The Illinois legislature in 2023 authorized the addition of express toll lanes to a congested portion of I-55, but the Illinois DOT has not initiated a project thus far. In Pennsylvania, PennDOT last year received an unsolicited proposal to add express toll lanes to the highly congested Schuylkill Expressway (I-76), but the agency has not decided to go forward with such a project.

The world’s first express toll lanes project was on SR 91 in Orange County, CA. It opened to traffic in Dec. 1995 and celebrated its 30th anniversary in Dec. 2025.

» return to top

New Zealand Plans Conversion to Nationwide Road User Charges

In the Aug. 2025 issue of this newsletter, I reported on what appeared to be a highly visionary plan being advanced by New Zealand Transport Minister Chris Bishop, whose aim was to replace existing fuel taxes and other road-use taxes via nationwide use of a simple but comprehensive Road User Charge (RUC). In the article, I pointed out that this sweeping plan would require legislation, identifying and testing the needed technology, addressing privacy concerns, and winning road user support.

ITS International published a detailed update on this effort, dated April 28. The first good news is that the architect of the plan, Transport Minister Chris Bishop, is still guiding the whole effort. The article informs (or reminds) readers that New Zealand has long had an RUC for heavy trucks. They pay a per-kilometer amount based on their gross weight, number of axles, and kilometers driven. Compliance is provided by odometer checks at weigh stations and routine safety inspections. According to Bishop, the trucking industry is happy with this RUC as it has evolved over many decades.

NZ trucks do not pay a diesel fuel tax, since they are already paying RUC. Phasing in personal vehicles (whose owners do pay gas (“petrol”) taxes for road use is an upcoming challenge. One factor in the change is the growth of petrol-hybrid cars and EVs. All petrol vehicles will be switched to RUC, but only after many decisions about technology, billing, etc., are resolved. As steps toward that goal, the Transport Ministry plans to remove the need for paper licenses in favor of a digital record. They are also evaluating how to use devices being built into cars, such as telematics and GPS. And they are exploring modern payment options, “similar to a utility bill or a Netflix bill that you just pay monthly.”

A lot of what the Transport Ministry is looking into does not appear easy to do. They want an overall RUC system that includes paying tolls for existing toll roads and planned congestion pricing in urban areas—not as separate systems but integrated into a single RUC that is paid for monthly like a utility bill. That’s a tall order, so I don’t expect a full-scale transition for a number of years.

One advantage is that New Zealand is composed of two islands, so they don’t have the problem of American states (other than Alaska and Hawaii) that have to worry about how to charge non-residents. So even if, or when, New Zealand implements the planned comprehensive RUC system, it will not be directly transferable to a U.S. state. Nevertheless, everyone involved in highway policy should be following New Zealand’s pioneering RUC efforts. I certainly will be.

» return to top

America’s Strangest Interstate Highway
By Baruch Feigenbaum

Northern Virginia’s I-66 Inside the Beltway (ITB) is unlike any other U.S. Interstate highway. It was envisioned as eight lanes, but a compromise with local residents led to a four-lane highway instead. And due to capacity restrictions, peak-direction/peak-period lanes were designated 2+ carpool only. Single-occupant vehicles had to use a different highway.

But the high-occupancy vehicle (HOV)-only roadway has had numerous problems. The number of carpoolers was not consistent during peak hours, leading to the Goldilocks problem of too few vehicles (inefficient) at some times and too many vehicles (no incentive for carpooling) at others. There were exceptions from HOV-only for travelers going to Dulles Airport, making enforcement nearly impossible. The last priority for any police officer is stopping a vehicle to see if the driver has a boarding pass. As a result, cheating was rampant; at least 25% of vehicles were not HOVs.

Pricing was always a better option, but before electronic tolling became commonplace, it would not have been feasible, due to space constraints and collection costs. However, in 2017, after several years of study and high EZ-Pass penetration due to other toll roads in the region, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) converted I-66 ITB into a high-occupancy-toll (HOT) corridor. Tolls are charged on I-66 eastbound 5:30-9:30 AM and westbound 3-7 PM. VDOT is using the toll revenue to fund 10 new bus routes in the corridor. Tolling reduced congestion in the corridor and allowed all drivers the option of using the road (ending the Dulles airport exemption).

