Evaluating Alternative Operations Strategies to Improve Travel Time Reliability (2013)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2013 www.TRB.org The Second S T R A T E G I C H I G H W A Y R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M REPORT S2-L11-RR-1 Evaluating Alternative Operations Strategies to Improve Travel Time Reliability Kittelson & AssociAtes, inc.

Subscriber Categories Finance Highways Operations and Traffic Management Planning and Forecasting

The Second Strategic Highway Research Program America’s highway system is critical to meeting the mobility and economic needs of local communities, regions, and the nation. Developments in research and technology—such as advanced materials, communications technology, new data collection tech- nologies, and human factors science—offer a new opportunity to improve the safety and reliability of this important national resource. Breakthrough resolution of significant transportation problems, however, requires concentrated resources over a short time frame. Reflecting this need, the second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2) has an intense, large-scale focus, integrates multiple fields of research and technology, and is fundamentally different from the broad, mission-oriented, discipline-based research programs that have been the mainstay of the highway research industry for half a century. The need for SHRP 2 was identified in TRB Special Report 260: Strategic Highway Research: Saving Lives, Reducing Congestion, Improving Quality of Life, published in 2001 and based on a study sponsored by Congress through the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21). SHRP 2, modeled after the first Strategic Highway Research Program, is a focused, time- constrained, management-driven program designed to com- plement existing highway research programs. SHRP 2 focuses on applied research in four areas: Safety, to prevent or reduce the severity of highway crashes by understanding driver behavior; Renewal, to address the aging infrastructure through rapid design and construction methods that cause minimal disruptions and produce lasting facilities; Reliability, to reduce congestion through incident reduction, management, response, and mitigation; and Capacity, to integrate mobility, economic, environmental, and community needs in the planning and designing of new trans- portation capacity. SHRP 2 was authorized in August 2005 as part of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). The program is managed by the Transportation Research Board (TRB) on behalf of the National Research Council (NRC). SHRP 2 is conducted under a memo- randum of understanding among the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the National Academy of Sciences, parent organization of TRB and NRC. The program provides for competitive, merit-based selection of research contractors; independent research project oversight; and dissemination of research results. SHRP 2 Reports Available by subscription and through the TRB online bookstore: www.TRB.org/bookstore Contact the TRB Business Office: 202-334-3213 More information about SHRP 2: www.TRB.org/SHRP2 SHRP 2 Report S2-L11-RR-1 ISBN: 978-0-309-12961-9 Library of Congress Control Number: 2013946101 © 2013 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Copyright Information Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copy- right to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. The second Strategic Highway Research Program grants permission to repro- duce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, or FHWA endorsement of a particular prod- uct, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing material in this document for educational and not-for-profit purposes will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from SHRP 2. Note: SHRP 2 report numbers convey the program, focus area, project number, and publication format. Report numbers ending in “w” are published as web documents only. Notice The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the second Strategic Highway Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The members of the technical committee selected to monitor this project and review this report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. The report was reviewed by the technical committee and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, and the sponsors of the second Strategic Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achieve- ments of engineers. Dr. C. D. (Dan) Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, on its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. (Dan) Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisci- plinary, and multimodal. The Board’s varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transporta- tion, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration in cooperation with the American Asso- ciation of State Highway and Transportation Officials. It was conducted in the second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2), which is administered by the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies. The project was managed by William Hyman, Senior Program Officer for SHRP 2 Reliability. Kittelson & Associates, Inc., was the primary contractor for this research project and was supported by the following subcontractors: the University of Florida, the Washington State Transportation Center (TRAC), ECONorthwest, Dr. Joseph Schofer, Dr. Michael Meyer, and Write Rhetoric. John D. Zegeer, senior principal with Kittelson & Associates, Inc., was the principal investigator for this study. The other authors of this report were Wayne Kittelson, Diego Franca, and Marais Lombard of Kittelson & Associates, Inc.; Dr. Lily Elefteriadou and Dr. Siva Srinivasan of the University of Florida; Mark Hallenbeck, Ed McCormack, and Pete Briglia of TRAC; Randy Pozdena and Sarah Dammen of ECONorthwest; Dr. Joseph Schofer, Northwestern University; and Dr. Michael Meyer, Georgia Institute of Technology. SHRP 2 STAFF Ann M. Brach, Director Stephen J. Andrle, Deputy Director Neil J. Pedersen, Deputy Director, Implementation and Communications James Bryant, Senior Program Officer, Renewal Kenneth Campbell, Chief Program Officer, Safety JoAnn Coleman, Senior Program Assistant, Capacity and Reliability Eduardo Cusicanqui, Financial Officer Walter Diewald, Senior Program Officer, Safety Jerry DiMaggio, Implementation Coordinator Shantia Douglas, Senior Financial Assistant Charles Fay, Senior Program Officer, Safety Carol Ford, Senior Program Assistant, Renewal and Safety Elizabeth Forney, Assistant Editor Jo Allen Gause, Senior Program Officer, Capacity Rosalind Gomes, Accounting/Financial Assistant Abdelmename Hedhli, Visiting Professional James Hedlund, Special Consultant, Safety Coordination Alyssa Hernandez, Reports Coordinator Ralph Hessian, Special Consultant, Capacity and Reliability Andy Horosko, Special Consultant, Safety Field Data Collection William Hyman, Senior Program Officer, Reliability Michael Marazzi, Senior Editorial Assistant Linda Mason, Communications Officer Reena Mathews, Senior Program Officer, Capacity and Reliability Matthew Miller, Program Officer, Capacity and Reliability Michael Miller, Senior Program Assistant, Capacity and Reliability David Plazak, Senior Program Officer, Capacity Dean Trackman, Managing Editor Connie Woldu, Administrative Coordinator Patrick Zelinski, Communications/Media Associate

