|
Items in cart [0] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| ||||||||||||
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 5
Jack Faucett Associates Inc.
,
1. INTRODUCTION AND RESEARCH APPROACH
Final Report
_
March 1997
Transportation planning in public agencies traditionally has been organized around single modes.
Most of the planning was concerned with highways and streets since this was the predominant mode
for which public agencies were re.snnn~ibit? n~rtirl~l~rl~r ~ the :.. ~¢ :~__._ ~
21 ___ _ 1 _ , ~. .
r~~~ ~ r~~~.~ l~Vlll L11~ ~1~pG~iVO O1 1111~51=c~e
development and preservation. Federal, state, and local agencies also jointly are responsible for
infrastructure development for air and water modes (airports, inland waterways and ports, and
seaports). Infrastructure planning and investment for the rail and pipeline modes is left to private
companies subject to public agency regulation and permitting for right-of-way. The operational use
of all of this infrastructure is almost entirely the province of the private sectors under safety
regulations proscribed by federal, state and local agencies, and anti-monopolistic route and rate
regulation on the commercial operators by federal and state agencies. User fees are generally exacted
from the users of public infrastructure to amortize the investment of public funds.
The concept of multimodalism is not new to public transportation planning agencies since the role
of each mode in the transport of people and goods has always been recognized in planning for public
infrastructure development. However, this planning was done in separate agencies (e.g., highway
departments, port authorities, and aviation departments) and often under separate funding authority
that was not well-coordinated until recent decades with the formulation of state departments of
transportation (state-DOTs) and, more recently, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) with
responsibility for coordinated multimodal planning. What is new is that recognition has now been
accorded to the efficiency of coordinated planning to meet the need for transnortatinn .£f~rvirPc
instead of a focus on individual modes.
In addition, the concept of intermodalism is not new since transportation planning, especially for
passenger travel, has long involved consideration of highway and street access to airports, transit,
and rail terminals. Less attention was accorded to freight intermodalism although connections
between surface transport and water transport were important in highway planning.
.
Increasing congestion in motor vehicle transportation, especially in urban areas where land for new
infrastructure is limited and expensive, has led to the realization that more efficient use of existing
infrastructure, and planning to facilitate the use of public transit, is often more cost-effective in
alleviating congestion than expanding the roadway infrastructure. Concerns about environmentally
damaging emissions from motor vehicles have also reintorc~rl tier=. need for infPr~rqt^~ In
planning in urbanized areas.
1L A-__1 ~1 1 ~· ~. ~ ~
~^ ~_ ~^~4 4~1 C~L~1 111~J~l~1
vl~uumoca~1sm considers the full range of transportation alternatives, since there are many different
approaches to solving transportation problems-ranging from those that increase the supply of
transportation (e.g., new roads, new rail lines, exclusive freight lanes, more bus routes, etc.) to those
which reduce demand (e.g., rideshare programs, parking restrictions, pricing mechanisms, etc.).
Multimodalism ensures that all potential solutions to transportation problems are considered within
the context of the planning process, and stresses comprehensive and integrated planning that strives
NCHRP-Mul~nodal Transportation
Planning Data
s
Project 8-32(5)
OCR for page 6
Jack Faucett Associates, Inc Final Report March 1937
_ . _
to better equilibrate travel demand arid supply while concurrently minimizing externalities such as
air pollution, energy consumption, safety, arid congestion.
In response to the move toward multimodalism, the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency
Act-1991 (IS TEA) and the 1990 Clears Air Act Amendments (CAAA) set the stage for new or
revised multimodal transportation planning at both the metropolitan planning organization (MPO)
and state deparunent of transportation (state-DOT) levels. In addition to representing the first
transportation legislation that has specific mandates supporting the objectives of the Clean Air Act,
ISTEA sets forth new requirements for both metropolitan and statewide transportation plarming.
Specifically, ISTEA requires MPOs and state-DOTs to consider the factors shown in Exhibit 1 in
developing transportation plans and programs. It also suggests the development arid implementation
of six transportation management systems which would include the followings 2
· identification of performance measures;
data collection and analysis;
· determination of transportation needs;
.
evaluation and selection of appropriate strategies arid actions to address the needs, as well
as the data required to support the planning process; arid
· evaluation of the effectiveness of the implemented strategies arid actions.
The new planning structure stemming from ISTEA highlights the change in planning focus from
analysis that evaluates capacity expansion projects, traditionally viewed as necessary to equilibrate
travel demand and supply, to multimodalism which improves the use of the current infrastructure
to meet grown in travel demand stemming from economic and demographic factors, ensures
preservation of the current system, and concurrently minimizes the detrimental externalities
associated with transportation.
iThe following management systems are elective in ISTEA since mandated implementation was later
suspended: Pavement Management System (PMS), Bridge Management System (BMS), Safety Management
System (SMS), Congestion Management System (CMS), Public Transportation and Equipment Management
System (PTMS), and Intermodal Management System (IMS). In addition to these six management systems, states
and MPOs may develop, establish, implement, and operate a traffic-monitoring system (TMS) on a continuous
basis. The purpose of TMS is to provide planners with traffic data Mat support the six management systems.