Virginia has made several changes to I-66 to improve operations. First, in a compromise struck with political leaders in Loudoun County, the state widened 4.0 miles of the eastbound direction between the Dulles Toll Road and Fairfax Drive from two to three lanes. The eastbound section had a major bottleneck as four lanes (two lanes from I-66 and two lanes from the Dulles Toll Road) merged to two lanes total. This additional lane creates a more tapered merge with a lane ending where many vehicles exit into central Arlington, reducing the severity of the bottleneck.

Second, in response to concerns about demand stemming from the new I-66 Outside the Beltway (OTB) HOT lanes, in 2022, when the OTB lanes opened, VDOT raised the HOV vehicle occupancy from two to three people, matching that of I-66 OTB. Why? An expanded I-66 OTB would lead to more tolled vehicles on I-66 ITB, and there wasn’t enough capacity for those vehicles and HOV-2s. Also, with all other HOT lanes in the region being 3+, a 2+ lane would be confusing for drivers.

Yet less than four years later, I-66 ITB has a different problem. While it is no longer congested in the peak-period/peak-direction, it is congested in the reverse peak direction, shoulder periods, middays, and on Saturdays. For example, on I-66 eastbound reverse peak direction in the late afternoons and evenings, speeds average less than 30 mph. From the Tysons Corner business district, it can be quicker for drivers to travel south and east on I-495 and then north on I-395, effectively the other three sides of a square.

Two sections are particularly problematic. The eastbound section in which the number of lanes decreases from three to two between Fairfax Drive and Langston Drive is the worst eastbound segment. The westbound segment between Sycamore St. and Washington Blvd. has only two lanes, while the section east of it has three and west of it has four; this is the worst westbound segment. Both of these segments are bottlenecks, so the fact that they are congested is not surprising.

VDOT has three options for fixing this congestion. The first would be to widen additional parts of I-66 ITB. Widening the westbound two-lane segment to three lanes is in the region’s long-range transportation plan. But that’s not going to help the eastern parts of the corridor. Four lanes of traffic merging to two lanes within four miles creates a bottleneck; widening a portion of the eastbound section seven years ago helped, but did not eliminate the funnel. As employment continues to grow in Tysons and Reston, the number of reverse commuters commuting from DC and Arlington will also grow. It doesn’t just affect solo drivers but carpools, vanpools, and buses. Planners have prioritized transit in the corridor, but that’s rail and bus. 

The second option would be to extend pricing to more hours, ideally 24 hours a day, but at a minimum, 5 AM to 9 PM on weekdays and 8 AM to 8 PM on weekends. Demand always existed outside of peak periods, but since the HOV requirement prevented many folks from using the highway, officials chose the peak-period/peak-direction compromise when congestion was worst. With the option of tolling, the hours can be extended without any drivers being excluded from the highway. Further, traffic speeds will be higher and travel times more reliable at more hours of the day.

The third and most optimal option would be to do both. Adding capacity in this high-demand corridor will increase mobility and economic activity, but not manage congestion. Tolling will manage congestion but not address demand from growth in the corridor. Together, they are a powerful solution.

In 2017, tolling I-66 peak-period, peak-direction, and a modest capacity increase was a good first step in improving mobility. Almost 10 years later, Virginia needs to take the next step of expanding the hours of tolling and adding some capacity to improve mobility.

» return to top

When Is a Trust Fund Not a Trust Fund?

If you are following proposals in Congress for the surface transportation reauthorization, you may have noticed that part of the White House 2027 budget proposal calls for a new Maritime Trust Fund. A good overview from the Eno Center for Transportation’s budget expert, Jeff Davis, is his April 17 article: “FY27 Budget Requests 72% Hike in Maritime Funding Through a New Trust Fund.”

In his usual thorough way, Davis provides context, showing Maritime Administration (MARAD) funding from FY 2025 through the administration’s FY 2027 request, so we can see where the large proposed increases are. And the major FY 27 increase is made possible by a proposed Maritime Security Trust Fund. Nearly everyone in transportation is familiar with the Highway [and transit] Trust Fund and the Airports & Airways Trust Fund. Like most federal trust funds, those two are supported by dedicated user-tax revenues—primarily motor fuel taxes for the former and airline ticket taxes for the latter.

