Developing Guidelines for Incorporating Managing Demand into WSDOT Planning and Programming

(Center Identification Number: 77964-00)

Principal Investigator:

Philip L. Winters, Director, TDM Program
National Center for Transit Research (NCTR) at the
Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR)
University of South Florida
4202 E. Fowler Avenue, CUT 100
Tampa, Florida  33620-5375
winters@cutr.usf.edu
(813) 974-9811

Problem Statement

WSDOT’s Moving Washington policy directs agency employees to integrate demand management, operations, and strategic capacity strategies to achieve a reliable, responsible, and sustainable transportation system that supports Washington State’s healthy economy, environment, and communities. To meet the intent of Moving Washington, WSDOT’s planning and programming efforts must evolve to evaluate the costs, benefits, and effectiveness of a more diverse set of transportation solutions, including those that require implementation by partnering jurisdictions. Only through this broader lens will WSDOT be able to identify and implement the least cost, practical solutions that will help WSDOT meet transportation challenges within budgeted resources. Current WSDOT business practices more effectively integrate strategic capacity and operations strategies, while demand management is a newer focus and more challenging to integrate.

Integrating demand management strategies is challenging because these strategies include a great variety of programs, services, policies, and regulations that cannot be applied equally and effectively in all conditions. The strategies take various lengths of time for development and implementation, and they fall under the jurisdiction of different agencies, governments, and authorities.

Background

While a considerable body of research exists on the costs, benefits, and effectiveness of various capital, demand management, and operational strategies, a much smaller universe of research goes beyond conceptual explorations or frames a comprehensive approach to comparing their tradeoffs within the context of state department of transportation business practices.

“Transportation Demand Management: A Guide for Including TDM Strategies in Major Investment Studies and in Planning for Other Transportation Projects” (WSDOT 1996) identifies appropriate transportation demand management (TDM) strategies for different contexts (e.g. urban or suburban, commute or non-commute) and implementation time frames (short, medium, long). It also recommends a process for developing a TDM alternative for planning or programming and provides screening criteria for selecting appropriate TDM alternatives. It also identifies a range of potential effectiveness for TDM strategies. While this research is very relevant to this research request, it is now 16 years old, does not quantify costs or benefits, and only measures effectiveness in terms of reductions in vehicle miles traveled. It also is limited to demand management strategies, and so does not offer a single comparative framework that would allow side-by-side comparison with capacity and operational strategies.

“Incorporating Assumptions for TDM Impacts in a Regional Travel Demand Model” (CUTR 2010) developed a sketch planning modeling approach to incorporate TDM into WSDOT’s travel demand model. This tool does provide a low cost method to help WSDOT plan TDM strategies as part of its overall transportation planning process. However, it does not help decision-makers identify and choose the most cost-effective mix of program elements for improving traffic and air quality conditions in a corridor. This tool built upon TRIMMS©2.0, described in “Quantifying the Net Social Benefits of Vehicle Trip Reductions: Guidance for Customizing the TRIMMS© Model. Final Draft Report” (CUTR 2009).

Another tool for evaluating TDM strategies is the Transportation Demand Management Tool developed by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District based on the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association’s “Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures: A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions from Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures” (CAPCOA 2010). The Transportation Demand Management Tool is an Excel-based spreadsheet meant to bring reliable quantification of mitigation into a project-level analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act. This, in turn, is intended to help a land use development project identify strategies to reduce their vehicle miles traveled and emissions. This tool is an interesting application of existing research to a project-level analysis that is very relevant to some of WSDOT’s business practices (e.g. development mitigation and comprehensive plan review), however because its emphasis is on evaluating environmental impacts, it does not address economic or community impacts adequately. Also, its project-level focus means the Transportation Demand Management Tool requires additional evaluation for larger planning-level analysis, as noted in “Validating VMT Reductions for Transportation Demand Management Measures” (Fehr and Peers 2011).

“Integrating Transportation Demand Management Into the Planning and Development Process: A Reference for Cities” (SANDAG 2012) may be helpful for identifying the TDM strategies that are applicable to WSDOT business practice of reviewing and commenting on local comprehensive plans, however it is primarily a conceptual guidebook rather than a detailed approach to evaluating which strategies are the best.

“Integrating Active Traffic and Travel Demand Management: A Holistic Approach to Congestion Management” (FHWA 2011) provides an overview of active traffic management and travel demand management and documents the need for and benefits of integrating the concepts into efforts to address congestion. However, while it outlines a general policy approach, it provides no specific details on how to integrate the concepts.

