Update for VTrans2025 Technical Committee

1. Update for VTrans2025 Technical Committee February 24, 2006 Dr. James H. Lambert Alexander S. Linthicum

2. Contents • Introduction • Performance Metrics • Multimodal Corridor Maturity and Potential • Request for Information • Appendix A – Performance Metrics • Appendix B – Suggestions of Metrics for Quality of Life and Environmental Stewardship • Appendix C – Amsterdam-Utrecht Corridor

3. Introduction • Last non-VTrans Technical Committee Meeting • November 28, 2005 at DRPT • Discussed metrics for rail and transit • Charged by Kim to focus on “Quality of Life and Environmental Stewardship” metrics • Since November meeting, UVA has focused on • Quality of life performance metrics • Use of performance metrics to determine multimodal corridor maturity and potential

4. Performance Metrics • Developed performance metrics that include • Metrics distributed by Kathy Graham at January VTrans meeting • Metrics for determining multimodal corridor maturity and priority • Suggestions for “Quality of Life and Environmental Stewardship” metrics • Located in Appendix A

5. Multimodal Corridor Maturity and Potential • Compared to all eleven corridors, specific transportation corridors • Are more multimodal in nature • Are more amenable to multimodal investment • Have greater potential to benefit from multimodal investment • UVA team is working on a framework to characterize them in terms of their multimodal maturity and potential • ‘Maturity’ gauges how multimodal in nature a corridor is currently • ‘Potential’ gauges which corridors are the strongest candidates for multimodal solutions based on current conditions and future potential

6. Multimodal Corridor Maturity and Potential • Maturity and potential is based on the VTrans2025 goals • Primary • Safety • Mobility, accessibility, connectivity • Quality of life, environmental stewardship • Secondary • Preservation/Maintenance • Economic vitality • Fiscal responsibility

7. Multimodal Corridor Maturity and Potential • Maturity and potential study will identify • Characteristics of current network • Volume of passengers and goods • Segments of significant congestion by mode • Particularly dangerous segments by mode • Mode share • Spatial characteristics • Densities of population, residence, workplace • Significant productions and attractions • Amount of parking • Qualitative characteristics • Localities that actively consider transportation in land use planning process • State, regional, and local transportation demand management policies

8. Multimodal Corridor Maturity and Potential • Maturity and potential will be determined primarily from quantitative performance metrics • Mobility, Accessibility, Connectivity • Land Use • Density (population, housing, jobs, attractions) • Accessibility to attractions by mode within time radius • Percent/amount of mixed use zoning • Availability of free parking • Transportation • Mode share • Presence/quality of intermodal facilities • Preservation, Maintenance • Level of Service by mode

9. Multimodal Corridor Maturity and Potential • Quantitative performance metrics (continued) • Safety and Security • Accidents/injuries/fatalities by mode, normalized by person-mile traveled • Quality of life • Travel time • Travel time variability • Out of pocket cost • Environmental Impact • Air quality • Greenhouse gases • Noise pollution • Watershed • Natural habitats

10. Multimodal Corridor Maturity and Potential • Characterizing corridors with respect to multimodal maturity and potential will allow Virginia to identify corridor segments and localities that • Are currently positioned for multimodal investment • Are not currently positioned for multimodal investment • Will benefit most from multimodal investment • Will not benefit greatly from multimodal investment

11. Multimodal Corridor Maturity and Potential • Approach • Corridors are one element of a system consisting of • Transportation network • Passenger • Freight • Regional and local land uses • Transportation and land use policies • Consider passenger and freight separately, but consider interactions where appropriate • Safety • Operations

12. Multimodal Corridor Maturity and Potential • Data Sources • US Census • BTS • UVA GeoStat Lab • Census Transportation Planning Package (CTPP) • Contains place of residence, place of work, and flows between home and work • VDOT State Planning System • National Highway Traffic Safety Administration • MPOs

