Analytical Support for the Statewide Multimodal Long-Range Transportation Plan

1. Analytical Support for the Statewide Multimodal Long-Range Transportation Plan Prepared for the Systems and Information Engineering Design Symposium University of Virginia April 26, 2003

2. Authors Mohammed A. Ba-Ali Brister B. Barrett David A. Cowden Jared T. Zane Prof. James H. Lambert Kenneth D. Peterson (BS/MS Student) C. Ariel Pinto (MS Student) Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems and Department of Systems and Information Engineering, University of Virginia

3. Problem Statement Need for analytical methods to improve the coordination among the various modal transportation agencies of the Commonwealth of Virginia

4. Overview • Process of case studies • Aviation case study • Public transit case study • Port case study • Rail case study • Multimodal systems integration

5. Multimodal Statewide Planning Process Source: VTrans2025 2002 (Draft)

6. Process of Case Studies • Collect projects from modal agencies (aviation, public transit, port, rail) • Assess TEA-21 qualitative metrics for each project • Select quantitative metrics for each mode • Assess quantitative metrics for each project • Interpret and study the portfolios of projects

7. TEA-21 Qualitative Metrics • EC: Economic competitiveness • FR: Fiscal responsibility • IM: Intermodalism and mobility • QL: Quality of life • SM: Systems management • SS: Safety and security

8. Aviation Case Study

9. Aviation Data Collection • Recorded project data from VDOAV • Description of the projects for each airport • Project cost ($) • State funding (requested and recommended)

10. Aviation Performance Metrics • Annual operations • Population served within 20, 25, 30 miles radius

12. Aviation Project Data

13. Aviation: Portfolio Results EC: Economic competitiveness FR: Fiscal responsibility IM: Intermodalism and mobility QL: Quality of life SM: Systems management SS: Safety and security

14. Aviation Projects Motivated by Systems Management and Safety/Security

15. EC (4%) FR (1%) IM (15%) QL (19%) 2 2 6 SM (31%) 3 9 7 SS (30%) 7 11 26 Aviation: Count of Projects EC: Economic competitiveness FR: Fiscal responsibility IM: Intermodalism and mobility QL: Quality of life SM: Systems management SS: Safety and security

16. EC (2%) FR (0%) IM (18%) QL (20%) 217 153 2485 SM (35%) 631 3655 2624 SS (25%) 1023 2113 6706 Aviation: Population Served by Sector EC: Economic competitiveness FR: Fiscal responsibility IM: Intermodalism and mobility QL: Quality of life SM: Systems management SS: Safety and security

17. Public Transit Case Study

18. Public Transit Performance Metrics • Population served • Revenue hours plus revenue miles

19. Public Transit Project Data

20. Public Transit: Portfolio Results EC: Economic competitiveness FR: Fiscal responsibility IM: Intermodalism and mobility QL: Quality of life SM: Systems management SS: Safety and security

21. Public Transit Projects Motivated by Intermodalism/Mobility and Safety/Security

22. Public Transit: Count of Projects EC: Economic competitiveness FR: Fiscal responsibility IM: Intermodalism and mobility QL: Quality of life SM: Systems management SS: Safety and security

23. Public Transit: Cost of Projects EC: Economic competitiveness FR: Fiscal responsibility IM: Intermodalism and mobility QL: Quality of life SM: Systems management SS: Safety and security

24. Public Transit: Population Served by Sector EC: Economic competitiveness FR: Fiscal responsibility IM: Intermodalism and mobility QL: Quality of life SM: Systems management SS: Safety and security

25. Port Case Study

26. Port Performance Metrics • Total tonnage per year • Total acres

27. Port Project Data

28. Port: Portfolio Results EC: Economic competitiveness FR: Fiscal responsibility IM: Intermodalism and mobility QL: Quality of life SM: Systems management SS: Safety and security

