WELCOME June 2011 PAC Presentation Opening Remarks Introductions - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

June 2011 PAC Presentation

1

PAC Meeting

WELCOME

• Opening Remarks
• Introductions

June 2011 PAC Presentation

2

June 2011 PAC Presentation

3

June 2011 PAC Presentation

4

Purpose of Meeting

• Confirm Corridor Vision
• Confirm Goals and Objectives
• Confirm Gaps and Deficiencies
• Confirm Economic Drivers
• Confirm Key Transportation Characteristics
• Review and Comment on Process Framework

June 2011 PAC Presentation

5

Study Update

What has happened so far?

Up to Round One Meetings

• Formation of PACs and Steering Committee
• Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats assessments
• Initial Modal Profiles developed for all modes of transportation
• Discussions on key issues, economic drivers and transportation

needs

After Round One Meetings

• Continuing to develop Modal Profiles
• Gaps and Deficiencies
• Process Framework
• Corridor Vision

June 2011 PAC Presentation

6

Corridor Vision Inputs

Importance of Corridor - Strengths

• Regions along Corridor have great assets and potential

– Metro areas exported more than $21.3 billion goods in 2008 – Over 500,000 professional, technical and health-related jobs in region – 20 Research Centers and 59 Colleges and Universities – 4 Metro Areas rank in the top 6 MSA’s with highest % of associate degree attainment in U.S.; 27% of workforce has a bachelor’s degree – Rich in historical and recreational assets, year-round tourism

• pportunities

– Erie Canal first multimodal transportation and trade asset

• Corridor has multimodal assets

– Within 24 hours of most national and international markets – Highway network is system backbone – Air cargo and passenger services throughout corridor – Three Class I railroads and short line railroads, multimodal connections – Local transit systems, light rail service in Buffalo – Canal and port network – Canal trail and other pedestrian/bicycle facilities

June 2011 PAC Presentation

7

Corridor Vision Inputs

• Population and job growth in corridor between

1970 – 2009 below national average affecting stability of non-traded sector businesses and availability of workforce. Source – U.S. Census Bureau

population database, 2009 (New York 2010 data not yet released)

• Connectivity between modes in some areas is

lacking

• Infrastructure is aging
• Progress takes partnerships (among modes; among

levels of government -- federal, state, and local; among investors – public and private)

• Scarce resources require identification of

investment priorities and supporting policies

Corridor Challenges

June 2011 PAC Presentation

8

Corridor Vision Inputs

• Support the economy through job

growth

Improve movement of goods and people

• Improved connectivity
• High quality options for commuters
• Improved reliability
• Support tourism economy

Serve the historic and recreational assets of the regions along the Corridor

• More flexibility (i.e., more options)
• User friendly
• Improved ped/bike/trail connections
• Support livability

Improve quality of life to attract businesses and workers to the area

• More mode choices
• Improved ped/bike/trail connections
• Support sustainable

transportation system

• Energy efficiency
• Maintain critical assets

Round One PAC Input

June 2011 PAC Presentation

9

Corridor Vision

Copy of document in meeting materials

Vision Statement

The Mohawk-Erie Corridor’s transportation system will support the region’s economic competitiveness and quality

• f life by linking the region’s people, businesses, and

industries to national and global marketplaces, and to each other. Building on the Corridor’s rich transportation assets and history, the transportation system will provide safe and efficient travel and connections for people and goods, balance the needs of businesses and communities, and help foster real and lasting prosperity.

June 2011 PAC Presentation

10 Corridor Goals and Objectives

Infrastructure Preservation

State of Good Repair Environment Energy Efficiency Environmental Footprint

Resilience (Scenario Impacts)

Marcellus Shale Price of Gas GHG Emissions Increased Freight Flows

Cost Effectiveness

Cost Timing Cost Benefit

Economic Competitiveness

Freight Movement Journey to Work/Business Travel Tourism Access

Quality of Life

Transit Accessibility Recreational Accessibility Education Accessibility Health Care Accessibility

June 2011 PAC Presentation

11

Vision Statement The Mohawk-Erie Corridor’s transportation system will support the region’s economic competitiveness and quality

• f life by linking the region’s people, businesses, and

industries to national and global marketplaces, and to each

• ther. Building on the Corridor’s rich transportation assets

and history, the transportation system will provide safe and efficient travel and connections for people and goods, balance the needs of businesses and communities, and help foster real and lasting prosperity.