13. Request For Information • What is the scope of a multimodal corridor? • Physical boundaries • Mileage radius • Geographical boundary (Census Tract, TAZ) (preferable) • Functional boundaries • Statewide network is interrelated with local networks • Relieving congestion on statewide corridors requires investigation and improvement to local transportation and land use

14. Multimodal Corridor Maturity and Potential

15. Request For Information • What is the VTrans2025 position concerning the conflicting objectives of mobility and accessibility? • Increasing mobility on roads will in many cases erode transit ridership and decentralize productions and attractions, reducing accessibility on other modes • Travel demand management, increased rail and transit capabilities, and centralizing productions and attractions encourage people to take shorter, non-auto trips, inherently reducing mobility

16. Request For Information • Given the funding shortage for transportation initiatives, and given the Kaine administration’s excitement about transportation, would this be a good time to focus on policies? • Land use alignments with transportation goals? • Travel demand management? • Congestion Pricing?

17. Appendix A – Performance Metrics

18. Appendix A - Performance Metrics • Safety and Security • Accidents • Injuries • Fatalities • Injuries / 100M VMT • Fatalities / 100M VMT • Crashes / Passenger Carried (or per million passenger miles?) • Fatalities / Passenger Carried (or per million passenger miles?) • Injuries w/ Bikes, Pedestrians, Trains, Heavy Trucks, Buses • Fatalities w/ Bikes, Pedestrians, Trains, Heavy Trucks, Buses • # at-grade crossings • crashes / train mile • % airports conducting voluntary security programs • % port compliance with Maritime Transportation Safety Act • OSHA recordables per 200K hours worked • crime rate at Park and Ride facilities

19. Appendix A - Performance Metrics • Performance and Maintenance • % lane miles deficient • % bridges functionally obsolete • % bridges structurally deficient • average clearance time for incidents • pavement condition • maintenance backlog • maintenance % of total budget • % facilities past recommended retirement age • mean time between failure • mean distance between failure • Coordination with Freight for Track Usage • # facilities not double-stack compatible • Coordination with Passenger Rail for Track Usage • Dwell Time for Containers • TEUs Per Acre

20. Appendix A - Performance Metrics • Mobility, Accessibility, Connectivity • lane miles • vehicle mix • VMT • AADT • % lane miles V/C > 1 • Ridership • % buses with bike racks • # communities with transit service • % of stations with bicycle facilities • # at-grade crossings • # communities within 10 miles of station • Enplanements • % population within a 30 minute drive of GA airport • % population within a 45 minute drive of commercial airport • air service volumes • Port capacity (TEU) • Size of ships accommodated • # / utilization of park and ride spaces

21. Appendix A - Performance Metrics • Economic Vitality • transportation cost per user • average length of commute • level of service • attractions / jobs within 1/4 mile of transit stops • population within 30 minutes of GA airport • population within 45 minutes of commercial airport • number of planes based at airports • economic impact of GA airport • economic impact of commercial airport • TEU's handled • value of goods • # distribution centers / warehouses in corridor • square footage • investment dollars • # of employees

22. Appendix A - Performance Metrics • Quality of Life, Environmental Stewardship • Average Delay Time • Increase of LOS due to TDM or transit usage • Reduction of VMT due to TDM or transit usage • overall customer satisfaction • Reliability • customer wait time • population within 30 minutes of GA airport • population within 45 minutes of commercial airport • See Appendix B for further suggestions

23. Appendix A - Performance Metrics • Fiscal Responsibility • # PPTAs • Projects completed on time and on budget • # localities participating in First Cities • # localities participating in Local Planning initiatives • Grants completed on time and on budget • Prioritization process • Current cash operating revenues • Current year beginning cash balances

24. Appendix B – Suggestions of Metrics for Quality of Life and Environmental Stewardship from “Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Appendix B - Performance Measures Library” (still need to identify which document)

