Progress on “CLRP Aspirations” & “What Would it Take?” Scenarios

1

Monica Bansal and Michael EichlerDepartment of Transportation Planning

Presentation to the TPB Technical Committee

December 5, 2008

Progress on “CLRP Aspirations” & “What Would it Take?” Scenarios

TPB SCENARIO STUDY

2

CLRP Aspirations

Draws on past studies and public outreach to provide an ambitious yet attainable vision of land use and transportation for the 2010 CLRP update and to eventually serve as an unconstrained long range plan.

Starts with COG regional CO2 goals and assesses what scales and combinations of interventions will be necessary to achieve the goal for the transportation sector.

What Would it Take?

The Two New Scenarios

3

Study Timeline

4

CLRP Aspirations

Draws on past scenarios (5 transportation/land use scenarios and 2 value pricing scenarios) to provide an ambitious yet attainable vision of land use and transportation for the 2010 CLRP update.

Starts with CO2 goals (80% below 2005 levels in 2050 and 20% reduction by 2020) and assesses what scales and combinations of interventions will be necessary to achieve the goal.

What Would it Take?

The Two New Scenarios

5

Baseline1. Round 7.1 Cooperative Forecast2. 2008 CLRP

RMAS Land Use/Transportation Scenarios 1. More Households Scenario2. Households In Scenario3. Jobs Out Scenario4. Region Undivided Scenario5. Transit-Oriented Development Scenario

Value Pricing Scenarios1. “DC and Parkways Restrained”

Public Outreach/Feedback on Previous Scenarios

The Starting Point

6

Land Use Decisions

Supportive Transit

Goal: To move jobs and housing closer together to create highly accessible and developed areas, and achieve more efficient transportation systems

Pricing Options

• Address congestion through pricing of new and/or existing lanes

• Provide alternatives through enhanced transit

• Concentrating projected growth in activity centers and existing/planned transit stations

• Consistent review and refinement by planning directors

• Use menu of transit options from past scenarios

• Connect activity centers

• Review by Regional Bus Subcommittee

Building the Scenario

7

“Within Reach”

1. Land use shifts should be within reach for inclusion in the COG Cooperative Forecast

2. Transportation projects should be financially within reach through tax revenues, developer contributions, or pricing.

Scenario Criteria

8

CLRP Aspirations: Land Use Component

9

10

11

12

CLRP Aspirations: Transportation Component

13

Existing system of activity centers and high quality transit shows mis-match. Many transit stations without activity and many activity centers without high-quality transit.

Existing System

14

The transit projects in the CLRP work to address some of these concerns.

CLRP Projects

Columbia Pike Streetcar

Corridor Cities Transitway

Bi-County Transitway

Crystal City/Potomac Yard Transitway

Dulles Metrorail

Anacostia Streetcar

15

Additional projects evaluated under RMAS should be carried forward, with minor modification to provide transit service to additional activity centers.

Recommended RMAS Projects

US 1 Transitway

Extend Purple Line to New Carrollton

Georgia Ave Transitway

VRE Extension to Haymarket

16

A value pricing study completed by the TPB in February of 2008 evaluated a regional network of variably priced lanes, made up of new capacity and selected existing facilities.

Studied Network of Variably Priced Lanes

17

A regional network of BRT operating mostly on the priced lanes will provide high-quality transit service to nearly all activity centers in the region.

BRT Network Recommended for Scenario Study

18

BRT to Provide Rail-Like Level of Service

The Shirlington Transit Station in Arlington, VA.

BRT stations will provide many features to decrease boarding time:

• All-door, level boarding• Off-board payment• Room for 60’ articulated multi-door buses

Other Operating Details:• 12 minute peak headways• 30 minute off-peak headways• 45 MPH on priced lanes• 15 MPH on priority corridor network • Circulator service in activity centers

19

This network will provide another layer of high-quality transit on top of existing and proposed transit services.

Full Scenario Transit Network

20

Transportation Component of the CLRP Aspirations Scenario

• Evaluates a regional network of priced lanes that serves as the right-of-way for a high-quality Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) network.

