Planning Process Thursday, June 23, :00 PM to 3:15 PM EDT 1:00 PM to 2:15 PM CDT Noon to 11 1:15 PM MDT 11:00 AM to 12:15 PM PDT

Transcription

1 6/20/2011 How to Integrate TDM in the Planning Process Thursday, June 23, :00 PM to 3:15 PM EDT 1:00 PM to 2:15 PM CDT Noon to 11 1:15 PM MDT 11:00 AM to 12:15 PM PDT Sponsored by ACT, National Center for Transit Research at USF Agenda Introductions Donna Smallwood, MassRides/URS (5 min) Polls (5 min) Presentations (45 min) Egan Smith, U.S. Department of Transportation Sandi Moody, TBARTA Commuter Services Beth Alden, AICP, Hillsborough County MPO Q&A (20 min) 1

2 6/20/2011 Sponsored by: Association for Commuter Transportation Advocates for TDM Provides professional growth and networking opportunities Communicates the latest information on TDM best practices and industry news ACT International Conference Chicago August For more info, visit Sponsored by: National Center for Transit Research NCTR is located at the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) at the University of South Florida National TDM and Telework Clearinghouse Help Desk house TRANSP-TDM listserv Commuter Choice Certificate Online courses Home of the new Best Workplaces for Commuters 2

3 6/20/2011 Credits Available 1. One credit under Commuter Choice Certificate program managed by the Center for Urban Transportation Research at the University of South Florida 2. CM credit for AICP members Both REQUIRE you to provide your personal contact information on the evaluation form Evaluation: Form also will appear at end of event Speakers Egan Smith USDOT Sandi Moody Tampa Bay Area Regional Transportation Authority Beth Alden, AICP Hillsborough County MPO 3

4 Overview Introduction to Transportation Planning: Integrating TDM Egan Smith Community Planner, Office of Planning, Federal Highway Administration June 23, 2011 Transportation planning process Who determines the transportation needs Elements of the transportation planning process Efforts to Integrate TDM into the Planning Process Transportation Planning Transportation Planning Decentralized 3C Process Continuing, Cooperative, Comprehensive Major Policy and Planning Issues Air Quality Congestion Management Process Land Use and Transportation Freight Movement Safety Security Title VI/Environmental Justice Performance Measures Financial Planning and Programming g Planning and Environmental Linkage Public Involvement System Management & Operations Technology (GIS, TDM, Visualization) Transportation Asset Management Transportation planning is the process of: Establishing a vision Demonstrating impact or influence of demographics Assessing opportunities and challenges of the future Identifying short and long-term options Developing a financial plan Implementation 3 Transportation Planning Process Transportation Planning Planning Factors 1. Support economic vitality 2. Increase safety 3. Increase security 4. Increase accessibility and mobility 5. Enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, improve the quality of life, and promote consistency 6. Enhance integration and connectivity 7. Promote efficient system management and operation 8. Emphasize system preservation 6

5 Who Determines the Transportation Needs Who Determines the Transportation Needs U.S. Department of Transportation (US DOT) Sets policies and provides guidance on planning issues Statewide & Metropolitan Reviews and certifies selected planning activities State Department of Transportation (State DOT) Develops statewide transportation plans and programs Coordinates with MPOs and neighboring States Plans for non urbanized areas Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Develops metropolitan transportation plans and programs Coordinates with neighboring MPO(s) and State(s) Consists of Local Government Public Participation and Stakeholder Involvement 8 Major Planning Products CANADA State DOT Long Range Statewide Transportation Plan (LRSTP) 20 years Can be policy oriented Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) 4 years MPO Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) 20 years Congestion Management Process (CMP) Transportation Conformity Demonstration Financial Plan Public Participation Plan Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) 4 years MEXICO 384 MPOs 10 Contributors to the Planning Process MPO States Regional Agencies The Public Federal Government Legal System Tribal Government Private Sector User/ Special Interest Groups Elements of the transportation planning process

6 From Problem to Solutions Analysis Evaluation and Decision-making Multiple ways to address a single problem Alternatives are the strategies/solutions to be considered Identification of alternatives starts with understanding problems and underlying causes Involvement of Agencies and the Public Analysis of Alternatives Evaluation of Alternatives Decision Programming Identify evaluation criteria Prioritize Projects for funding Document decisions in the TIP/ STIP

7 Project Development Projects-planning process Environmental process Efforts to Integrate TDM into the Planning Process More Contemporary Definitions of Travel Demand Management Efforts to Integrate TDM into the Planning Process Managing demand is about providing travelers, regardless of whether they drive alone, with travel choices, such as work location, route, time of travel and mode. In the broadest sense, demand management is defined as providing travelers with effective choices to improve travel reliability. Demand management is designed to better balance people s needs to travel a particular route at a particular time with the capacity of available facilities to efficiently handle this demand. Ridesharing Options Analysis and Practitioners Toolkit Identify how TDM strategies can and should be integrated into the planning process and also address livability goals Integrating TDM into the Transportation planning Process: A Desk Reference 23 24

