1 / 43

Smart Mobility Performance Measures

Smart Mobility Performance Measures. Jerry Walters Fehr & Peers. Smart Mobility Performance Objectives. Multi-Modal Performance Speed Suitability Activity Connectedness Climate Change Considerations Land Use Efficiency Network Optimization Productivity over Convenience Equity.

lolita
Download Presentation

Smart Mobility Performance Measures

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Smart Mobility Performance Measures Jerry Walters Fehr & Peers

  2. Smart Mobility Performance Objectives Multi-Modal Performance Speed Suitability Activity Connectedness Climate Change Considerations Land Use Efficiency Network Optimization Productivity over Convenience Equity

  3. 1. Multi-Modal Metrics Consider all transportation system users, regardless of travel mode, with respect to: • Accidents and safety • Travel time mobility • Reliability • Level of Service e.g. multi-modal LOS methods in 2010 Highway Capacity Manual from the Transportation Research Board.

  4. Multi-Modal LOS in 2010 HCM • Auto:stops/ mile, % speed limit, median, turn lanes • Transit:wait time, ride time, loading, ped LOS • Pedestrians:ped density, sidewalks, buffers, street width, traffic level • Cyclists:lane width, traffic and truck count and speed, parking, pavement and stops

  5. ® ® Multi-Modal LOS Example Alt. 2 reduces total traveler delay by 8% with no increase in vehicle delay. Alt. 3 increases vehicle delay by 8% but reduces delay for all travelers 5%. Arup, Van Ness Ave BRT Alternatives Analysis, 2008 5

  6. 2. Speed Suitability • Change from conventional “design speed” based solely on facility type • Determine context-suitable speed considering adjoining activities, land use and place type, multi-modal users • Design facility to enforce suitable speed through physical design features and speed management techniques

  7. Speed SuitabilityImproves Safety for all Users

  8. Speed SuitabilityImproves Safety for all Users

  9. Objective-Based Speed Management Suitable Speed Travel Speed

  10. Speed Management and Carrying Capacity 10

  11. Speed Management and Carrying Capacity 28% increase in design speed Abrupt speed drop 5% increase in capacity 11

  12. 3. Activity Connectedness • Location efficiency and stewardship • Objectives-based planning of transportation system and the land use patterns it serves • Account for the travel distances and modal connections among all activities to limit induced development and induced travel • Reduce separations between: • workers and jobs • shoppers and shopping • families and schools • residents and social, rec.

  13. Share of Income Spent on Housing and Transportation Source: Center for Neighborhood Technology, 2006

  14. Transportation Growth Constraint: 30% traffic growth/ 10% cap. growth 5% thru 45% thru 15% thru 5% thru

  15. ® ® Blueprint Scenario Planning to Reduce VMT (20% – 40%) 15

  16. Induced Travel • Travel Efficiency vs VMT Generation: • Elasticity = 20% to 50% • Key factors affecting induced travel: • Land availability and cost • Congestion severity • Congestion duration • Degree of traffic diversion • Degree of trip suppression

  17. 4. Climate Change Considerations • AB 32 and SB 375 coordination of RTPs with “sustainable communities strategies” • Land use and transportation plans and environmental assessments to include CO2 analyses. • Quantify VMT and travel flow resulting from transportation proposal relative to regional targets

  18. “D” Factors Reduce VMT Densitydwellings, jobs per acre Diversity mix of housing, jobs, retail Design connectivity, walkability Destinationsregional accessibility Distance to Transit rail proximity Development Scale pop, jobs Demographicshousehold size, income Demand Management pricing, incentives

  19. System Expansion? • Address in Blueprints and RTP SCS • Transportation improvements support SCS • Address interregional travel • Limit induced travel • Types of per capita VMT • Sustaining • Manageable • Productive • Induced

  20. Daily VMT per Household

  21. Requires Land Use Efficiency and TDM Strategies, Pricing

  22. Traffic Speed and Flow Stability affects CO2/ VMT and MPG

  23. 5. Land Use Efficiency • Reduce the overall footprint of development and transportation facilities • Minimize acres of sensitive land consumed by transportation project and associated development • Transportation plan and accommodated land use • Alternative corridor transportation modes • Project alignment design

  24. Design Speed and Footprint Design roadway features to induce desired speed for safety, function and context: AASHTO Green Book (2001), and ITE “Context Sensitive Solutions in Designing Major Urban Thoroughfaresfor Walkable Communities” (2006).