For a more detailed approach to evaluating operations strategies, the “Operations Benefit/Cost Analysis Desk Reference: Providing Guidance to Practitioners in the Analysis of Benefits and Costs of Management and Operations Projects” (FHWA 2012) is an excellent resource. This is a desk reference with an associated spreadsheet tool intended to provide practitioners with guidance on how to estimate the benefits and costs of operations strategies (including TDM strategies) effectively and reliably. However, while the desk reference cautions the reader about the challenges of fitting a management and operations benefit/cost analysis into a traditional capacity analysis process, it does provide specifics on how to do so. The “Operations Guide to Improving Highway Capacity” (TRB 2012) is another resource that identifies principles for estimating the effect of a traffic operational improvement on highway capacity, but it does not recommend a specific methodology for applying these principles.

“Multimodal Corridor System Management — Incorporating Analysis of Transit, Demand Management Programs, and Operational Strategies” (William Loudon 2011) illustrates the application of this approach in Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties in California.

“Integrated Corridor Management for Urban Transport” (Samuel Zimmerman, Said Dahdah, and Wei Wang 2012) describes the integrated corridor management approach and details methods for corridor selection and problem diagnosis, identification and evaluation of improvement options, and implementation. Caltrans has also done some work on integrated multimodal corridor management, including the development of corridor system management plans.

Other evaluation frameworks that may be relevant to review include: FHWA’s INVEST sustainability evaluation system, FHWA’s Energy and Emissions Reduction Policy Analysis Tool, PRISM, STARS, and the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure’s Envision framework. The Strategic Highway Research Program’s capacity and reliability track projects may also have relevant research to review.

Objectives

The objective of this research is to develop guidelines for WSDOT business areas to identify and select potential demand management strategies appropriate to the context of the land use and transportation environment to meet their objectives.

Benefits

The anticipated benefits from this research include increasing capacity in the WSDOT transportation system by expanding participation in alternative modes (carpools, vanpools, transit, cycling, walking and telecommuting).  With a large gap in unfunded needs and growing environmental concerns such as climate change, WSDOT will take a forward step in managing demand for vehicle trips to improve overall performance of the highway system, mitigate congestion during construction, and reduce greenhouse gases.

Products

The following deliverables will be submitted to WSDOT:

  • Technical memorandum summarizing literature review and synthesis.
  • Draft of general guidelines for integrating demand management into WSDOT business areas.
  • Final report summarizing Tasks 1 through 4 with recommendations to implement the guidelines, address data deficiencies and research needs, and amend existing policies or practices.
  • Research Notes page.
  • Semi-annual progress reports.

Implementation

This research will establish support for the following business areas to evaluate the costs, benefits, and effectiveness of demand management strategies for meeting their needs

  • Corridor planning studies, statewide transportation plans, modal plans, and quick response planning initiatives.
  • Program development (including agency recommended investment packages and the development and prioritization of project lists).
  • State Environmental Policy Act mitigation requests related to local development impacts.
  • Growth Management Act comments related to local policy and regulatory actions to mitigate the traffic impacts of planned development.
  • WSDOT construction project traffic mitigation.
  • Award of grant funds and distribution of discretionary federal and state funds to external partners.

This support will be in the form of guidelines that these business units can adopt in their own programs. The final report will present the guidelines. An open workshop conducted at WSDOT will facilitate these guidelines to WSDOT staff.  Attendance at the workshop is at the discretion of the WSDOT Program Manager.

Work Plan

The research team will work closely with WSDOT staff as well as collaborate with the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) in all of the following tasks:

Task 1 – Documentation of each WSDOT business area’s needs for integrating demand management into their business practices

CUTR will:

  1. Review stakeholder interviews completed recently with the State Smart Transportation Initiative (SSTI) and other studies completed by WSDOT including:
  • Annotated Bibliography – Integrating TDM in WSDOT Corridor Planning Activities
  • 2007 Transportation Planning Studies Guidelines and Criteria
  • A Guide for Including TDM Strategies in Major Investment Studies and in Planning for other Transportation Projects
  1. Review INVEST work from FHWA pilot study underway.
  2. Review current practices for integrating demand management, including post hoc evaluations of previous demand management strategies. Identification of institutional barriers to implementation will be conducted via an open-ended survey of WSDOT-identified key stakeholders that will be reviewed by the TAC.
  3. Collect and review documentation of key WSDOT business processes as identified in consultation with WSDOT staff.
  4. Identify successful examples of integration from WSDOT and other state DOTs as well as examples where lessons can be learned for improving integration moving forward.
Task 2 – Synthesis of current materials and research, including internal WSDOT guidance