8 Ridesharing Options Analysis and Practitioners Toolkit TDM Strategies Address Livability Goals Benefits and Incentives of Ridesharing The Role of Ridesharing in U.S. DOT s and FHWA s Broader Initiatives The Public Sector Ridesharing Spectrum Ridesharing and Technology Partnerships in Ridesharing Educating the Public About Ridesharing Ridesharing Program Implementation the how to The Future of Ridesharing Ridesharing Database Identify, through case studies, MPOs that have innovatively promoted bicycle, pedestrian, and TDM programs as part of a complementary group throughout their planning processes. Link to Toolkit Integrating TDM into the Transportation Planning Process: A Desk Reference For More Information Describe a contemporary view of TDM with relevance to various policy objectives Provide case studies, examples and best practices for integrating TDM in planning Identify integration opportunities for TDM in Planning Process Statewide, Metropolitan, Corridor, Local Provide guidance on tools and techniques for evaluating TDM approaches Summarize the known effectiveness of TDM strategies for various policy goals Federal Highway Administration & Federal Transit Administration Transportation Planning Capacity Building

9 Planning the TDM Future: Long Range TDM Plan SANDI MOODY DIRECTOR - PROGRAMS AND OPERATIONS TAMPA BAY AREA REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (TBARTA) TBARTA Commuter Services (formerly Bay Area Commuter Services) is the regional commuter assistance program agency promoting TDM services for West Central Florida covering Hillsborough, Pinellas, Pasco, Hernando, and Citrus counties Background TBARTA Commuter Services More Services Regional ridematching for carpool and vanpool Regional Emergency Ride Home Program (ERH) TBARTA Commuter Vanpool Telework Tampa Bay Working with land use entities to include TDM strategies in planning for development/redevelopment Public Awareness Media Campaigns Maintenance of traffic (MOT) Community based transportation initiatives, such as school pooling And much, much more... Why Did We Develop A LRTDM Plan? TDM has been low priority in transportation planning TBARTA and other TDM agencies have made a strong impact, but more was needed To achieve a greater impact, buy-in was needed from the local decision makers, to include TDM strategies in the Long Range Plan for Top Reasons Why Develop A TDM Long Range Plan 1. Help match resources to expectations ti or match expectations to resources Resources Expectations We must develop realistic expectations of what TDM can do at specific levels of effort and investment. 1

10 Top 3 Reasons for LRTDM Plan Plan of Action Components 2. Identify funding needs (and program those needs) 3. Move policies from encouragement of TDM to action Transition from vague policy references to budgeted TDM programs attached to specific goals and objectives es in Long Range Transportation Plans (LRTPs) Compel agency staff/elected officials to discuss and agree on quantifiable effects of TDM strategies on air quality and congestion Effects of TDM strategies had to be quantifiable Action Plan (continued) Advisory Committee Plan should identify the most effective strategies to pursue on a long term (20+ years) basis Plan should be able to predict the effects of the appropriate TDM strategies on air quality and congestion on a long term basis To achieve credibility, TBARTA Commuter Services solicited members of these agencies for the Advisory Committee... MPO Staff Hillsborough County The City of Tampa Florida Dept. of Transportation (2 reps) The Environmental Protection Commission The MPO s Citizen Advisory Committee The MPO s Technical Advisory Committee The MPO s Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee Consultant s Role Results Collect baseline data Identify existing and potential TDM products and services Develop scenarios with stakeholder input Run COMMUTER Model for county, activity center and employer Develop plan in partnership with TBARTA Commuter Services and Advisory Committee Quantifiable performance measures for validating TDM strategies effectiveness By using the LRTP process, decision-makers use specific TDM language, stating the amount of congestion reduced d due to TDM measures Identification of the most effective TDM strategies for transportation agencies in our area A definitive plan for creating effective TDM programs 2

11 Stronger Policies in Comprehensive Plan Secure Dedicated Funding BEFORE (1994) The County shall encourage new development to participate in transportation demand management strategies... AFTER (current) The County shall require new development to participate in transportation demand management strategies BEFORE: The 2020 LRTP s Cost Affordable Plan contained definition of TDM, a list of strategies and benefits and overviews of the organizations involved in promoting TDM AFTER: The 2025 LRTP s Cost Affordable Plan allocates $2.56 million per year to travel demand management programs, beginning in fiscal year Conditions for Success As An Added Bonus... Supporters within the MPO TDM recognized as a set of tools to meet primary goal of LRTP: Reduce traffic congestion Use of EPA s COMMUTER Model Use of federally-created model added validity and credibility to plan Can be used as off-model to regional planning models to modify trip tables This process provided a forum to get TDM strategies recognized by other agencies affecting transportation decisions... Way To Go! A further benefit was the building and strengthening of relationships between TBARTA Commuter Services and other agencies in our community who plan for the future of transportation... Advice from the TDM Trenches See the plan. Be the plan. The LRTDM Plan is your roadmap. Follow it! Hold their feet to the fire. Use the plan for building relationships. Put me in coach! Seek higher visibility within the transportation planning arena Expand your horizons. Seek to be perceived as more than commuter ridesharing. TDM is much more than changing mode behavior. A TDMer s work is never done. Planning is a continual process. Expect to update the plan. 3