29. Port Projects Motivated by Economic Competitiveness and Intermodalism/Mobility Total Tonnage per Year vs. Total Acres 70000000 60000000 50000000 Total Tonnage per Year 40000000 Total Tonnage per Year 30000000 20000000 10000000 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Total Acres

30. Port: Count of Projects EC: Economic competitiveness FR: Fiscal responsibility IM: Intermodalism and mobility QL: Quality of life SM: Systems management SS: Safety and security

31. Port: Cost of Projects EC: Economic competitiveness FR: Fiscal responsibility IM: Intermodalism and mobility QL: Quality of life SM: Systems management SS: Safety and security

32. Rail Case Study

33. Rail Performance Metrics • Track miles • Total freight cars on-line (per year)

34. Rail Project Data

35. Rail: Portfolio Results EC: Economic competitiveness FR: Fiscal responsibility IM: Intermodalism and mobility QL: Quality of life SM: Systems management SS: Safety and security

36. Rail Projects Motivated by Systems Management and Intermodalism/Mobility 350000.01 300000.01 250000.01 200000.01 150000.01 Total Cars On-line 100000.01 50000.01 0.01 10 100 1000 Track Miles

37. Rail: Count of Projects EC: Economic competitiveness FR: Fiscal responsibility IM: Intermodalism and mobility QL: Quality of life SM: Systems management SS: Safety and security

38. Rail: Cost of Projects EC: Economic competitiveness FR: Fiscal responsibility IM: Intermodalism and mobility QL: Quality of life SM: Systems management SS: Safety and security

39. Multimodal Systems Integration

40. Comparison of Multimodal Systems Aviation Ports Rail and Public Transportation Roads

41. Integration of Modal Projects Soo-Haeng Cho, 2001

42. Study of Dulles CorridorMultimodal System http://web.mit.edu/dsm/Tutorial/DSM_reading.htm

43. Dulles Corridor (cont.) http://web.mit.edu/dsm/Tutorial/tutorial_intro.htm

44. Future Work • Development of a “multimodal impact statement” • Need and purpose • Rationale for selected alternative • Integration and implementation plan

45. MIS Example: Route 460 Corridor

46. Route 460 Corridor (cont.) • Various upgrades to bring US460 to near interstate standards • Construct new 6000 ft runway at Hampton Roads airport • Provide dedicated access/interchanges for the following general aviation and small commercial facilities: Blackstone Municipal Airport, Petersburg Airport, Wakefield Airport (runway protection zone necessitates realignment), Crewe Airport, Farmville Airport, Lynchburg-Falwell Airport, Lynchburg Regional Airport, Roanoke Airport • Rail upgrade (double track, sidings, speeds) and realignment of Norfolk Southern and CSXT lines • APM Terminals (Maersk subsidiary) intermodal container port in Portsmouth (largest such private facility in the US) • Intermodal container rail to port facility in Suffolk (Virginia Port Authority) • Intermodal container rail to port facility in Petersburg (Richmond Ports Commission) • Various rail-industrial development sites west of Petersburg

47. Future Work: Other Multimodal Systems • Dulles Corridor • Disaster preparedness • Eastern airport • I-81 Corridor • Third Crossing • Western Rail Expansion • Space transportation • Olympics • High-tech rail • Cruise ship terminals • Door-to-door freight • Coal/mineral transportation • Urban undergrounds • Urban public/personal transportation • Tourism centers • Multimodal service areas • Innovative transit solutions • Innovative parking solutions • Urban corridors -DC-RIC -RIC-NOR

48. Acknowledgements Jim Bland, Cliff Burnette, Jeff Florin, George Connor, Bill LaBaugh, Alan Tobias, Ranjeet Rathore, Ken Lantz, Diane Mitchell, Marsha Fiol, Katherine Graham, Kimberly Spence, Frank Dunn, Gus Robey, Mary Lynn Tischer, Mike Knott, Chip Badger, Alan Tobias, Bill Ketron, Kevin Page, Wayne Ferguson, Mike Fontaine, and John Miller

49. Discussion