Before developing guidelines for incorporating managing demand into WSDOT planning and programming business areas, CUTR will conduct a literature review to update and fill in any gaps as needed in the literature review documented in the FHWA Desk Reference on Integrating Demand Management into the Transportation Planning Process.  We also will use our TRANSP-TDM listserv to reach over 2,200 TDM professionals (10% international) on practices used elsewhere that may not have been well-documented.    Under this task, CUTR will:

  1. Identify and describe data sources, guidance and other information for evaluating the societal (including personal and community health), environmental, and economic costs and benefits of demand management strategies.
  2. With input from the Technical Advisory Committee, identify the conditions, performance measures, and range of effectiveness for demand management strategies in different contexts (including urban, suburban, and rural areas and other characteristics such as density, availability of alternative modes) for meeting the objectives of each WSDOT business area.
  3. Special attention will be focused upon characterizing measures of effectiveness by market and business area (e.g., business areas include corridor planning, project development services, operations, etc.).  The differences in measures of effectiveness among different business units will be tabulated for clarity.
  4. As part of our first site visit, conduct targeted in-person interviews and/or small group meetings to engage staff from each of WSDOT’s relevant business areas to understand their objectives, identify key measures of effectiveness that may be impacted by demand management strategies, and identify specific needs or institutional barriers that would help them incorporate demand management into their business practices. 
Task 3 – Development of Guidelines for Integrating Demand Management Strategies Into Each WSDOT Business Area

Based on the documentation of each WSDOT business area’s needs identified in Task 1 and synthesized in Task 2:

  1. Identify data and information necessary to support estimating the impacts of demand management strategies on the identified measures of effectiveness (performance measures will be identified along with the TAC).
  2. As part of a half-day workshop with the TAC, apply creative thinking exercises to identify potential approaches for overcoming institutional and cultural barriers.
  3. Identify opportunities to coordinate with external partners that can support development of demand management solutions and barriers that will need to be overcome.
  4. Create a set of general guidelines for integrating demand management into WSDOT business areas.  This will also include consideration of the best format(s) for providing the guidelines.
  5. Distribute the draft guidelines to the TAC and hold a web meeting with the TAC to review the guidelines approximately one week later. 
Task 4 – Beta Test the Guidelines with Two or More Business Units

With direction from WSDOT and the TAC as to which business unit(s) should be selected for the pilot, CUTR will test the guidelines. For example, CUTR will work with the business unit project staff to:

  1. Identify projects/plans. WSDOT and the TAC will identify additional resources (outside this project) that are available to the business units for implementing during beta testing.
  2. Identify project objectives.
  3. Meet with each of the business units’ project staff to help identify and select potential demand management strategies using the guidelines. These meetings will occur as part of the second site visit.
  4. Determine the potential effectiveness of the demand management strategies in meeting the project objectives, and evaluate how such strategies may change the timing and scope of other potential solutions.
  5. Coordinate with internal and external partners to plan for the implementation of the selected demand management strategies.
  6. Evaluate the effectiveness of the guidelines for addressing the needs of the selected WSDOT business area and summarize lessons learned.
Task 5 – Draft Final and Final Report

Given the wide range of business needs and the likelihood of gaps in data, CUTR will prepare a draft final report and submit to WSDOT for review and comment.  The report will include:

  1. Summarize policy and administrative issues within WSDOT that need to be addressed to begin or advance the use of TDM strategies in the planning processes of the different business units.
  2. Recommend actions required to implement the guidelines in current WSDOT processes and practices.

Propose a research program to address data deficiencies identified in Task 3.

Staffing Plan

CUTR brings a team of uniquely qualified researchers with practical real-world experience to this project.