But Davis—who knows more about federal budgeting than anyone else I know—looks through the entire maritime budget for a dedicated funding source for this new trust fund, from which the budget request proposes a $1.412 billion appropriation in FY 27. “Nowhere in the budget are specific taxes identified that would support the Trust Fund.” Also, “The proposed Trust Fund has no permanence. The ten-year spending table in the budget… shows only one year of appropriations out of the [new] Trust Fund, $1.412 billion in 2027.”

In going through the maritime budget proposal, Davis finds that the $1.412 billion would all be spent (or at least allocated) in FY 2027 on a variety of different MARAD projects and programs. They include:

• $450 million for the existing Port Infrastructure Development program;
• $430 million for campus upgrades at the Merchant Marine Academy
• $250 million for Commercial Shipbuilding
• $134 million for NDRF Support craft (Defense)
• Plus a number of smaller items.

So, is this Maritime Security Trust Fund really a trust fund? Davis assesses three criteria that established transportation trust funds adhere to, but finds them ignored:

• No specific user taxes are identified to support the new trust fund. The language in the proposal simply lists a grab-bag of possible sources, such as customs duties, tonnage taxes, penalties under Title 46, and/or fees levied on Chinese vessels.
• This trust fund has no permanence. The 10-year spending plan shows only one year of appropriations from the new trust fund.
• The appropriation language would require the Congressional Budget Office to score spending from the trust fund as discretionary, not mandatory, which is unlike spending from established trust funds.

In short, what’s proposed here is not a trust fund in any meaningful sense, as the term is used in federal budgeting. The unanswered question is why this concoction of spending ideas has been associated with a one-time “trust fund” that departs from all the budgetary practices that are intended to safeguard revenues from infrastructure users to ensure that those funds are spent on facilities that directly benefit the users of that infrastructure.

This is actually a set of programs getting just one year of funding for projects that might benefit some of those paying the maritime taxes. It’s very far from a new users-pay/users-benefit program for the maritime industry.

» return to top

The Tale of Two Brightlines, Continued

In previous issues of this newsletter, I have discussed two startup private passenger rail projects, Brightline Florida (higher-speed rail mostly on existing freight rail track, between Miami and Orlando) and Brightline West, a planned high-speed line on all-new track and right of way between Las Vegas and Rancho Cucamonga, where it will connect with an existing (many-stop) commuter rail line to Los Angeles. Both began as private ventures but soon evolved into public-private partnership (P3) projects.

Of the two, the Florida line is the lower-risk P3. It needed only a small fraction of new right-of-way (from Cocoa Beach to Orlando), for which it was able to lease right-of-way from the Florida DOT. And by limiting top speeds to 125 mph (and only going that fast in rural areas), it saves money on propulsion and on extremely precise trackwork. And its “higher” speed timetable is competitive with driving and generally less hassle than flying between Orlando and Miami.

Brightline West is a far more risky proposition. True high-speed rail between Las Vegas and Cucamonga means higher per-mile construction cost and more energy-intensive propulsion. And hardly anyone wants to go to Cucamonga on trips between Los Angeles and Las Vegas, when there are inexpensive flights to and from Vegas at five commercial airports throughout the LA metro area.

Yet on two consecutive days (April 30 and May 1), The Bond Buyer published a positive article about Brightline West (“DOT Bullish on Brightline West as $6B RRIF Loan Pends”) and a very negative one about Brightline Florida (“Brightline Florida Raises Going Concern Warning, Lacks Liquidity for Coming Debt Payments”).

Taking the Florida project first, its ridership has continued to grow, but significantly slower than the company had projected. Several factors likely to contribute to this. Some would-be passengers are turned off by the railroad’s relatively high level of collisions with vehicles (at grade crossings) and with people walking on the tracks. Both are linked to ordinary people having no idea how quickly these trains reach a grade crossing, even at the 79 mph speed limit in urban areas. And South Florida media have spent several years demonizing Brightline Florida as the “killer train,” which likely dissuades some from using it. (Of the four round-trips I’ve made on it since it began operations, one was stopped for about an hour due to the train ahead of it having crashed into a motor vehicle at a grade crossing, and my train had to sit there until the wreckage was cleared.)

In an effort to increase cash flow, with debt payments looming, the company last year increased its ticket prices, which may not have helped much. I was an early fan of Brightline Florida, judging that it had likely found a sweet spot for linking South Florida to Orlando, and I will be disappointed if it goes under—but that looks likely,

I have never thought Brightline West (successor to the never-built Xpress West) was a viable project. Reason Foundation published a policy study on Xpress West in Aug. 2012, which is still available online. It had sought a $6.5 billion Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) loan from the Federal Railroad Administration, and the Reason study referred to a very speculative consumer market, questionable ridership and revenue projections, a projected capital cost far too low, and the use of available I-15 right of way that might preclude future widening of that important Interstate highway link. Some have credited that report for the rejection of that project’s requested RRIF loan.