12 Case Study Contact Information Hillsborough County Long Range TDM Plan Full report available at: Sandi Moody Director Programs and Operations TBARTA TBARTA Commuter Services RIDE 4

13 6/20/2011 What s the Buzz at your MPO? TDM from the MPO s Perspective Beth Alden, AICP, Group Leader Hillsborough MPO, Tampa, FL Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) Metropolitan Transportation Plan/ Long Range Transportation Plan (MTP, LRTP) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Congestion Management Process (CMP) Air Quality Conformity Determination 2 UPWP: Planning Work Federal PL Funds (from SAFETEALU) Work & Budget approved by MPO Board Some work tasks are mandated, others are local priorities Local example: Long Range TDM Plan o o o Identified TDM activities appropriate for our metro area Forecast vehicle trips, emissions Estimated staffing costs & capital needs Long Range Transportation Plan Plan Adoption Required Every 4-5 Years 3 Federal & State Requirements Where will growth be? Local Compre- hensive Plans What facilities will be needed? Long Range (20+ year) Transp. Plan Who builds or operates, starting when? Local FDOT 5-year 5-year CIP s WP HART THEA 10-year Program TDP TBARTA/ BACS Program Goals 1. Improve quality of life while minimizing impacts to the environment 2. Support economic vitality to foster global competitiveness 3. Promote accessibility & mobility by improving multi-modal choices 4. Coordinate transportation with land use 5. Enhance safety & security 6. Preserve existing facilities 6 1

14 6/20/2011 Performance Criteria Help to make important investment decisions more objectively Compare C costs & benefits relative to performance objectives like: Reduce delay, emissions, collisions, VMT Improve traffic flow or mobility for the transportation disadvantaged Performance Criteria Ensure high-end performers are included in the final cost affordable plan Inform trade-off discussions, with higher weights for some goals and objectives 7 8 Ten Weighted Performance Criteria 17% Safety/ crashes 7% Maintain/ support existing 5% Security/ evacuation 7% Goods movement 10% Activity centers 7% Environmental impacts 8 % Regional connections 16% Reduce congestion 8% Community plans & 15% support Alternatives to driving Committee Comment: Level playing field for all types of projects! Obj. 2.2 Weighting factor: 16% Relieve congestion and improve traffic flow. Reducing traffic congestion Mode Data Scoring Criteria i Policies i Highway Volume/ Reduces 2035 Volume/Capacity ratio Policy 2.2 A- Transit capacity F, 3.3D from E+C Creates a separate ROW for transit, or enhanced network w peak hour service, parallel to 2035 congested roads Bike, Ped 2035 SE data New facilities on 2035 congested roads ITS Coordinated signals, etc. on 2035 congested roads Reduce peak hour trips, promote alternatives to TDM driving alone 10 Obj. 3.1 Maximize access to the transportation system and improve the mobility of the transportation disadvantaged. Obj. 3.2 Decrease reliance on single-occupant vehicles. Obj. 5.1 Provide for safer travels for all modes of transportation, including walking, bicycling, transit, auto, and freight. Weighting factor: 15% Bike, Ped ITS TDM Alternatives to driving alone Mode Data Source Scoring Criteria Policies Highway Known to add lanes incentivizing HOV Policies use, or combo of sidewalks, bike lanes, 2.2A-E, Transit accessible bus stops 3.1A-B, 3.2A-C 2035 LRTP ridership forecasts (pax-mi per mi) Multi-modal LOS evals, 06 & 07 MPO Bike Plan Volume/capacity fr E+C network w 2035 SE data Attracts transit riders Improves ped or bicycle level of service Provides public info about alternatives Makes vanpool vehicles available or provides public info about alternatives 11 Weighting factor: 17% Safety (Reducing Crashes) Mode Data Source Scoring Criteria Policies Highway, Bike, Ped Transit ITS TDM Safety Tech Memo for 2035 LRTP Top crash rate segments and intersections (except widening 6+ lanes) Passenger safety improvements Provides info about incidents and delays No TDM projects Policies 2.2 A and E, 4.2F, 5.1D and E 12 2