Philip L. Winters, Director, Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program at the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) at the University of South Florida.  He will serve as principal investigator for this project.  He has over 32 years in TDM research, training and technical assistance.  He manages the National TDM and Telework Clearinghouse, the Florida Commuter Choice Certificate Program and co-manages Best Workplaces for Commuters.  He created the popular TRANSP-TDM listserv in 1998 that now has nearly 2,200 active subscribers and that allows quick and easy reach to identify case studies, work in progress, etc. He has demonstrated leadership in developing tools to help the transportation demand management industry.  He is an emeritus member of the Committee on TDM of the Transportation Research Board. He received the prestigious Association for Commuter Transportation’s Bob Owens TDM Champion Award in 2007. He received a B.S. in civil engineering from Virginia Tech.

Sisinnio Concas, PhD, is an associate professor and a senior economist with extensive experience in urban and regional economic impact analysis and transportation policy analysis.  His applied work focuses on advanced transportation demand management (TDM) predictive evaluation methods.  He is the developer of TRIMMS® (Trip Reduction Impacts of Mobility Management Strategies).  He also conducts basic research on the linkages between transportation infrastructure investment, economic development, and residential location patterns.  His research interests include application of nonparametric estimation and inference techniques to transportation research, and the theoretical underpinnings of the linkages between household travel activity patterns and land use in urban areas. He holds a PhD in Economics from the University of South Florida, specializing in Urban Economics and a doctoral degree in Political Science, with a field specialization in Political Economy from the University of Sassari, Italy and a Master of Arts in Economics from the University of South Florida.

Sara J. Hendricks, AICP, is a Senior Research Associate at the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR), University of South Florida.  She offers over 20 years professional experience in transportation and land use planning, with applied research specializing in synergies between transportation demand management strategies and public transportation, regulatory and institutional frameworks.  She provides technical assistance to state and local governments, regional commuter assistance programs and transportation management associations nationwide through CUTR’s Clearinghouse programs. Ms. Hendricks holds a Master of Regional Planning from University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Chanyoung Lee, PhD is a Senior Research Associate with the Intelligent Transportation Systems and Traffic Safety team at CUTR.  His primary area of specialization is in the field of transportation planning and engineering, which includes: travel behavior studies, travel demand modeling, experiment design, survey analysis and Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), and the development of a model for measuring the impact of employer-based TDM strategies on transportation system performance. He currently leads a project entitled, “Improving Cost-effectiveness of Financial Incentives in Managing TDM Programs” which aims to find a way to influence the travel decision making process in an effective and efficient manner and the project was introduced in a digital edition of National Geographic last summer. He received his PhD in Civil Engineering (Transportation) from the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 2004. He has the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) certification and the Professional Transportation Planner (PTP) certification by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE).

Nevine Labib Georggi is a senior research associate in the TDM Program at CUTR.  She offers over 20 years professional experience in travel behavior, travel-related statistical analysis, transportation survey design and analysis, project development and environmental studies, and ITS.  Ms. Georggi investigated the impacts of employer-based policies and programs on the transportation system, researched the impacts of ITS applications in collecting and disseminating travel data and providing travelers with pertinent feedback to reduce drive-alone use.   Ms. Georggi earned a Master of Science, Civil and Environmental Engineering, from the University of South Florida, May 2000.

Facilities Available

This research effort will be conducted through the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) at the University of South Florida.    CUTR resources available for this project include a professional staff to aid in the writing, editing, and graphics involved in report production; microcomputer facilities; and conference and drafting facilities.

CUTR houses the National Center for Transit Research, designated by the U.S. Congress in 1991 and reaffirmed in 1998 and in 2012 as a Tier 1 university transportation research center, and the National Bus Rapid Transit Institute (NBRTI), sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration. Through NCTR and NBRTI, CUTR conducts research projects in rapidly growing urban areas to develop innovative, pragmatic approaches that will enable public transportation to better meet the evolving needs of the country.

Supporting Data

The Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR), established in 1988, has become recognized nationally and serves as an important resource for policymakers, transportation professionals, the education system, and the public. With emphasis on developing innovative, practical solutions to transportation problems, CUTR provides high quality, objective transportation expertise in the form of technical support, policy analysis, and research support that translates directly into benefits for its project sponsors.

A significant factor in CUTR’s success and a unique aspect of the Center is the responsiveness resulting from its faculty of full-time employees dedicated to conducting research. The multidisciplinary research staff includes experts in economics, planning, engineering, public policy, and geography who develop comprehensive solutions for all modes of transportation while combining academic and “real world” experience.