2Dane Ismart, State Management Systems: Overview of ISTEA Requirements and Current ·mplementaiion,
TR News 173, July-August 1994.
NCHRP - Multimodal Transportation 6 Project8-32~5)
Planning Data
OCR for page 7
Preservation of existing transportation facilities
Results of the management systems
Planning consistency with Federal, state, and local energy conservation programs.
goals, & objectives
Federal, state, or local energy use goals, objectives, programs, or
requ~ranents
Relieve and prevent congestion from occurring where it does not yet occur
Strategies to incorporate bicycle transportation facilities and pedestrian
walkways
Effect on and consistency with land use and deYelopmentplans
International border crossings and access to ports, airports, intermodal
facilities, ete.
Programming of expenditure on transportation enhancement activities
Transportation needs of areas outside of metropolitan planning areas
Effects of transportation projects within the area
International border crossings and access to ports, airports, international facilities,
etc.
Conaeetivity of roads outside/inside region
Any metropolitan area plan
Connectivity between metropolitan planning areas within the state and
within other states
Recreational travel and tourism
Transportation needs identified through the use of the management systems
Preservation of Rights-of-way
Social, eeonomie, energy, and environmentaleffeets of transportation decisions
Any state plan developed pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act
TSM and inves~nent strategies to make most efficient use of existing
transportation facilities
Social, eeonomie, energy, and environruental effects of transportation
decisions
Life-eyele cost in the design and engineering of bridges, tunnels, or pavement
Methods to enhance the efficient freight transport
_
Methods to _ _ __~ ~ _ _ ~_
_
Capital investments that would result in increased transit system security
Methods to reduce and prevent congestion where it does not yet occur
Methods to expand and eahanee transit services
Effect of transportation decisions on land use and land development
Strategies for identifying end implementing transportation enhancements
Use of innovative financing mechanisms
Preservation of right-of-way
~ ong-range needs of the state transportation system for movemeatof
persons and goods
Methods to eahanee the eff'eient moYernentof eommereial motor
vehicles
Lif~eyele costing in the design and engineering of bridges, tunnels, or
pavements
Coordinationof metropolitan transportation plans and programs
In~restrnent strategies to improve adjoining state and local roads
Concerns of Indian tribal governments
OCR for page 8
Jack Faucett Associates, Inc. Final Report March 1997
The new focus imbedded in ISTEA is in part a response to the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments
(CAAA). The 1990 CAAA fostered a new relationship between transportation and air quality
planning that changes the type of data necessary to support each planning process. Many
metropolitan areas across the country are now required to design transportation improvement
projects that will not compromise a region's ability to meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) in the future. Known as "conformity", this ruling is the determination by MPOs and the
U.S. DOT that transportation plans and programs in nonattainment areas meet the purpose of the
area's air quality plan as reflected in the State Implementation Plans (SIP). The underlying purpose
of the SIP is to reduce pollutant emissions to levels that comply with the NAAQS. According to the
1 990 CAAA' transportation plans and programs cannot:
· create new NAAQS violations in a region,
.
increase the frequency or severity of existing NAAQS violations in a region, nor
· delay the attainment of the NAAQS by the region.
In addition, the 1 990 CAAA set the stage for the development and implementation of transportation
control measures designed to mitigate motor vehicle emissions by decreasing travel demand or the
grow~inVMT. Such transportation demand strategies require the collection or development of new
date to facilitate the measurement of a strategy's effectiveness in reducing VMT, the number oftrips,
and emissions. Similarly, conformity creates new data needs for ~v~lilpitin~ ~ n~rtirl~lqr ~rr`;~tc~
impact on air quality.
~ ~ r~ ~1 ~ ~1 JO VJ ~ L ~
Together, ISTEA and the 1990 CAAA expand the spectrum of the type and quantity of data
necessary to support the transportation planning process. New and emerging planning requirements
of ISTEA and the 1 990 CAAA accord new responsibilities to planning organizations-especially
the emphasis on multimodal planning coordination, congestion and demand management, and
environmental concerns. For instance, the development, deployment, and evaluation of the six
management systems suggested by ISTEA (but no longer mandated) require new and expanded data
for passenger and freight multimodal planning activities undertaken by state-DOTs and MPOs.
However, no comprehensive guidance exists for planning organizations to assess data needs, assess
alternative collection methods and sources, and integrate databases for improving the efficiency of
data access' updating' and use.