  25. Design Speed and Footprint • narrower total roadway width • tighter curvature • narrower clear zones • lower super-elevation • smaller intersections, more frequent access • smaller curb return radii • smaller median offset

  26. Reduced Footprint and Costs for Construction and Maintenance • narrower total roadway width • tighter curvature* • narrower clear zones • lower super-elevation • smaller intersections/ interchanges *

  27. 6. Network Optimization • Management of the transportation network to accommodate greatest number of travelers with the minimal instability, benefits: • capital and operating/ maintenance cost • cost of natural resources • environmental impacts • opportunity or land efficiency costs • Considerations: • role of parallel and access-oriented facilities and services • ITS, signal coordination, ramp metering, in-vehicle and roadside technology to reduce headways

  28. Network Management Strategies Congestion Mitigation • Signal coordination • Ramp metering • Incident management Flow Smoothing • Variable speed limit • Intelligent speed adapt. Speed Management • Improved enforcement • Speed limiters • Active accelerator pedal CO2 20 60 Speed Barth, Matthew; ITS and the Environment, UCR, 2008

  29. 7. Productivity over Convenience • Reliable multi-modal transportation system for economic well-being, and interregional and interstate travel • Instead of generic “lost time due to congestion”, assess productivity lost • Differentiate sustaining travel and productive travel from induced travel • Differentiate recreational trips from work-related and commerce 29

  30. 8. Equity • Plan-level and project-level • Evaluate costs, benefits and impacts differentially by • economic and ethnic group • geographic area

  31. Performance Measures with Equity Dimensions • Accident rates • Speed suitability • Modal mobility, consistency • Activity connectedness • Universal Accessibility (ADA) • Emissions and noise impacts • Land use efficiency • LOS

  32. Plan-Level Equity Evaluation • Compare minority and low income households to regional average for: • Jobs and schools within 30 minutes by transit • Jobs and schools within 30 minutes by fastest mode • Frequency of bus service within ¼ mile. • Universal accessibility

  33. Typical Equity Analysis

  34. Project-Level Equity Metrics • Compare minority and low income households to non-minority, mid/high income households for: • Displaced households. • Households subjected to noise above threshold • Households subjected to criteria pollutants above threshold • Universal accessibility (ADA)

  35. Equity of Pricing Strategies • Effects of pricing strategies on individual socio-economic groups • Measure proportions of affected travelers within different income strata and ethnic populations • Differentiate transit cost from driver cost • Express cost as a percentage of income • Report relative degrees of benefit and impact to each affected group

  36. Smart Mobility Performance Objectives Multi-Modal Performance Speed Suitability Activity Connectedness Climate Change Considerations Land Use Efficiency Network Optimization Productivity over Convenience Equity

  37. ® ® Smart Mobility Performance Measures (part 1) 37

  38. ® ® Smart Mobility Performance Measures (part 2) 38

  39. Afternoon Session on Performance Measures • Review three case studies illustrating application of performance measures • Small groups review of case studies, assess effectiveness of performance measures • Report back to full group

  40. Case #1: RTP + SCS • Coordinate transportation (RTP) and land use planning (SCS) to achieve: • acceptable levels of travel accessibility • regional economic vitality • cost-effective infrastructure investments • minimal environmental impacts, induced travel • Conformity with AB32 and SB375 40

  41. Case #2: Context Sensitive Design • Arterial creates barrier and economic disincentive through established community • Goal to improve safety and convenience for travelers and affected community and sustain community value 41

  42. Case #3: Management of Freeway Corridor • 50-mile transportation corridor exhibits: • traffic congestion • lack of parallel roadway capacity • transit facilities approaching ridership capacity • incomplete HOV network • gaps and barriers within the bicycle network 42

  43. Smart Mobility Performance MeasuresQuestions?

More Related