PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR HIGHWAY CAPACITY DECISION MAKING SALEEM SALAMEH, P.E., PH.D.

PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR
HIGHWAY CAPACITY DECISION MAKING
WEST VIRGINIA PLANNING CONFERENCE – SEPTEMBER 16, 2015
SALEEM SALAMEH, P.E., PH.D. KYOVA IPC
TRUNG VO, P.E. KIMLEY-HORN
OUTLINE
 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century
 KYOVA Performance Measurement
 A Case Study in Highway Capacity Decision Making
2
MOVING AHEAD FOR PROGRESS
IN THE 21ST CENTURY
PERFORMANCE ELEMENTS . NATIONAL GOALS . PERFORMANCE MEASURES
3
PERFORMANCE ELEMENTS
1. National Goals
2. Measures
3. Targets
4. Plans
5. Reports
6. Accountability and Transparency
4
NATIONAL GOALS
Goal Area National Goal
Safety Reduce fatalities & serious injuries on all public roads
Infrastructure condition Maintain a state of good repair
Congestion reduction Significantly reduce congestion on the NHS
System reliability Improve the efficiency of the surface system
Freight movement & Improve the national freight network, access of rural communities to markets,
economic vitality & economic development
Environmental sustainability
Reduced project delivery delays
Enhance system performance while protecting and enhancing the
environment
Accelerate project completion by eliminating delays in the project delivery
process
5
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
 Safety Performance
 Number of fatalities and number of serious injuries
 Rate of fatalities and rate of serious injuries
6
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
 Pavement and Bridge
 Percentage of pavements in the Interstate System in good and poor condition
 Percentage of pavements of the non-Interstate NHS in good and poor condition
 Percentage of NHS bridges classified as being in good and poor condition
7
KYOVA PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT
STRATEGIC HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM 2 . 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN
CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROCESS . SPATIAL DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM
8
STRATEGIC HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM 2 (SHRP 2)
 SHRP 2 was created to
 Improve highway safety
 Reduce congestion
 Improve methods for renewing roads and bridges
 KYOVA will use its SHRP 2 grant to establish a process that
 Conforms to national and state standards
 Is easily repeatable
 Coordinates with available data and data gathering practices
9
STRATEGIC HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM 2 (SHRP 2)
TIMELINE OF EVENTS
 January-March 2015 – KYOVA applied for and was awarded funding for C02: Performance Measures
for Highway Capacity Decision-Making
 May 2015 – Kickoff Conference Call with FHWA and completion of Statement of Work
 August 2015 – Notification to proceed with work
 September-November 2015 – Identify stakeholders and prepare for FHWA workshop
 November 2015 – Stakeholder workshop
 June 2016 – Complete SHRP 2 Implementation Assistance project
10
STRATEGIC HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM 2 (SHRP 2)
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Task #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Deliverable/Activity
Identify stakeholders
Kickoff meeting with stakeholders (merged with FHWA workshop)
Data needs coordination
Preparation for FHWA workshop
Conduct workshop with FHWA and stakeholders
Summarize feedback from FHWA workshop
Additional data gathering and coordination
Develop action plan for C02 tool application
Prepare C02 tool performance documentation
Presentation to agency stakeholders
Timeframe
1 week
2 weeks
4 weeks
4 weeks
1 week
2 weeks
4 weeks
4 weeks
2 weeks
2 weeks
11
STRATEGIC HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM 2 (SHRP 2)
FHWA WORKSHOP
 Stakeholders will hear from representatives from FHWA, KYOVA, WVDOT, KYTC, and
ODOT about current and forthcoming work on performance measures
 Break-out group brainstorming to generate ideas on future “action steps”
 Group dialogue on the framework and components of the Action Plan
 Discussion of next steps for developing and implementing the Action Plan
12
2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN
PRIORITIZATION CRITERIA
 Efficiency
 Reduction in Delay
 Reduction in Excess Demand
 Support of Freight Priorities
 Support of Transit Service
 Support of Bicycle and Pedestrian
Mobility
 Safety
 Growth Management
 Economic Development
 Existing Deficiency
 Cost Effectiveness
 State Priority
13
CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROCESS
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
 Intensity
 Variability
 Volume-to-Capacity Ratio
 Crash Rate
 Level of Service
 Planning Time Index
 Travel Time Index
 Duration
 Extent
 Number of Vehicle Miles Traveled at LOS E
or F
 Total Delay
 Multimodal
 Fixed-Route Transit Coverage
 Bicycle/Pedestrian Routes/Facilities
 Proportion of CMP Network that Includes
Fixed-Route Transit or Bicycle/Pedestrian
Routes/Facilities
14
SPATIAL DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM (SDSS)
 A GIS-based system of relational databases, computational tools, and information
sources used to
 Store transportation system attribute and performance data
 Perform technical analyses that identify/quantify congestion and assess the effectiveness of
congestion reduction/mitigation strategies
 Provide themes maps and system performance reports for stakeholders and decision makers
15
SPATIAL DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM (SDSS)
Map Figures
KYOVA Transportation Management Area Boundary
Volumes from Traffic Model Assignments
CMP Network
Capacities from Traffic Model Assignments
Major River Crossings
V/C Ratios from Traffic Model Assignments
Fixed Route Transit Coverage
Levels of Service
Computed Crash Rates Compared to Statewide Average
Travel Time Indices
Congested Locations from Stakeholder Workshops
Planning Time Indices
Downtown Railroad Underpass/Viaduct Locations
16
CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES
 Providing both consistency and flexibility
 Finding the right balance of national measures
 Managing performance across jurisdictions
 Data requirements and management
 Linking performance measures to investments
 Advancing technologies
17
CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES
 Improved communication link between investments and results
 Increased consistency
 Increased coordination across jurisdictions
 Greater understanding of what works
 Spur discussions on the value of future performance management
 Improved data collection, integration, reporting, and visualization
18
A CASE STUDY IN
HIGHWAY CAPACITY DECISION MAKING
NCDOT PRIORITIZATION PROCESS . BENEFIT/COST CRITERIA
TRAVEL TIME SAVINGS ANALYSIS . OPPORTUNITY FOR KYOVA
19
NCDOT PRIORITIZATION PROCESS
 Strategic Transportation Investments Law passed in 2013
 Replaces Equity Formula with Strategic Mobility Formula
 New data-driven process based on specific criteria
 Equity Formula would have funded 175 highway projects
 Mobility Formula will fund 478 highway projects
20
BENEFIT/COST CRITERIA
 Highway projects compete in three categories – all include Benefit/Cost criteria
 Division Needs – 20%
 Regional Impact – 25%
 Statewide Mobility – 30%
 Benefit/Cost is based on travel time savings
21
TRAVEL TIME SAVINGS ANALYSIS
 TransModeler 4.0 is the selected microsimulation software to measure travel time
savings for every highway project
 Currently analyzing 98 projects – to be completed by end of October
 Long-term byproduct is statewide microsimulation model
22
OPPORTUNITY FOR KYOVA
 Integrate microsimulation with regional travel demand model
 How could microsimulation be used to inform KYOVA’s MTP prioritization process?
 Potential performance measures
 Travel time savings
 Congestion reduction
 Queue spillback mitigation
23
 Saleem Salameh
 Trung Vo
KYOVA Interstate Planning Commission
Kimley-Horn
[email protected]
[email protected]
24