• Uses previously studied transportation facilities as starting points– 2008 CLRP Baseline– Regional network of variably priced lanes– RMAS transit

• Focuses accessibility improvements on regional activity centers– Direct access ramps from priced lanes to activity centers– BRT stations serve activity centers, Metro stations, park-and-ride lots– Include RMAS projects that provide access to activity centers– New activity centers proposed: Fort Detrick, Wheaton, Westphalia and

Fort Belvoir

• Makes use of WMATA Priority Corridor Network (PCN) to provide service to the urban core.

Summary

21

CLRP Aspirations

Draws on past scenarios (5 transportation/land use scenarios and 2 value pricing scenarios) to provide an ambitious yet attainable vision of land use and transportation for the 2010 CLRP update.

Starts with CO2 goals (80% below 2005 levels in 2050 and 20% reduction by 2020) and assesses what scales and combinations of interventions will be necessary to achieve the goal.

What Would it Take?

The Two New Scenarios

22

Fuel EfficiencyFuel Carbon

Intensity

3 categories of strategies to reduce mobile CO2 emissions

Travel Efficiency

Reduce VMT through changes in land use, travel behavior, prices

Reduce congestion

Improve operational efficiency

Beyond CAFE standards [currently 35 mpg by 2020]

Alternative fuels (biofuels, hydrogen, electricity)

Goal: To reduce CO2 emissions by 10% in 2012, and 20% and 80% below 2005 levels in 2012, 2020 and 2050 respectively

Setting up the WWIT Scenario

FLEET USE of FLEET

23

1. Effectiveness

2. Cost-effectiveness

3. Timeframe for Implementation

Analyzing the WWIT Scenario

3 categories of analysis for each strategy

24

Fuel EfficiencyFuel Carbon

IntensityTravel Efficiency

Reduce VMT through changes in land use, travel behavior, prices

Reduce congestion

Improve operational efficiency

Beyond CAFE standards [currently 35 mpg by 2020]

Alternative fuels (biofuels, hydrogen, electricity)

What can we do with the fleet?

25

What can we get with CAFE?

2010 Travel and CO2 Emissions

8-Hour Ozone Non-Attainment Area

 VMT (Billions) - Annual

% CO2 Emissions (Mil. Annual Tons)

%

Passenger Cars 19.06 47% 6.76 24%

Light Duty Trucks (SUVs, etc)

18.94 46% 15.38 56%

Heavy Duty (Trucks, Buses, etc)

2.94 7% 5.46 20%

Total

40.95 100% 27.60 100%

26

Characteristics of the Region’s Vehicle Fleet

27

Fuel EfficiencyFuel Carbon

IntensityTravel Efficiency

Reduce VMT through changes in land use, travel behavior, prices

Reduce congestion

Improve operational efficiency

Beyond CAFE standards [currently 35 mpg by 2020]

Alternative fuels (biofuels, hydrogen, electricity)

What can we do with the fleet?

28

Forecast Characteristics of the Region’s Vehicle Fleet

29

Fuel EfficiencyFuel Carbon

IntensityTravel Efficiency

Reduce VMT through changes in land use, travel behavior, prices

Reduce congestion

Improve operational efficiency

Beyond CAFE standards [currently 35 mpg by 2020]

Alternative fuels (biofuels, hydrogen, electricity)

How do we use the fleet?(and how can this change)

30

How We Use the Fleet, An Example

31

32

1. Effectiveness

2. Cost-effectiveness

3. Timeframe for Implementation

Analyzing the WWIT Scenario

3 categories of analysis for each strategy

33

Initial analysis of cost-effectiveness of Transportation Emissions Reduction Measures ($ per ton of CO2 reduced)

How can we begin to prioritize strategies?

Cost-effectiveness

Number Category DescriptionCO2 Cost

Effectiveness Range *

1 Telecommute Programs $10 to $40

2 Signal Optimization $30 to $50

3 Park & Ride Lots (Transit and HOV) $100 to $500

4 Transit Service improvements $100 to $800

34

1. Effectiveness

2. Cost-effectiveness

3. Timeframe for Implementation

Analyzing the WWIT Scenario

3 categories of analysis for each strategy

35

While all 3 example measures reduce 100 units of CO2 in 2020, the cumulative emissions reductions from 2011-2020 differ based on the time required for implementation and realization of benefits.

Example Reductions for Measures

Early action is essential to meet the goals

Timeframe for Implementation

36

“Sliders” metaphor

Different combinations of interventions can be assessed for cost-effectiveness and feasibility.

Products

37

38

39