While Brightline West has repeatedly increased its estimated construction cost (most recently to $21.5 billion, about double its original estimate), even if it gets the $6 billion RRIF loan, its current route still does not get passengers closer than 41 miles to downtown Los Angeles, and it will remain uncompetitive with flying between greater LA and Las Vegas. If I were asked, I would definitely advise against FRA approving the RRIF loan. This project is best described as a boondoggle that taxpayers should not be paying for.

» return to top

Transit Recovery Depends on Markets Served
By Neliann Rivera

Before 2020, much of U.S. transit planning, especially in metropolitan areas with long-established rail networks, was built around the weekday commute. Heavy rail, light-rail, and downtown-oriented commuter rail systems were designed to move large volumes of workers into central business districts during peak hours, and investment decisions often reflected that priority.

Most bus systems followed a different logic. In smaller or more dispersed metropolitan areas, buses were more likely to support local, all-day travel across the metro area, serving non-commute trips such as medical appointments, shopping, and service-sector work, because bus networks are less constrained by fixed infrastructure. Beyond centralized job locations, they have historically played a broader role in meeting everyday mobility needs beyond the traditional rush-hour commute. This model worked well for decades until the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the assumptions that had long shaped how transit systems were planned and used.

During the pandemic and shutdowns, transit ridership declined rapidly across nearly every state in the United States, leading to significantly reduced fare revenue and placing tremendous financial pressure on transit agencies. In response, Congress approved the largest federal transit assistance program in American history, providing approximately $25 billion through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, $14 billion via the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act (CRRSAA), and adding $30.5 billion in the American Rescue Plan for public transit.

At that time, policymakers anticipated that, once offices reopened and daily routines resumed, ridership and transit system performance would recover.

The table below groups major metropolitan transit markets by the percentage of their 2019 ridership that had returned by 2024, using unlinked passenger trips reported to the Federal Transit Administration’s National Transit Database.

Recovery Category	States
Exceeding 2019 Ridership	Wilmington, DE (DART First State)
Strong Recovery (~85–95%)	Miami–Dade, FL (Miami-Dade Transit); New Orleans, LA (New Orleans RTA); Wichita, KS (Wichita Transit); Sioux Falls, SD (Sioux Area Metro)
Upper-Moderate Recovery (~75–84%)	Salt Lake City / Wasatch Front, UT (Utah Transit Authority); Detroit, MI (DDOT and SMART buses); Des Moines, IA (Des Moines Area Regional Transit Authority); Boise, ID (Valley Regional Transit); Cheyenne and Casper, WY (local bus systems)
Moderate Recovery (~65–74%)	Phoenix, AZ (Valley Metro); Denver, CO (Regional Transportation District); Los Angeles, CA (Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority); Chicago, IL (Chicago Transit Authority); Boston, MA (Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority); Seattle, WA (King County Metro; Sound Transit); Dallas–Fort Worth, TX (Dallas Area Rapid Transit); Portland, OR (TriMet)
Below ~65% Recovery	Atlanta, GA (Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority); Twin Cities, MN (Metro Transit); New York City, NY (MTA New York City Transit); Newark–Jersey City, NJ (NJ Transit; PATH); San Francisco Bay Area (Bay Area Rapid Transit)

After five years, the data tell a more complicated story. Although ridership has increased since its low point in 2020–2021, most places have not returned to pre-pandemic levels despite unprecedented federal aid and higher state and local spending.

Large, rail-focused states show an even clearer disconnect between funding and recovery. New York received more than $25.5 billion in federal transit funding between 2019 and 2024, in addition to substantial state and local support, yet recorded approximately 1.63 billion transit trips in 2024, only about two-thirds of its 2019 total. New Jersey and Massachusetts follow similar patterns. Despite billions in combined federal and state funding, ridership in 2024 reached only about 64% of 2019 levels in New Jersey and roughly 72% in Massachusetts.