CUTR conducts nearly $10 million in research annually for a variety of public and private sector sponsors in Florida and the United States, including the Florida Legislature, the Florida Transportation Commission, and state and local governments, agencies, and organizations. Areas of research include public transportation, transportation planning, intelligent transportation systems (ITS), transportation demand management (TDM), transportation economics and finance, geographic information systems (GIS), access management, alternative fuels, and transportation safety.

Relevant Project Experience of the CUTR Research Team

The following projects demonstrate our experience and understanding of the data and conditions around helping assess the contribution of TDM.  Many of these projects included extensive use of data from Washington’s Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) program.  We’ve also identified the researchers in this proposal who were either principal or co-principal investigators on these projects.

1.         Incorporating Assumptions for TDM Impacts in a Regional Travel Demand Model. This project, conducted for WSDOT by CUTR, developed a Transportation Demand Management Assessment Procedure (TDMAP), as a sketch planning modeling approach to incorporate TDM into WSDOT’s travel demand model. TDMAP does so by (1) extracting mode split tables from the model; (2) processing them to be compatible with TRIMMS© 2.0, an existing tool that estimates changes in travel behavior as a result of implementing different TDM strategies; (3) running the tables through TRIMMS© 2.0; and then (4) processing them back into the four-step model for distribution over the transportation network. The study did develop a low cost method to help WSDOT plan TDM strategies as part of its overall transportation planning process. Ideally, the next generation would also help WSDOT identify and choose the most cost-effective mix of program elements for improving traffic and air quality conditions in a corridor, and for the desired level of change in vehicle traffic, and see how the cost and mix varies with the desired level of change.  (Lee, Georggi and Winters)

2.         Developing a Technique that Predicts the Impacts of TDM on a Transportation System.   Managing demand requires an ability to predict the magnitude and geographic distribution of potential changes in travel behavior resulting from steps taken at specific locations or on a specific corridor. The research hypothesis assumed increases in employers’ expenditures for subsidies and incentives, in support of employee commute options programs, which will decrease the drive-alone rate. The research centered on the relationship between TDM effectiveness at the worksite level and employer-based TDM program costs. Data collection efforts focused on the examination of thousands of employer trip reduction plans submitted over many years and cost data of those employers with the goal of integrating the information with the new TDM Assessment Procedure (TDMAP). TDMAP incorporates TDM into the transportation planning process by modifying mode split tables to reflect the impact of implementing a particular TDM strategy or mix of strategies in specific corridors over time. TDMAP consists of a set of subroutines that integrate with CUTR-developed TRIMMS© 2.0. (Lee, Georggi and Winters)

3.         Estimating Costs and Benefits of Emissions Reduction Strategies for Transit by Extending the TRIMMS Model. This study details the development of a series of improvements to the Trip Reduction Impacts of Mobility Management Strategies (TRIMMS™) model. The third generation model, TRIMMS 3.0, now estimates a wider range of emission pollutants and incorporates a new module that evaluates the impact of land use strategies on transit patronage. TRIMMS uses the emission inventory of the Environmental Protection Agency Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES2010a).     (Concas and Winters)

4.         Improving Cost-effectiveness of Financial Incentives in Managing TDM Programs (in progress). The objective of this study is to understand how the elements (form, amount, and structure) of financial incentives determine their effectiveness in changing commuting behavior and to investigate the process of developing a habitual mode choice behavior. This research is drawing on behavioral economics, empirical data, and a controlled field experiment with commuters to understand these relationships. The goal is to improve the cost-effectiveness of financial incentives as a tool for transportation agencies to use in transportation demand and reducing emissions. (Lee and Winters)

5.         Integrating Transit and Urban Form. This study develops an integrated behavioral model of transit patronage and urban form. Although herein focused on transit, the framework can be easily generalized to study other forms of travel. Advanced economic models are used to test specific behavioral hypotheses developed in the theoretical models. Findings are then summarized in a succinct fashion showing relevance and magnitude of the impact of land use on transit demand. The empirical models also quantify these relationships in the form of point elasticity estimates that can be used as indicators of the relevance of transit supply measures.     (Concas)

6.         Price Elasticity of Rideshare: Commuter Fringe Benefits & Parking Cash-Out.  The goal of this research project was to determine the price elasticity of rideshare with specific objectives of helping to assess what the effect on ridership would be if the effective price paid by the traveler was substantially reduced (i.e., increase in employer co-pay) or increased (i.e., decrease in employer co-pay). While there are multiple modes for providing rideshare, this research was limited to the study of vanpools. The quantitative analysis used the Puget Sound data set and applied the regression and Logit models to analyze the impact of fares and other factors on mode choice.   (Concas and Winters)