15 6/20/2011 I-4, from 50 th St to County Line: 4 Special Use Lanes Env. Impact No significant impact 3 Regional On SIS 5 Traffic V/C > 1.5 in Commty Pln Not in adopted community plan 0 Alternatives If lanes are HOV or HOT 5 If not 0 (3.66) Activity Ctrs Connects 2 Activity Centers 5 Freight Goods movement Hot Spot 5 Safety High crash rate area 5 Security Critical infrastructure/ key resource 5 Maintain Project in existing ROW Transportation Spending: Status Quo Bike/Ped/Trails 2% Signals/ITS 1% Improvements to Major Roads 83% Transit 14% Hillsborough MPO Transportation Improvement Program 09/10-13/1413/14 Transportation Spending: Public Comment Proposed Affordable By % ITS 42% 15% Wlki Walking & Biking 25% Highways Transit $47 Transit $14 ITS $16 Walking & Biking $23 Highways Highways, $5,908 Trails & Bike Lanes, $96 Ped Improvemts, ITS, $26 $76 Transit, $5,844 Survey (%) The Money Game ($100) Capital Projects (in $M) Total: $11.9 B 16 Strategic Intermodal System Cost Feasible Plan I -75 SR 56 to Fowler Ave 6 lanes Fowler Ave to I-4 Design & ROW MAINTAIN EXISTING SYSTEM -LRTP 7% Maintenance costs off the top Advanced Traffic Management Systems Travel Demand Management Proposed TRIP Priority Partial funding for HOT Lanes 18 3

16 6/20/2011 CMP Requirements Congestion Management Process On-going Process Shapes the Long Range Plan Develop Objectives Define Network/ System Develop Performance Measures Collect Data & Analyze Problems Identify Strategies Implement Strategies Monitor System & Evaluate Effectiveness DRAFT GOALS & OBJECTIVES GOAL 1: Improve Reliability of Travel Major Issue 1 A: High Crash Rates Crashes contribute to a percentage of congestion Crash rates in Hillsborough County are 2 4 times the national average DRAFT GOALS & OBJECTIVES GOAL 2: Shift Trips to Non SOV Modes Major Issue 2 A: Transit Effectiveness A sample of 99 trips between major destinations in Hillsborough take significantly longer by bus than by driving, nearly ½ take more than an hour longer by bus. Transit operating in LOS D or better reaches 31% of total population and employment DRAFT GOALS & OBJECTIVES GOAL 3: Reduce Peak Hour Impacts Major Issue 3 A: Constrained Roads & Intersections Signalized intersections have a major effect on travel times lane miles of constrained right of way No capability of county to remotely adjust signals County, Cities, and State systems are not coordinated DRAFT GOALS & OBJECTIVES GOAL 3: Reduce Peak Hour Impacts Major Issue 3 B: Unchecked Demand When a freeway is 90% full, it can still run. It s the last few percent that create gridlock. A small reduction in traffic at peak can make a big difference. The driver may value his/her time enough to pay more to use a road Land use patterns directly affect congestion 4

17 6/20/2011 DRAFT GOALS & OBJECTIVES Role of CMP Issue 3 B: Unchecked Demand Strategy 3 B: Reduce Peak Hour Demand Best Practices: Variable pricing: I 95 Miami HOT lanes improved average travel times from 25 to 8 minutes Ramp metering: Minneapolis shows a 22% decrease in freeway travel time TDM programs forecast to reduce VMT 5% in 20 years Mixed Use Developments reduce external trips 10% Define MPO s focus Generate a list of needed projects for metropolitan long range plan & TIP If air quality non attainment area: before widening a road, must demonstrate that all other CMP strategies will not solve the congestion problem Attaining Air Quality Standards EPA Revising Ozone Standard July 31, 2011 Important for Health Reasons (e.g., Asthma Rates) If Don t Meet Emissions Budget Funds Withheld Must have Conforming Transportation Plan Must estimate emissions & potential reductions! Conformity Determination Emissions budget for transportation in your region is set by your state government LRTP, TIP must meet budget (amendments too!) Others are working to meet budgets (stationary & point sources) State Implementation Plan identifies Control Strategies How to Create a Conforming Plan: Charlotte & Denver Examples Both cities faced with emissions over budget in the 90s Charlotte adopted revised plan with better transit and smart growth trimming traffic and pollution. Won voter approval. Denver s problem was particulate matter. Added maintenance into regional plans, incentives for light rail, commitment to limit growth, and travel demand strategies. By 2001, Denver was only large metro area that attained every national air quality standard. What Can Happen if Non Conforming: Atlanta s Story Conformity Lapse Redirected $300,000,000, from Capacity Projects to highway safety, transit, bike/ped, traffic signals, HOV, bridges, air quality Formed Georgia Regional Transportation Authority 5

18 6/20/2011 There s Room for TDM at your MPO! Public Process Technical Advisory Committee Come plan with us! 31 6