Update for VTrans2025 Technical Committee

1
Update for VTrans2025 Technical Committee

• February 13, 2006
• Dr. James H. Lambert
• Alexander S. Linthicum

2
Contents

• Introduction
• Performance Metrics
• Cost Benefit Analysis / Prioritization
  Methodology
• Need
• Existing work
• Gaps
• Work Planned
• Discussion of Future Work
• Appendix A Suggestions of Metrics for Quality
  of Life and Environmental Stewardship
• Appendix B Suggestions of Metrics for Cost
  Benefit Analysis / Prioritization

3
Introduction

• Last meeting attended by UVA concerning
  performance metrics
• 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 in an objective
  prioritization process

4
Performance Metrics

• Developed a performance metrics that includes
• Metrics distributed by Kathy Graham at January
  VTrans meeting
• UVA suggestions for Quality of Life and
  Environmental Stewardship metrics
• Located in Appendix A
• UVA suggestions for metrics to aid in Cost
  Benefit Analysis / Prioritization Process
• Located in Appendix B

5
Cost Benefit Analysis / Prioritization

• From the VTrans2025 Final Progress Report,
  December 2005
• Recommendation 15
• Continue development of the Multimodal
  Investment Network (MIN) approach as a framework
  for planning and prioritizing multimodal projects
  at the state level, giving particular attention
  to how this new approach to planning can assist
  in allocating scarce transportation dollars.
• Action Item 15.3 Establish a mechanism for
  giving priority to statewide multimodal corridor
  components in modal agency prioritization
  systems.
• Action Item 15.4 Work with regional planning
  partners and modal agencies to evaluate the
  benefits of prioritizing statewide multimodal
  corridor components.
• Action Item 15.5 Develop a process for
  evaluating alternative transportation modes
  and/or mode substitutability in development of
  modal long-range plans.

6
Cost Benefit Analysis / Prioritization

• Differing modes often measured by disparate
  performance metrics
• Costs and benefits often monetized
• Several tools that monetize costs and benefits
  for multimodal initiatives are available from
  FHWA (SPASM and STEAM)
• These tools apply the concept of consumer
  surplus
• B (Pb - Pi )(Vb Vi ) / 2
• Pb and Pi are price per trip and Vb and Vi are
  the number of trips in the Base and Improvement
  Cases
• In Exhibit 2.2, the rectangular area represents
  benefits to current users and the triangular area
  represents benefits to new users.

7
Cost Benefit Analysis / Prioritization
8
Cost Benefit Analysis / Prioritization

• Sketch Planning Analysis Spreadsheet Model
  (SPASM)
• Great for strategic planning
• Can be used for multimodal corridors
• More work required to
• quantify external costs and benefits
• consider airports and maritime ports
• Surface Transportation Efficiency Analysis Model
  (STEAM)
• Designed primarily for local and regional
  planners
• Requires more detailed, initiative-specific
  information than is available to statewide
  planners during the strategic planning stage

9
Cost Benefit Analysis / Prioritization

• Existing FHWA tools (SPASM) and methodologies
  from UVA and VDOTs highway cost estimation and
  prioritization process can be modified and
  complemented to help the VTrans2025 Committee
  develop an objective, performance metric-based
  prioritization methodology
• Future Work
• Define scope
• Define performance metrics required (see Appendix
  B for initial list)
• Develop methodology
• Deconstruct existing tools
• Define cost benefit equations

10
Appendix A 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)

11
Appendix A - 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

12
Appendix A - 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

13
Appendix A - 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

14
Appendix A - 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

15
Appendix A - 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

16
Appendix A - 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

17
Appendix A - 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

18
Appendix A - Environmental Stewardship

• Air Pollution
• Highway emissions levels within non-attainment
  areas
• Tons of greenhouse gases generated
• Air quality rating

19
Appendix A - 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)

20
Appendix A - 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

21
Appendix A - 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

22
Appendix A - 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

23
Appendix B Suggestions of Metrics for Cost
Benefit Analysis / Prioritization

• from SPASM

24
Appendix B Metrics for Cost Benefit Analysis /
Prioritization

• Unit Cost Parameters
• Value of Travel Time ( per person-hour), varies
  by mode (auto, truck, carpool, local bus, express
  bus, rail)
• In-Vehicle
• Excess Time
• Added bus delay on arterials (minutes/mile)
• External Costs (excluding emissions)
• Per vehicle trip (auto, carpool)
• Per vehicle mile (auto, truck, carpool)

25
Appendix B Metrics for Cost Benefit Analysis /
Prioritization

• Agency Costs
• Capital cost of new initiatives
• Operating and maintenance costs of new initiatives

26
Appendix B Metrics for Cost Benefit Analysis /
Prioritization

• Base Case and Improvement Cases
• Freeways, arterials, HOV lanes, rail corridors
• Length
• Capacity
• Free-flow Speed
• These can be same for base and improvement cases

27
Appendix B Metrics for Cost Benefit Analysis /
Prioritization

• Demand Inputs
• Base and Improvement Cases, Peak and Off-Peak
  Periods
• Person Trips Per Day
• Vehicle Occupancy (persons/vehicle)
• Out-of-pocket cost per person trip ()
• Wait and transfer time per trip (min.)
• Access Mode Fractions ( of trips)
• Access Mode Distances (miles)