SEATTLE-LAKE WASHINGTON CORRIDOR
URBAN PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT
NATIONAL EVALUATION PLAN

U.S. Department of Transportation
Research and Innovative Technology Administration
Federal Highway Administration
Federal Transit Administration

November 4, 2009
Publication No. FHWA-JPO-10-017

By
Battelle Memorial Institute
505 King Avenue
Columbus, OH 43201

Prepared for
United States Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
Office of Operations
1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E.
Washington, DC 20590

Contract No. DTFH61-06-D-00007/ORDER 07-T-08002/WO BA07-041

November 4, 2009

PDF Version 1.8 MB

---

QUALITY ASSURANCE STATEMENT

The U.S. Department of Transportation provides high-quality information to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. U.S. DOT periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous quality improvement.

---

Technical Report Documentation Page

1. Report No FHWA-JPO-10-017	2. Government Accession No.		3. Recipient's Catalog No. EDL #14520
4. Title and Subtitle Seattle/Lake Washington Corridor Urban Partnership Agreement: National Evaluation Plan			5. Report Date November 4, 2009
			6. Performing Organization Code
7. Authors Matt Burt, Gang Shao and Carol Zimmerman (Battelle); Katie Turnbull and Kevin Balke (Texas Transportation Institute); Alasdair Cain (University of South Florida Center for Urban Transportation Research); and Eric Schreffler.			8. Performing Organization Report No.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address Battelle 505 King Avenue Columbus, OH 43201			10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)
			11. Contract or Grant No. DTFH61-06-D-00007/ORDER 07-T-08002/WO BA07-041
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address U.S. Department of Transportation Research and Innovative Technology Administration Federal Highway Administration Federal Transit Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, DC 20590			13. Type of Report and Period Covered
			14. Sponsoring Agency Code
15. Supplementary Notes
16. Abstract This report provides an analytical framework for evaluating the Seattle/Lake Washington Corridor (LWC) Urban Partnership Agreement (UPA) under the United States Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) UPA Program. The Seattle/LWC UPA projects focus on reducing congestion by employing strategies consisting of combinations of tolling, transit, telecommuting/travel demand management, and technology, also known as the 4 Ts. The Seattle/LWC national evaluation plan identifies the major questions to be answered through the evaluation, the evaluation analyses to be used to address those questions, and the data needed for the analyses. It also outlines the test plans that will be used to collect and analyze the required data. The Seattle/LWC UPA national evaluation is based on the National Evaluation Framework prepared for the U.S. DOT. Four objective questions posed by U.S. DOT serve as a starting point for the national and Seattle/LWC evaluation plan. These questions are how much congestion was reduced; what contributed to the reduction and what were the associated impacts; what lessons were learned about non-technical factors for success; and what were the overall cost and benefit of the congestion reduction strategies. The four objective questions were translated into twelve evaluation analyses, which in turn consist of hypotheses and questions, measures of effectiveness (MOEs), and data required for the MOEs. This document presents the plan for evaluating the Seattle/LWC UPA projects.
17. Key Word Urban Partnership Agreement, Congestion Reduction Demonstration, congestion pricing, tolling, HOT, congestion reduction, transit, bus rapid transit, telecommuting, evaluation		18. Distribution Statement
19. Security Classif. (of this report)	20. Security Classif. (of this page)		21. No. of Pages 113	22. Price

---

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Many representatives from the Seattle/LWC Urban partnership agencies as well as the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration regional offices provided much appreciated support to the national evaluation team's efforts to develop this plan. The efforts of the following individuals were particularly instrumental in collecting the technical information needed to develop the evaluation plan and their assistance is recognized and appreciated: Patty Rubstello, Jennifer Charlebois, Tyler Patterson and Rob Fellows, Washington State Department of Transportation; Peter Heffernan, Fotini Georgiadou and Lori Mimms, King County; Charlie Howard, Robin Mayhew, Benjamin Brackett, Neil Kilgren and Matthew Kitchen, Puget Sound Regional Council; and Russ McCarty and Sandy Barnett of Jacobs Engineering (consultant to Washington State Department of Transportation).

---

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

• Background
• The Seattle/LWC UPA
• Evaluation Analyses and Test Plans
• Next Steps

• 1.1 U.S. DOT Program to Reduce Congestion
  • 1.1.1 Urban Partnership Agreement/Congestion Reduction Demonstration Program Overview
• 1.2 Organization of this Report

• 2.1 The Transportation System and Congestion in the Seattle Urban Area
• 2.2 The Seattle/LWC UPA Local Partners
• 2.3 Seattle/LWC UPA Projects and Deployment Schedules

• 3.1 National Evaluation Organizational Structure
• 3.2 National Evaluation Process and Framework
• 3.3 U.S. DOT Four Questions and Mapping to 12 Analyses
• 3.4 Seattle/LWC UPA National Evaluation Process