By contrast, several lower-spending, bus-focused states recovered more fully. By 2024, Delaware slightly exceeded its 2019 ridership. Kansas, after experiencing a roughly 50% decline during the pandemic, rebounded to about 87% of its pre-pandemic ridership despite comparatively modest funding levels. Other primarily bus-based states also returned closer to earlier ridership levels, including South Dakota at about 84%, Iowa at about 81%, Michigan at about 80%, and Wyoming at about 83%.

At the same time, several states with comparatively high total transit funding continued to lag in ridership recovery. Minnesota applied roughly $4.6 billion in combined federal, state, and local transit funding between 2019 and 2024, yet recovered only about 64% of its 2019 ridership by 2024. Similar outcomes appear in Maryland, which applied about $7.6 billion and recovered roughly 67% of pre-pandemic ridership, Virginia, which used about $10.9 billion and recovered about 66%, and Pennsylvania, which applied approximately $30.1 billion and recovered about 65%, based on data reported to the Federal Transit Administration’s National Transit Database.

How well transit recovered after the pandemic depended largely on how systems were designed and who they served. States where transit continued to support local, all-day travel generally saw steadier recoveries than those focused primarily on peak-hour commuting into downtown job centers. Where transit remained useful for healthcare workers, service-sector employees, students, and people making everyday trips, ridership returned more quickly. By contrast, simply restoring pre-pandemic schedules in commuter-focused systems often failed to bring riders back because travel patterns had changed.

Decisions by state departments of transportation and transit agencies played a major role in shaping outcomes. Systems with stronger recoveries tended to focus on three actions:

• Restoring frequent service on high-demand corridors.
• Simplifying networks to make routes easier to understand and use.
• Prioritizing safety and cleanliness to rebuild rider confidence.

Agencies that instead preserved underused routes or maintained legacy service patterns often experienced weaker recoveries, even with substantial funding increases. The key question, then, is not how much funding was provided but how effectively it was used. Ridership remains the clearest measure of value, reflecting whether transit service is frequent, reliable, safe, and aligned with how people travel today.

» return to top

News Notes

Detroit’s Ambassador Bridge Losing Customers
Even before the forthcoming opening of the new Gordie Howe Bridge between Detroit and Windsor, Ontario, the former heavy truck monopoly held by the aging Ambassador Bridge was being challenged. Last month, the Blue Water Bridge in Sarnia, Ontario, handled more heavy truck traffic than the Ambassador. Blue Water is now the busiest commercial traffic corridor between Canada and the United States. In response, last month the Ambassador Bridge slashed its toll rate for personal vehicles but kept its high truck tolls unchanged.

Maryland Opens New P3 Office
Maryland Gov. Wes Moore last month announced the creation of a state DOT office focused on public-private partnerships (P3s). As an article in The Bond Buyer pointed out, Maryland DOT is once again looking into express toll lanes on its portion of the I-495 Beltway, as well as widening or replacing the American Legion Bridge, jointly with Virginia DOT. In Virginia, such projects are often carried out as revenue-financed long-term P3 concessions.

Virginia DOT Planning Highway P3 Pipeline of Projects
Eugene Gilligan reported in Infralogic (April 8) that VDOT plans to pursue six or seven highway P3 projects over the next four years. The projected projects include making the reversible express toll lanes on I-95 bi-directional, building the missing southside link in the I-495 express toll lanes system, and replacement or widening of the American Legion Bridge, along with Maryland DOT.

Time to Re-think the Jones Act
In March, President Trump suspended the Jones Act for 60 days to allow non-U.S. ships to transfer cargoes between U.S. ports despite not having been built in the United States or crewed by Americans. And late last month, he extended the suspension for another 90 days. For the first time in many years, goods are being sent from mainland ports to Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. But for these economically valuable shipments to continue after the suspension ends, the Jones Act must be repealed. Eric Boehm has posted an excellent piece on this.

Los Angeles Airport P3 People Mover Project Stalls
When is a P3 project likely to fail? One answer is when it’s very complex and cannot be financed by a built-in revenue stream. A prime example is the years-late, far-over-budget LAX automated people mover. Its purpose is to link the airport terminals with its rental car center and a light-rail station. It began in 2019, under an availability-payment P3 contract. It is already three years late, and speculation by Fox 11 in Los Angeles suggests that it may not open in time for the 2026 FIFA World Cup or even the 2028 Olympics. A lengthy article in the Nov. 2025 issue of Public Works Financing goes into many details on the project’s troubles.

