1 / 17

Making Performance Count

Making Performance Count. Steve Heminger Executive Director Metropolitan Transportation Commission 4 th International Transportation Systems Performance Measurement Conference May 18, 2011. A Matter of National Importance. National Commission Recommendations.

questa
Télécharger la présentation

Making Performance Count

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Making Performance Count Steve HemingerExecutive DirectorMetropolitan Transportation Commission 4th International Transportation Systems Performance Measurement Conference May 18, 2011

  2. A Matter of National Importance

  3. National Commission Recommendations • The federal surface transportation program should not be reauthorized in its current form. Instead, we should make a new beginning. • The federal program should be performance-driven, outcome-based, generally mode-neutral, and refocused to pursue objectives of genuine national interest.

  4. People Killed In Traffic Crashes, by Year Source: NHTSA Traffic Safety Facts FARS/GES Annual Reports, 2000 - 2008

  5. National Asset Condition

  6. Metro Areas Greater Than 1 Million Source: U.S. Census

  7. Metros Capture Huge Market Share Sources: U.S. Census, Texas Transportation Institute, U.S. Conference of Mayors, EPA

  8. An Example of Regional Action

  9. Performance Targets For 2035 compared to 2005

  10. Performance Targets cont. For 2035 compared to 2005

  11. Scenario Results (1) 11

  12. 6. Direct new non-agricultural 95% development within urban footprint 100% * measured in housing units * 97% 7. Reduce housing + transportation 3% costs as share of low-income -10% households' budgets -4% * preliminary results * 80% 8. Increase gross regional product 90% [GRP] IVS target result not yet available 5% 9a. Reduce per-trip travel time for -10% non-auto trips 7% 19% 9a. Increase non-auto mode share 25% (alternative target) 20% Current Regional Plans -8% -10% 9b. Reduce VMT per capita -10% Initial Vision Scenario Scenario Results (2) 12

  13. Scenario Results (3) 13

  14. Committed Projects by Development Phase (Transportation 2035 Projects) Capacity Increasing, Greater than $50 million Notes: (1) Additional T2035 projects may have progressed to construction (2) Some projects included in the numbers above are deemed committed because they are Prop.1B CMIA or TCIF projects

  15. Project Assessment Outcomes • Benefit/Cost Measure • Delay & travel time • Particulate emissions • C02 emissions • Collisions • Direct user costs 15

  16. Lessons Learned • Performance-based results are more helpful for strong projects than harmful to weak ones. • Big question: which projects get assessed? • Wide-ranging targets (from affordable housing to greenhouse gases) are straining travel models. • Don’t be afraid of aggressive goals – just get a good lawyer.

  17. METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION www.mtc.ca.gov 17

More Related