13th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications ConferenceMay 9, 2011

Seong Dae Kim, Ph.D., PMP (University of Alaska Anchorage)Teresa M. Brewer (Municipality of Anchorage)Gary Kretchik, PMPDonghwoon Kwon, MSHarrison Yeoh, MSKelly Brown, PMP

Outline• Introductions• Where is Anchorage?• Presentation by Dr. Seong Dae Kim, UAA• Presentation by Teresa Brewer, AMATS• Q&A

Items to Consider When Prioritizing Freight Projects

Categories of Impact Impact Types Technical Facility condition

Travel time Vehicle operating cost Accessibility, mobility, and congestion Safety Intermodal movement efficiency Land-use patterns Risk and vulnerability

Environmental Air quality Water resources Noise Wetlands and ecology Aesthetics

Economic efficiency Initial costs Life-cycle costs and benefits Benefit-cost ratio Net present value

Economic development Employment Number of business establishments Gross domestic product Regional economy International trade

Legal Tort liability exposure Sociocultural Quality of life

Slide 4 of 19

Project FlowchartAnchorage Freight Movement Survey

Export Data to

Spreadsheet Ranking Model

Update Data on Map and

Website

Objective Data

Slide 5 of 19

Stakeholder SurveyOn-line survey was used to gain stakeholder

input.Employer informationFreight driver information

Length of experience Size of vehicle Pre-determined route

Perception about each candidate area Problematic? Why?

Slide 6 of 19

Slide 7 of 19

Stakeholder Survey Result52 responses by March 24, 201042.3% of responders said that their company

provides the transportation service of truckload

52.2% of responders are not a freight driver29.5% of responders drive single-trailer

tractor

Slide 8 of 19

Stakeholder Survey Result (cont’d)Area Problem? Type of problem

Ocean Dock Road and Terminal Road intersection 34.1% road congestion (54.2%)Industrial Area circulation and access area 34.2% turning radius (36.8%)School Bus storage area 13.9% road congestion (36.8%)3rd Avenue and Ingra/Gambell area 54.3% road congestion (50.0%)Ocean Dock alignment near the Port entrance 31.4% road congestion (84.6%)3rd Avenue: Post Road and Reeve Blvd 45.5% road congestion (50.0%Dowling Road: New Seward Hwy to Lake Otis Pkwy 51.6% turning radius (77.8%)International Airport Road and Postmark Drive 3.2% merge lanes (50.0%)Ocean Dock Railroad Crossings 43.3% road congestion and poor signage (43.8%)C Street and 5th/6th Avenue Intersection 43.3% road congestion (72.2%)Lake Otis Parkway: Debarr Road to Northern Lights Blvd 40.0% road congestion (53.3%)West Northern Lights Blvd and Wisconsin Street intersection 16.7% road congestion (37.5%)C Street/Potter/64th Ave intersections 33.3% road congestion (50.0%)North C Street and Ocean Dock road Intersection 40.0% road congestion (41.7%)Ocean Dock road access and crossing from Port to Terminal Rd 26.7% road congestion (55.6%)C Street and International Airport Road intersection 17.2% road congestion (50.0%)New Seward Hwy and O’Malley Interchange 41.4% turning radius (53.3%)C Street: Tudor Road to 36th Avenue Northbound 31.0% road congestion and turning radius (50.0%)Postmark Drive and Point Woronzof/West Northern Lights Blvd 10.3% road congestion (40.0%)

Slide 9 of 19

Stakeholder Survey Result (cont’d)Most problem types are road congestion and turning

radius.Some of the candidate areas need more attention

than other areas.The respondents are not necessarily truck driversCausal relationship of problem types

Problem types in the questions are not exclusive.Some problem types are the caused by other problem types

E.g. ‘Road congestion’ can be caused by ‘merge lanes,’ ‘turning radius,’ etc.

Need to distinguish symptoms and causes of the perceived problems

Slide 10 of 19

ModelDirect Weighting Method is used as the ranking

modelWithout pairwise comparison, decision makers

assign numerical weight values directly to performance criteria.

Slide 11 of 19

Prioritization CriteriaTruck crash data (relative frequency): wASubjective from the survey: wBTraffic data (relative volume): wC

Slide 12 of 19

Truck Crash DataCount of truck crash from 2005 to 2009

Maximum: 7 at Dowling Road: New Seward Hwy to Lake Otis Pkwy

Minimum: 0 at Ocean Dock Railroad Crossings and six others

Relative crash count (count/countMax) is used in the ranking model

Slide 13 of 19

Subjective DataPercentage of respondents who said

“problem area” in the surveyMaximum: 54.3% at 3rd Avenue and

Ingra/Gambell areaMinimum: 3.2% at International Airport Road

and Postmark Drive

The percentage for each area is directly used in the ranking model

Slide 14 of 19

Traffic Volume Data2008 Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)