Maryland Drops Key Bridge Contractor Over $5.2 Billion Estimate
It’s back to the drawing board for Maryland DOT’s project to replace the collapsed Francis Scott Key Bridge. Late last month, it dismissed prime contractor Kiewit over the estimated $5.2 billion cost of the new bridge. A simple replacement of the aged bridge was first estimated at $1.9 billion, but plans for a bigger, better bridge kept the price tag growing steadily. Instead of simply looking for a new design-build contractor, an alternative course might be to total up all the pending insurance pay-outs (potentially $3 billion) and estimate how much toll revenue could be raised over 40 years (since tolling the replacement seems to have dropped out of sight). Based on those calculations, MDTA could then seek DBFOM proposals from experienced P3 companies.

Automated Truck Corridor to be Tested in Texas
A Swedish autonomous trucking pioneer (Einride) is partnering with the leaders of America’s only privately financed toll road, SH 130, to test a planned autonomous freight corridor. SH 130 between the Austin and San Antonio metro areas spans 41 miles. Einride’s trucks have no cab; they are supervised by remote operators. The SR 130 Concession Company holds a long-term P3 concession on that portion of the roadway. It is also planning next-generation rest stops with electric vehicle charging facilities. Einride received approval for U.S. on-road testing from NHTSA in June 2022.

IFM Seeks to Buy Atlas Arteria
Australia-based Atlas Arteria (which owns long-term P3 concessions for the Chicago Skyway, the Dulles Greenway, two motorways in France, and the Warnow Tunnel in Germany) has received a takeover bid from Australia-based IFM Investors, one of the world’s largest infrastructure investment funds. Atlas Arteria is urging its shareholders to reject that offer as undervaluing the assets. Infralogic reported (May 5) that Atlas Arteria is considering selling its ownership in the Chicago Skyway concession.

Australia May Halt Funding for Huge Inland Rail Project
The federal government is now seriously considering canceling the planned Inland project to link Melbourne and Brisbane, based on its cost having tripled to $32.34 billion. Infralogic (May 5) cited a report by ACIL Allen for the new cost estimate, and the likely completion date being extended to 2036. The final decision is likely to be reflected in the federal budget announcement later this month.

New Hampshire Considers Hiking Tolls for Non-Residents
A bill in the New Hampshire legislature (SB 627) seeks to increase highway funding for its aging highways. But instead of increasing toll rates on the New Hampshire Turnpike (which have been unchanged for 18 years), it proposes to increase toll rates only for out-of-state drivers. This strikes me as a clear violation of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits any restrictions on interstate commerce. This proposal was cheered for by Foster’s Daily Democrat (April 22), a local newspaper. A follow-up article from InDepthNH.org reports that the proposed bill will be sent to the legislative committee for a six-month study. I would imagine those legislators will be hearing from trucking organizations before long.

John Laing Investments Acquires 50% of the I-4 Ultimate Project in Orlando
The I-4 Ultimate P3 project added 21 miles of express toll lanes in Orlando several years ago. Skanska, one of the original investors in the P3, last month sold its 50% stake to John Laing Investments, reported Eugene Gilligan in Infralogic (April 3). The project was Florida DOT’s largest P3 thus far. Like its previous P3s, I-4 Ultimate is an availability-payment P3, with a 40-year design-build-finance-operate-maintain concession.

Extend PABs and TIFIA Loans to Ports?
Caitlin Devitt reported in The Bond Buyer that Gregory Johnson and colleagues at Squire Patton Boggs last month posted an alert calling for policy changes to facilitate long-term P3s for ports, as they already are for highways and transit. Specifically, their alert called for expanding the successful tax-exempt Private Activity Bonds (PABs) and TIFIA loans to port projects. Johnson and colleagues suggested adding such a provision to either a 2025 shipbuilding and infrastructure bill or the SHIPs Act. But this might be an easier sell to surface transportation committees, as long as the capacity of both PABs and TIFIA were expanded enough to not short-change planned highway and transit projects.

MassDOT Tries Again for Service Plaza P3 Competition
Last year, Massachusetts DOT sought bids from experienced companies to refurbish 18 service plazas on the Mass Pike and other highways. But as Mike Bennon explains in Public Works Financing’s March issue, that procurement “fell apart after multiple lawsuits from a losing bidder.” But it plans a second attempt this year, starting with an industry day for potential bidders held in March. The new program will use DBFOM P3 concessions rather than long-term leases.