This research report should be of interest and practical value to transportation planners and analysts, including systems engineers. This research resulted in information useful for strategic and performance-based planning, as well as project- and program-level decision making. State departments of transportation and metropolitan planning organizations may be interested in this research as they take steps to comply with the Moving Ahead for Prog- ress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) with respect to performance reporting of travel time reliability. This report sets out requirements for travel time reliability within a performance-based planning process. The authors present two succinct tables that describe requirements for person and freight trips for reliable transport. A discussion of goals, performance mea- sures, and performance targets follows. Performance measures are presented that pertain to roadway users and agencies. The report examines the cost-effectiveness of different ways to improve travel time reliability. The analysis draws from a wide range of literature, but because few data on outcomes of different strategies to improve travel time reliability are available, assessment of cost-effectiveness is qualitative. Nonetheless, in perusing the tables of information, one can form reasonable conclusions about what large, medium, and small expenditures for different types of operations and capacity improvement projects can pro- duce in terms of a small, modest, or large effect on travel time reliability. The research included an effort to determine the economic value of improvements in travel time reliability by applying options theory from the financial sector. This method is predicated on determining the certainty equivalent of the variability of speed. This innova- tive approach, briefly summarized in the body of the report and described in an appendix, deserves further exploration despite the lack of consensus from experts about its validity. A prominent part of the report presents a forecast of the year 2030 under alternative assumptions that may influence travel time reliability. The researchers set out three alterna- tive outcomes—optimistic, mediocre, and pessimistic—regarding climate change, econom- ics, and demographics. In addition, they examined a range of technological developments that might affect reliability. To paint a picture of the future, they prepared a concept of operations for the year 2030. Among the various ways to improve travel time reliability, pricing is strongly emphasized by the researchers. F O R EWO R D William Hyman, SHRP 2 Senior Program Officer, Reliability

C O N T E N T S 1 Executive Summary 1 An Introduction to Travel Time Reliability 2 Improved Travel Time Reliability: What Is Needed? 3 Next Steps for Migrating Toward More Reliability 4 Steps Toward Balancing Demand and Capacity 5 Steps to Strengthen Interagency and Intermodal Relationships 6 Technical and Technological Steps to Improve Reliability 8 Summary 10 CHAPTER 1 Introduction 10 Travel Time Reliability 10 Travel Time Reliability and Congestion 12 Classification of User Categories 13 Travel Time Reliability Requirements 15 Importance of Travel Time Reliability 15 Travel Time Reliability Performance Measures 18 CHAPTER 2 Effectiveness of Agencies 18 Existing Agency Measures 19 Issues Affecting Effectiveness of Agencies 22 CHAPTER 3 Goals and Performance Targets 22 Existing Travel Performance and Disruption Data 26 Potential Performance Measures for Agency Use 31 Developing Performance Measures and Setting Goals 34 CHAPTER 4 Trends Affecting Travel Time Reliability 34 Demographics, Land Use, and Urbanization 34 Environment and Climate Change 36 Energy Costs and Availability 36 Technological Innovation 37 Freight 37 Finance, Road Pricing, and Innovation 38 CHAPTER 5 Alternative Futures 38 Using Alternative Futures to Identify Trends 38 Alternative Future 1: The Optimistic Scenario 41 Alternative Future 2: The Mediocre Scenario 42 Alternative Future 3: The Pessimistic Scenario 45 Summary of Alternative Futures

47 CHAPTER 6 Operations Strategies and Treatments to Improve Travel Time Reliability 47 Sources of Congestion and Unreliability 48 Classification of Strategies and Treatments to Improve Travel Time Reliability 55 Effectiveness of Strategies and Areas of Application 65 Future Technological Innovations 72 CHAPTER 7 Concept of Operations 72 Definition 72 Travel Time Reliability ConOps Purpose 72 Travel Time Reliability Performance Measures 75 Future Scenarios—ConOps Perspective 78 Baseline and Alternative Futures Strategy Assessment 80 Implementation Road Map 85 How the Future Transportation System Could Work 88 Next Steps for Migrating Toward a More Reliable Future 90 Impact of Innovative Technologies 90 Conclusions—Building a Reliable Future 93 References 103 Appendix A. Reliability Performance Measures Available to Agencies 108 Appendix B. Determining Economic Benefits of Improving Travel Time Reliability 136 Appendix C. Valuation of Travel Time Reliability for Rare Events 145 Appendix D. Sample Problem: Quantifying the Economic Benefit of Improving Travel Time Reliability 153 Appendix E. Strategy Framework for Agency Management, Organization, and Resource Allocation 158 Appendix F. Additional Description and Quantitative Benefits of Travel Time Reliability Strategies 186 Appendix G. Cost Information of Travel Time Reliability Strategies Online version of this report: www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/168142.aspx.