Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 1 Update for VTrans2025 Technical Committee February 24, 2006 Dr. James H. Lambert Alexander S. Linthicum

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 14 Multimodal Corridor Maturity and Potential

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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?

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 17 Appendix A – Performance Metrics

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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)

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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 a principal barrier to seeking employment –% of region's mobility-impaired who can reach specific activities by public 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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 status Customer perception of satisfaction with air quality

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 32 Appendix B - Environmental Stewardship Air Pollution –Highway emissions levels within non-attainment areas –Tons of greenhouse gases generated –Air quality rating

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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)

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 37 Appendix C – Amsterdam-Utrecht Corridor Haq, Gary. “Towards Sustainable Transport Planning: A Comparison Between Britain and the Netherlands”. Avebury. Hampshire, England. 1997; pp

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia 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