7.         Impact of Employer-Based Programs on Transit System Ridership and Transportation System Performance. This study established a direct quantitative relationship between employer-based TDM strategies and the performance of a transportation system. The study objectives were to develop a methodology for measuring the impacts of employer-based TDM programs on the performance of a traffic network using measures universal to traffic operations staff, transportation planners, and decision-makers. The study used a micro-simulation traffic model to simulate the effects of Washington State Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) programs implemented by 189 employers along an 8.6-mile segment of I-5 in the Seattle downtown area. The current performance of the selected network with the actual volumes provided by the Washington State Department of Transportation (Scenario with TDM) was compared to that of a scenario with vehicle trips actually reduced by CTR programs at the worksites added back onto the network (Scenario without TDM). Performance measures analyzed included the spatial and temporal extent of congestion, recurring delay, speed, and travel time. Further sensitivity analysis proved that even a small reduction in vehicle trips at worksites had a significant impact on the performance of the transportation network decreasing delay in vehicle-minutes by as much as 21.9 and 32.3 percent during the AM and PM peak periods, respectively.   (Georggi and Winters)

8.         A Summary for the Design, Policies and Operational Characteristics for Shared Bicycle/Bus Lanes. In urban areas with constrained right-of-ways, municipalities are experimenting with preferential bus lanes that can also be shared by bicyclists.  This research documents alternative designs and operational features across the United States, Canada and abroad.  Researchers prepared a state of the practice for the design of such facilities that seeks to optimize safety and preserves preferential lane time advantages for bus transit service, while balancing impacts to street capacity and level of service. (Hendricks)

9.         Incorporating Transportation Demand Management into the Land Development Process. This report provides detailed information to transportation professionals regarding how to incorporate TDM strategies into the land development process. The report documents efforts to secure TDM strategies as part of development approvals, summarizes the long range planning groundwork that frames the land development process, provides several case study examples from Florida and nationwide and also identifies several institutional barriers to the use of TDM as part of the land development process. A major finding is that transportation professionals interested in using TDM in land development must get involved long before development proposals are submitted. This requires participation in review and updates of the MPO long range transportation plan and transportation improvement program as well as local government comprehensive plans. Further, it involves appraising how well the local government land development regulations implement the intent of the comprehensive plan and reviewing traffic analysis methodology and underlying assumptions.  (Hendricks)

10.       Developing a Framework for a Toolkit for Carbon Footprint that Integrates Transit (C-FIT). This research developed parameters for spreadsheet products that would enable the calculation of greenhouse gas emissions from bus transit service improvements compared against alternative highway widening projects.     (Hendricks)

11.       Assessing the Economic and Business Impacts of the Proposed SR 924/Gratigny Parkway Extension (Miami Dade Expressway). This study analyzes the business impacts of the proposed extension of the East Gratigny Parkway, which would provide congestion relief by separating regional and local arterial traffic. Long-distance regional trips would be served on an elevated expressway in the median of NW 119th Street, starting at I-95 and ending at NW 32nd Avenue leading to the Gratigny Parkway. Researchers identified the section of NW 119th Street where impacts would most likely occur. The study assessed the net (the sum of the potential positive and negative) impact that the proposed preferred alternative would have on businesses located within the project study area.   (Concas)

12.       The Economic Impact and Benefits of the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority Five-Year Work Plan.  To manage and operate its program of system improvements, the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority annually updates its Five-Year Work Plan. The Work Plan identifies those projects to be funded during the next five years and is an integral part of the 2030 Expressway Master Plan. The Expressway Authority commissioned this study to estimate the economic impacts and benefits of implementing the 2010-2014 Five-Year Work Plan strategic investments. The study reported the estimates of the economic impact of project expenditures and the monetary value of travel improvement benefits associated with the construction and operation of current system improvements, system expansion, investments in intelligent transportation systems, and other improvements. The Work Plan expenditures were evaluated and their impact estimated using the IMPLAN Input-Output model to generate I-O tables and multipliers. The study determined the Five-Year Work Plan was substantial in its contribution to economic growth for the four-county Orlando-Kissimmee metropolitan statistical area.   (Concas)

Leave a Reply

Please complete the simple math problem prior to submitting your comment. This reduces spam. Thanks! * Time limit is exhausted. Please reload CAPTCHA.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.