• 4.1 Evaluation Analyses
  • 4.1.1 Congestion Analysis
  • 4.1.2 Tolling Analysis
  • 4.1.3 Transit Analysis
  • 4.1.4 Telecommuting/TDM Analysis
  • 4.1.5 Technology Analysis
  • 4.1.6 Safety Analysis
  • 4.1.7 Equity Analysis
  • 4.1.8 Environmental Analysis
  • 4.1.9 Non-Technical Success Factors Analysis
  • 4.1.10 Cost Benefit Analysis
• 4.2 Preliminary Evaluation Test Plans
  • 4.2.1 Traffic System Data Test Plan
  • 4.2.2 Tolling Test Plan
  • 4.2.3 Transit System Data Test Plan
  • 4.2.4 Telecommuting/TDM Data Test Plan
  • 4.2.5 Safety Test Plan
  • 4.2.6 Surveys, Interviews and Workshops Test Plan
  • 4.2.7 Environmental Test Plan
  • 4.2.8 Content Analysis Test Plan
  • 4.2.9 Cost Benefit Analysis Test Plan
  • 4.2.10 Exogenous Factors Test Plan

5.0 NEXT STEPS

List of Tables

• Table ES-1. Relationship Among Test Plans and Evaluation Analyses
• Table ES-2. Illustrative Excerpt from the Transit Analysis Approach
• Table 1-1. Summary of UPA/CRD Strategies by Site
• Table 2-1. Seattle/LWC UPA Projects and Funding
• Table 2-2. UPA Project Schedules
• Table 3-1. U.S. DOT National Evaluation "Objective Questions"
• Table 3-2. U.S. DOT Objective Questions vs. Evaluation Analyses
• Table 4-1. Congestion Analysis Approach: Travel Time and Travel Speed
• Table 4-2. Congestion Analysis Approach: Travel Time Reliability
• Table 4-3. Congestion Analysis Approach: Throughput
• Table 4-4. Congestion Analysis Approach: Spatial and Temporal Extent of Congestion
• Table 4-5. Congestion Analysis Approach: User's Perception
• Table 4-6. Tolling Analysis Approach
• Table 4-7. Transit Analysis Approach
• Table 4-8. Telecommuting/TDM Analysis Approach
• Table 4-9. Technology Analysis Approach
• Table 4-10. Safety Analysis Approach
• Table 4-11. Equity Analysis Approach
• Table 4-12. Environmental Analysis Approach
• Table 4-13. Non-Technical Success Factors Analysis Approach
• Table 4-14. Cost Benefit Analysis Approach
• Table 4-15. Relationships Among Test Plans and Evaluation Analyses
• Table 4-16. Data for the Evaluation Analyses
• Table 4-17. Roadways for Which Traffic System Data Are Needed
• Table 4-18. Data Requirements for Computing Performance Measures Used in the National Evaluation Analyses
• Table 4-19. Data and Analysis Time Frames
• Table 4-20. Transit System Data Availability
• Table 4-21. Transit Data Analysis
• Table 4-22. UPA Signage Locations
• Table 4-23. Safety Test Plan Data Sources and Availability
• Table 4-24. Data and Analysis Time Frames
• Table 4-25. Recommended Survey, Interviews and Workshops
• Table 4-26. Content Analysis Tracking Log
• Table 4-27. Exogenous Factors Data Collection Schedule

List of Figures

• Figure ES-1. SR 520 Location
• Figure 1-1. Percentage of Vehicle Miles Traveled by Congestion Level in Very Large Urban Areas, 1982 versus 2007
• Figure 2-1. Seattle/LWC UPA Team
• Figure 2-2. SR 520 Location
• Figure 2-3. Seattle/LWC UPA Tolling and Technology Projects
• Figure 2-4. Seattle/LWC UPA Transit Projects
• Figure 2-5. Proposed Tolling Point Location
• Figure 2-6. UPA ATM Gantry Locations
• Figure 2-7. Visualization of UPA ATM Signs
• Figure 2-8. Possible Travel Time Sign Designs
• Figure 3-1. Battelle Team Organizational Structure
• Figure 3-2. The National Evaluation Framework in Relation to Other Evaluation Activities
• Figure 3-3. Seattle/LWC UPA National Evaluation Team
• Figure 3-4. Seattle/LWC UPA National Evaluation Process
• Figure 4-1. Seattle/LWC UPA Project Deployment Timeline and Evaluation Data Collection Timeline
• Figure 4-2. Location of SR 520 DMS
• Figure 4-3. Sample Log of Construction and Maintenance Activities Ongoing in the Puget Sound Area
• Figure 4-4. Example of Information Contained in Special Events Log

---

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ITS JOINT PROGRAM OFFICE, HOIT
1200 NEW JERSEY AVENUE, SE
WASHINGTON, DC 20590
TOLL-FREE "HELP LINE"1-866-367-7487
WWW.ITS.DOT.GOV

EDL # 14520

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
RESEARCH AND INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY ADMINISTRATION
PUB. NO. FHWA-JPO-10-017

---

You may need the Adobe Acrobat Reader to view the PDFs on this page.