2010 © CEOs for CITIES 2

KEY FINDINGS

The secret to reducing time Americans spend in peak hour traffic has more to do with how we build our cities than how we build our roads.

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 3

DISTANCE MATTERS

!   In nation’s cities largest, typical traveler spends 200hr/yr in peak period travel

!   But in best performing cities, travelers spend 40 fewer hrs in peak traffic

!   Why? They travel shorter distances

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 4

LONGER TRIP DISTANCES AND SPRAWL SHAPE TRAVEL TIMES

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 5

A VERY DIFFERENT PICTURE

LONGEST PEAK HOUR TRAVEL TIMES

Nashville-Davidson TN Oklahoma City OK Birmingham AL Richmond VA

HOURS 284 252 245 242

RANK 1 2 3 4

UMR RATE 31 38 34 44

SHORTEST PEAK HOUR TRAVEL TIMES

New York-Newark NY-NJ-CT Sacramento CA Chicago IL-IN

HOURS 122 136 163

RANK 46 48 51

UMR RATE 14 23 21

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 6

ROADMAP

1.  The Urban Mobility Report

2.  Travel Time Index is flawed concept

3.  UMR overestimates congestion

4.  Fuel economy estimates contain errors

5.  Developing better measures

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 7

THE URBAN MOBILITY REPORT

!   Produced since 1982 by Texas Transportation Institute

!   Provides estimates and rankings of congestion

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 8

UMR CLAIMS

!   Congestion is a big problem – 46 hrs of delay per person per yr

!   It wastes lots of energy

!   It’s getting worse

!   It costs us a lot of money – $750 per person up from $290 in 1982

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 9

UMR REALITY

!   Impact of distance on travel times ignored

!   UMR rates areas “less congested” even if residents have to travel farther and longer

!   Congestion estimated from unattainable ideal

!   Speeds estimated from inaccurate model, mechanically converting higher volumes into slower speeds

!   Other evidence shows commute times have not increased

!   Fuel economy incorrectly estimated, overstating costs

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 10

A FLAWED CONCEPT: THE TRAVEL TIME INDEX (TTI)

!   How much additional time does it take to travel a given distance at peak vs off-peak

!   Example: – Trip takes 20 min off-peak (free flow) – Trip takes 25 min at peak – TTI = 25/20 = 1.25 – 5 min of delay

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 11

PROBLEMS WITH TTI

!   An unrealistic baseline – No one expects or can achieve zero delay/free-flow in the peak hr

!   TTI ignores variations in travel distances among metro areas

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 12

IS CHICAGO TRAFFIC REALLY WORSE? COMPARISON Average Trip Un-congested Travel Time Delay Total Travel Time TRAVEL TIME INDEX

CHARLOTTE 19mi

38.4min 9.6mi

48.0mi 1.25

CHICAGO 13.5mi 22.8mi 9.8min 32.6mi 1.43

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 13

UMR OVERESTIMATES CONGESTION

!   No direct observation of travel time

!   A bad model for estimating travel time

!   UMR results don’t square with other measures

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 14

WEAK BASIS FOR SPEED ESTIMATES

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 15

CHECKING UMR VALIDITY

!   Do UMR estimates square with other data on variations in travel over time and space?

– Inrix: Real time speed data – NHTS: Comprehensive travel survey data – Census/ACS: Reported journey-to-work travel time data

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 16

NATIONAL SURVEY SUGGESTS TRAVEL TIME, ADJUSTED FOR DISTANCE, ACTUALLY DECLINED

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 17

UMR NOT CONSISTENT WITH INRIX

The average UMR estimate in 70% higher than the average INRIX observation: UMR = 1.24 INRIX = 1.14

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 18

FUEL CONSUMPTION ESTIMATES BASED ON OUTDATED STUDY

!   RAUS study done in 1981

!   Data: 1973-76 GM cars av 13.6mpg

!   Fuel economy estimates

“The above relationship is good only for speeds up to

about 35mph”

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 19

UMR v. DOE FUEL ECONOMY CURVES

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 20

TOWARD BETTER MEASURES OF URBAN TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS

TWO KEY TASKS !   Correcting the UMR

!   Developing new measures that emphasize accessibility

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 21

CORRECTING THE UMR ESTIMATE

!   Recompute UMR, assuming – Realistic baseline

– Better travel time data (Inrix) – Lower travel time costs – Drop fuel model

!   Reduces UMR cost estimate 70%

!   UMR overstates by $49 billion

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 22

A NEW FOCUS

!   Shift to accessibility measures

!   Start with shorter distances actually traveled in many metro areas

!   Use a realistic baseline – What is actually attained in best of class metro areas – Look at 90th percentile performers

!   Quantify time, energy, and economic costs of sprawl-lengthened commute travel

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 23

THE ROLE OF LONGER TRIP DISTANCES

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 24

THE PAYOFF

!   If every one of the top 50 metro areas achieved same level of peak hr travel distances as best performing cities, their residents would drive about 40B fewer mi/yr and use 2B fewer gal of fuel, at savings of $31B annually.

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 25

SOME CITIES HAVE MADE PROGRESS THE UMR VIEW: Congestion got worse Travel Time Index

1982 1.07

2007 1.29

THE REALITY: Trips and travel time got shorter Average Trip Travel Time

1982 19.6mi 53min

2007 16.0mi 43min

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 26

BUILDING A BETTER MEASURE

!   Emphasize access to destinations

!   Add measures of land use & trip distance

!   Incorporate better data

!   Adopt open, multidisciplinary process

!   Aim to guide policy and assess investments

2010 © CEOs for CITIES 27

CONCLUSIONS

!   The Travel Time Index (TTI) is a misleading guide to assessing transportation system performance and costs and inherently rewards sprawl and penalizes compact development

!   The UMR methodology is flawed, and its results can’t be reconciled to real world observations

!   Sprawl, not congestion, is the bigger source of time loss, energy waste and excess costs in most metro areas

!   New measures that emphasize accessibility should guide our transportation policy