A major objective ofthis study is to develop a convenient and comnrehen.sive qa~,ro.e rif inEnrm~timn
^~.+ ~ ~ ~.,~ ~ __11 __._ _ _ ^_ _1_ ' ~
~uvuc unto I I;;, miu ~;ollec;~lun lecnmques ror performing strategic assessments of data
needs. Specific objectives include providing transportation planning organizations with a manual
to guide their assessment of data needs, select among alternatives to meet these needs, and improvise
to fill gaps in available data or gaps in data that are expensive to collect. Other objectives of this
study include specifying methods for data integration that nrnmot~ ~ffiri`~n~`r in Acts q^~=c~c' ^~1
distribution among the various users.
-"~ ~r ~~ ~-^~~~~~~} lA1 ~ CL~J~_~O Hillel
NCHRP-Multimodal Transportation 8 Project 8-3265)
Planning Data
OCR for page 9
Jack Faucett Associates, Inc. Final Report
The overall study is divided into the following seven tasks.
`~arch 1997
· Task 1: Perform a Strategic Assessment of Multimodal Transportation Planning Data
Needs of MPOs and State-DOTs.
· Task 2: Evaluate Current MPO and State-DOT Data Organization Frameworks and
Propose New Frameworks that Reflect Data Needs Stemming from ISTEA
and the 1990 CAAA.
· Task 3: Develop an Interim Report that Documents the Results of Task 1 and Task
2.
· Task 4: Develop a Compendium of Primary and Secondary Data Collection Practices
Employed by MPOs and State-DOTs.
· Task 5: Perform an Economic Analysis of Transportation Data Programs.
· Task 6: Examine Data Integration Strategies to Relate Transportation Demand,
Supply, Performance, and Impact Data in the Context of Multimodal
Planning Models.
· Task 7: Prepare a Final Report with a Stand-Alone Appendix of Guidelines to MPOs
and State-DOTs.
A major purpose of this research is to sort out the data issues and to identify how planning agencies
need to cooperate in sharing data of common usefulness among the planning agencies. Central ideas
emerging from Tasks 1 and 2 are important to this major purpose as set forth below.
The planning organization should adopt a classification system for exchange of data but have no
obligation to apply an unique classification system to the vast amount of data that is only internal
to its operations. The diversity of its responsibility for internal operations leaves it an option as how
to organize data for its internal operation.
There is a definite limit to which data need to be interchanged between MPOs and state DOTs. The
most amount of data in the custody of MPOs is primarily administrative data. Much of the
administrative detail must be left to competitive leadership among the local bureaucracies.
Competitive demonstration ofthe efficient functioning of the transportation system within the local
area challenges the competence ofthe officials in charge. The internal administration includes most
of the maintenance and operation of the system. Most of the expansion of the system involves
detailed internal planning of the local system in context with approval of state DOTs that are
concerned with route connectivity beyond the local scope of area.
NCHRP-MultimodalTransportation 9 Project8-32(5)
Planning Data
OCR for page 10
Jack FauceaAssoc~ates, inc. Final Report _ Marc,§ 1997
. _
Strategic planning in each planning organization must be concealed with Me internal operations arid
the external interface relationships with which the local agencies must cope. Strategic assessment
of data needs is the focus of Task 1. The emphasis is on the consolidation of data needs based on
the identification of the mission of the specific planning agency arid stresses the need to reduce
overlap in data detail. However, the detail with which the internal data is organized he the nI~nnin~
err;> ;' Of `~ `~ 1~:~:_ _ ~_~_! for ~
up, ta teJ~ C(J line ucc~szon or each agency. we have simply recommended art organization that
can save resources. Any decisions on implementation and We time schedule remains flexible to the
operation affecting data internal to planning agencies.
The external concerns of the planning agencies are the elements of strategic planning that require
interchange of data information. Ibis requires cooperation among Me planning agencies in defining
and standardizing the data exchanged. This activity facilitates the exchange and enhances Me
efficiency of Me cooperative planning processes. Therefore, it is essential that a standardized data
system needs to be established to include any data of inter-agency concern. The system outlined in
Task 2 classifies data into four components: supply, demand, performance arid environmental
impact. Data elements and data items under each component are illustrated. The planning agencies
must understand that this system or some other standardized system must be agreed upon and only
the appropriate data cells must be implemented. General information theory as it applies to internal
data (discussed in Task 2) is elective on the part of planning agencies. However, a good reference
on strategic planning as it applies to external interfaces among planning agencies is John Al
Bryson's Strategic Planningfor Public and Nonprof t Organizations, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San
Francisco, CA, 1995. This dichotomy of strategic planning responsibility among the planning
organizations is of utmost importance.
NCHRP-Multimodal Transportation 10 Project 8-32(5)
Planning Data
Representative terms from entire chapter:
transportation planning