25. Appendix B - Quality of Life • Accessibility, Mobility Related • % population that perceives its environment has become more 'livable'over the past year with regard to ability to access desired locations • % of region's unemployed or poor that cite transportation access as aprincipal barrier to seeking employment • % of region's mobility-impaired who can reach specific activities bypublic transportation or by walking/wheelchair • Customer perception of satisfaction with commute time • Customer perception of quality transit service • Lost time due to congestion • Average number of hours spent traveling • Work trips completed per vehicle hour

26. Appendix B - Quality of Life • Safety Related • Customer perception of safety while in travel system • % of population which perceives that response time by police, fire, rescue, or emergency services has become better or worse, and whether that is due to transportation factors

27. Appendix B - Quality of Life • Air Quality Related • Tons of air pollution emitted by all modes (including energy used to power METRO and other facilities) • # of days Pollution Standard Index is in unhealthful range • Number of urban areas classified as non-attainment status • Population in areas classified as non-attainment statusCustomer perception of satisfaction with air quality

28. Appendix B - Quality of Life • Noise Related • % of population exposed to levels of transportation noise above 60 decibels • Number of residences exposed to noise in excess of established thresholds • Number of noise receptor sites above threshold

29. Appendix B - Quality of Life • Other Environment Related • Customer perception of satisfaction with transportation decisions which impact the environment • Customer perception of amount of salt used on trunk highways • Amount of salt used per VMT or per lane-mile • # of archeological and historical sites that are not satisfactorily addressed in project development before construction begins

30. Appendix B - Quality of Life • Project Delivery Related • Customer perception of satisfaction with involvement in pre-project planning • Customer perception of satisfaction with completed projects • Customer perception of promises kept on project completion

31. Appendix B - Environmental Stewardship • Alternative Modes, Fuels • Overall mode split • Mode split by facility or route • % of change in mode splits • Public transportation passenger-miles/total vehicle miles • % of vehicles using alternative fuels • % use of walking and bicycling for commute trips • % use of walking and bicycling for all trips • # of miles of non-motorized facilities

32. Appendix B - Environmental Stewardship • Air Pollution • Highway emissions levels within non-attainment areas • Tons of greenhouse gases generated • Air quality rating

33. Appendix B - Environmental Stewardship • Fuel Usage • Fuel consumption per VMT • Fuel consumption per PMT • Fuel consumption per ton-mile traveled • Average MPG • Fuel usage splits • Average fuel consumption per trip for selected trips (or shipments)

34. Appendix B - Environmental Stewardship • Land Use • Sprawl: difference between change in urban household density and suburban household density • % of region which is developed • Pipelines • degree to which pipeline spills and accidents are minimized • Number of pipeline spills

35. Appendix B - Environmental Stewardship • Government Actions • Customer perception of satisfaction with transportation decisions which impact the environment • Number of environmental problems to be taken care of with existing commitments • Number of transportation control measures (TCMs) accomplished vs. planned • Environmentally friendly partnership projects per year

36. Appendix B - Environmental Stewardship • Miscellaneous • VMT/speed relationships constraints to utilization due to noise (hours of operation) • constraints to utilization due to water (dredge fill permits) • # accidents involving hazardous waste • Amount of recycled material used in road construction • # and miles of designated scenic routes

37. Appendix C – Amsterdam-Utrecht Corridor Haq, Gary. “Towards Sustainable Transport Planning: A Comparison Between Britain and the Netherlands”. Avebury. Hampshire, England. 1997; pp 192-232

38. Case Study: Amsterdam-Utrecht Corridor • Multimodal corridor analysis conducted in the late 90’s • Similar to I-95 corridor • Highway network experiencing congestion • Affecting passenger travel and freight delivery • Two track rail corridor at full capacity • Passenger rail unreliable due to track-sharing conflicts • Thorough description of corridor • Consideration of all of VTrans2025 goals • Effective presentation of findings