Maximum: 23,976 at C Street: Tudor Road to 36th Avenue Northbound

Minimum: 2,068 at Industrial Area circulation and access area

Relative AADT (AADT/AADTMax) for each area is used in the ranking model

Slide 15 of 19

Spreadsheet Ranking Model

Slide 16 of 19

When Equally WeightedwA = 1/3, wB = 1/3, wC = 1/3

Ranking Area1 Dowling Road: New Seward Hwy to Lake Otis Pkwy2 C Street and 5th/6th Avenue Intersections3 C Street: Tudor Road to 36th Avenue Northbound4 C Street/Potter/64th Ave intersections5 New Seward Hwy and O'Malley Interchange6 C Street and International Airport Road intersection7 Lake Otis Parkway: Debarr Road to Northern Lights Blvd8 Ocean Dock Road and Terminal Road Intersection9 3rd Avenue and Ingra/Gambell area

Slide 17 of 19

When Equally Weighted (cont’d)wA = 1/3, wB = 1/3, and wC = 1/3

Slide 18 of 19

ConclusionThis ranking model shows rankings instantly

revised from revised weighting.The model provide flexibility to the

prioritization using one subjective criterion and two objective criteria, depending on the preference of decision maker.

The model is expandable to include additional data and decision criteria.

Pairwise comparison can be added to assist weight assignment in multiple criteria prioritization.

Slide 19 of 19

AMATS Planning ApplicationsTeresa Brewer

Slide 20 of 16

Presentation Outline Who are we? Where are we going? What’s next? Why do we care? Questions?

Who is AMATS?

Plans

Funds

Implements

Coordinates

Multi-Agency Team

MOADOT&PF

Freight

UAA

FHWAPublic Transit

Tribal

Police/Troopers

Anchorage and the Matanuska- Susitna Region is poised for increased population & growth. Anchorage’s population hovers near 300,000.

The Matanuska-Susitna Borough’s growth rate is one of the highest in the nation.

Growth=Traffic=Delay

Where are we going?

Anchorage: 9%

Mat-Su Borough: 42%

The growth in the Mat-Su Borough has generated a 2.53% increase in commuter traffic on the Glenn Hwy. during the past two years.

Population Growth Rates 2000-2009

Where are we going?

Delay costs the average Anchorage driver about $17.00 per hour or about $3.1 million annually. This cost is higher for Freight (fuel, labor) users.

Where are we going?

Why do We Care?

Freight to double by 2020.

Freight needs safe, secure, and easy access to retail, commercial, and industrial sites throughout the Municipality of Anchorage and the region.

Future freight requirements & transportation infrastructure needs must be addressed now to adequately plan for natural resource development projects, such as the natural gas pipeline.

2025 Forecasted Average Daily Traffic

Why do We Care?

Between 80% and 90% of all of Alaska’s freight moves through Anchorage via the Port of Anchorage & the Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport.

Port Access. Poor access to the Port; Freight Traffic flows onto Downtown National Highway System. This is one of the highest employment centers and tourist locations.

Freight Providers largely located near Port.

Port Expansion Project will accommodate more freight intermodal, and cruise ship opportunities (Alaska Railroad). Local roads must be ready to meet this demand.

Courtesy of the H2H Project

Courtesy of the H2H Project

Courtesy of the H2H Project

Courtesy: Knik Arm Crossing

Courtesy: Knik Arm Crossing

GPS Installation in Freight Trucks & Private Vehicles

Partnered with the Alaska Trucking AssociationReal-Time Freight Tracking using GPS and Cellular Transceivers for Transportation and Community Planning.

Regional Freight Strategy

What’s Next?

Why do We Care?

Number 1 Reason that we care is: Economic

Development

Moving Goods and People

Safely & Efficiently

throughout the region.Photo Courtesy: Lynden Transportation

Why do We Care?

Develop Transportation policy, design standards, road networks, & forecasts for freight distribution and land uses based on actual traffic movement versus personal diaries or surveys.

Identify land use conflicts, opportunities (future freight corridors, freight terminals, distribution centers, etc.).

Protect community livability (noise, lighting, environment).

Note Seasonal Weights/Restrictions Road Usage.

Update Code to reflect actual/planned Freight Routes.

Identify accident areas, improve safety , identify bottlenecks, congestion, delay (i.e. downtown corridor).

Develop screening criteria – best use of public dollars.

Photo courtesy: Anchorage Daily News Bill Roth

What’s Next?

Establish not only local, but regional and statewide strategic freight priorities for transportation system development funding.

Implement Freight Priority website.

Provide, Seek Funding for Traffic Control Technologies/GPS Phone Applications and Downloads on a larger scale for freight stakeholders, the military, federal, state, local, and tribal agencies and the public to use to track traffic delays, congestion.

Start work on near-term projects, such as traffic signal timing to reduce freight delays.

Implement Future Freight Improvement Projects, such as the H2H (Highway to Highway) or the Knik Arm Crossing Bridge. The H2H project will build the Glenn-Seward connection & provide critical links in support of state, regional, & local economies.

Questions?Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation SolutionsTeresa Brewer, Freight Mobility Coordinator907-343-7994BrewerTM@muni.org

Seong Dae Kim, Ph.D., PMP University of Alaska Anchorageafsdk1@uaa.alaska.edu

Photo Courtesy:

David Blazejewski, Alaska Railroad