John Laing to Acquire American Roads
Bryan Gottlieb reported in ENR that John Laing Group is buying toll-facility operator American Roads. The latter holds concessions for three tolled roads and bridges in Alabama and the U.S. half of the Detroit-Windsor Tunnel. The price was not disclosed.
 
Potrero Bus Yard P3 Project Gains Approval
The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) board has finally approved a project to redevelop the Potrero Bus Yard, after a four-year delay and a number of changes. The original plan called for building an electric bus maintenance facility topped by 500 affordable housing units. After extensive objections from neighborhood groups and others, the housing portion was cut back to only 100 units, the P3 developer will not be responsible for operations and maintenance, and there will be no equity investment in the P3. P3 developer Plenary has set up a project entity called the Potrero Neighborhood Collective LLC. Only in San Francisco! Details in the March 2026 issue of Public Works Financing.

Austin Express Toll Lanes Extension Faces Opposition
The Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority added express toll lanes to its MoPac expressway a decade ago, and they have been popular with motorists. But CTRMA’s plan to extend those lanes southward for eight miles has led to environmentalist opposition. The draft Environmental Assessment for the project found that without improvements, commute times will be significantly worse over the next two decades. The EA identified “no significant impacts” from the project, except minor impacts during construction. Local opponents cite threats to local water, parks, and trails during the construction period. The project is expected to require no tax funding and will be paid for by expected toll revenue.

Tesla’s Semi Truck Getting Kudos from Truckers
Paul Berger reported in the Wall Street Journal that the long-delayed electric Tesla Semi is entering the production stage, with shipments to begin this summer. Tesla estimates it will deliver between 5,000 and 15,000 Semis this year, before ramping up to 50,000 trucks in 2027. Based on driver responses to test drives, reported by Berger, truck drivers appreciate the many tech features in the cab, including screens showing views behind the truck on both sides. Tesla has not released prices for the two models it will offer, with ranges of either 325 or 500 miles.

Japan’s Bullet Trains Adding Cargo
The Financial Times reported that both JR East and JR Central are launching cargo services via  bullet trains, due to “dwindling passenger numbers.” JR East is introducing a cargo-only bullet train, while JR Central has partnered with Nippon Express to offer cargo space on its high-speed passenger trains. The article quotes Kei Yazaki of Nomura Research Institute (NRI) saying that, “As Japan’s population declines, relying only on passenger-rail revenue is difficult.” JR Central’s Tokyo-Osaka route has an average seat occupancy rate of 53%, according to NRI.

Channel Tunnel Operator Gets New Investment
Saritha Dantu reports for Infralogic (April 9) that the tunnel’s operator, Getlink, has received increased investment from both Paris-based Eiffage and infrastructure investment fund Mundys. Those two investors now own 29.4% and 25%, respectively. Getlink has a market cap of  €11 billion.

» return to top

Quotable Quotes

“By aligning digital infrastructure, connectivity readiness, and future charging capacity, SH 130 Concession Company is advancing its ambition to establish the roadway as a nationally recognized route for automated freight movement.”
—Ananth Prasad, CEO, SH 130 Concession Co., news release, March 17, 2026

“At the end of the day, driving on the roads is just a utility like anything else, and it should be treated as such. . . .  This is a change you can either do now and stage it and integrate it and get it right—or you can do it in 20 years in a really clunky Big Bang, very difficult way. And so we’re getting ahead of it and starting now, and it’s undoubtedly the right thing to do.”
—Chris Bishop, New Zealand Transport Minister, in, “Road User Charging in New Zealand: A Fund of Information,” ITS International, April 28, 2026

“Choice lanes would give [motorists] another option, and the idea, hopefully, is even if you choose not to utilize the choice lanes, the free lanes that you’ve been using will probably be less congested because some people are going to use that. So it should be a win-win.”
—Sen. Larry Bennett, Chairman, South Carolina Senate Ethics Committee, Bria Smith, “South Carolina Lawmakers Push for Toll Lanes on I-77 Near Charlotte,” WCNC Charlotte, April 30, 2026

» return to top

The post Puerto Rico pioneers express toll lanes on a toll road appeared first on Reason Foundation.

Source: https://reason.org/transportation-news/puerto-rico-pioneers-express-toll-lanes-on-a-toll-road/