• Corridor Vision

– What do you like? – What could be better? – Final Changes

Discussion

June 2011 PAC Presentation

12 Discussion

• Goals and Objectives

— What do you like? — What could be better? Infrastructure Preservation

State of Good Repair Environment Energy Efficiency Environmental Footprint

Resilience (Scenario Impacts)

Marcellus Shale Price of Gas GHG Emissions Increased Freight Flows

Cost Effectiveness

Cost Timing Cost Benefit

Economic Competitiveness

Freight Movement Journey to Work/Business Travel Tourism Access

Quality of Life

Transit Accessibility Recreational Accessibility Education Accessibility Health Care Accessibility

June 2011 PAC Presentation

13 Future Direction

Where are we headed?

• Key issues do not relate to capacity/travel time
• Connectivity and mode choice are more important
• Approach must assess which projects best serve the

corridor needs Create an assessment tool that relates needs of key economic drivers and quality of life factors to characteristics

• f proposed projects and determines which projects perform

“the best”

June 2011 PAC Presentation

14 Study Outcomes

Action plan that makes transportation a distinguishing feature in the future of the regions along the Corridor enhancing economic competitiveness and quality of life

• Action Plan

Prioritized projects based on potential benefit as well as policies to strengthen transportation system

requires

• Distinguishing Feature in

Development of the Regions

Knowledge of what is necessary from transportation to make the regions prosper

June 2011 PAC Presentation

15 Action Plan

Financial constraints are the new normal. Need to filter suggested multimodal improvements to determine best performance relative to need. Suggest policy, operational, and regulatory changes to provide a project/policy action plan

Policies to Support Transportation as a Distinguishing Feature

Action Plan

Prioritized Projects

June 2011 PAC Presentation

16 Process Overview

June 2011 PAC Presentation

17 Process Elements

Traditional transportation models use changes in peak-hour travel time to evaluate improvements. Generally, congestion isn’t an issue in

• Corridor. Connectivity, reliability, mode choices, etc. are key. This

framework focuses on needs of key economic drivers and quality of life.

Evaluation Process

Supply Side

• Transportation

Projects

• Project

Info

Demand Side

• Key Economic

Driver Clusters

• Transportation

Needs

More info

June 2011 PAC Presentation

18 Supply Side - Projects

Where do projects come from that will be prioritized?

Proposed and suggested projects in the Corridor

Statewide & Corridor-wide Modal & System Plans Programmed Roadway, Bridge, and Waterway Needs (including maintenance) and Transit Capacity NYSTA/CC and Rural Area NYSDOT Programming NYSTA/CC and Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) MPO Transportation Improvement Programs Programmed Ports and Airport Needs Non-programmed Multimodal Needs MPO Long Range Plans – Unfunded Needs Stakeholder Input Transportation Modal Provider Interviews Economic Driver Surveys CPAC/RPAC Input

Filters

(Info)

Gaps and Deficiencies Analysis Modal Profiles

June 2011 PAC Presentation

19

• 1. Vision Filter

– Does it strengthen transportation

• 2. Fatal Flaw Analysis

– Criteria (not yet determined) may result in project being archived for future plan/program development but eliminated from further consideration in this analysis. Criteria could include:

• Implementation timetable 20+ years
• Mega projects requiring major investment eliminating funding for other improvements
• Private investment required for project, private support for project is not currently evident
• Projects not on the core M-E network (to be defined once economic drivers are mapped)
• Significant environmental impact
• 3. Gaps and Deficiencies Filter

– Does it address an identified gap or deficiency

Filters

More Info

Projects will be subjected to several filters during evaluation process

June 2011 PAC Presentation

20 Gaps & Deficiencies Identification

Purpose: To identify multimodal transportation network issues identified in modal profiles, data assessment, and confirm issues identified by the RPAC & CPAC members Definitions:

Deficiency: An existing issue, problem, or potential concern within the transportation system identified through technical/data review and assessment or by stakeholder input Gap: Missing element in the transportation system that has been identified through a technical/data review and assessment or by stakeholder Input

June 2011 PAC Presentation

21 Gaps & Deficiencies

Step 1: Defined Project Analysis Level “30,000 ft” Perspective/Corridor-wide Issues have potential large-scale Trans. and

• Econ. Development Component

Step 2: Compiled Technical Data for development of Modal Profile Inventories: Aviation, Highway & Bridges, Water, Bicycle & Pedestrian, Rail (Passenger & Freight), Bus/LR

June 2011 PAC Presentation

22 Gaps & Deficiencies

Step 3: Analyzed Existing Technical Data, Compiled and Organized Data Summarized findings Step 4: Compiled and Analyzed Stakeholder Input Findings from CPAC and RPAC Meeting #1 Corrections/Clarifications/Projects Identified by CPAC & RPAC Members

June 2011 PAC Presentation

23

CPAC/RPAC Input

Next Step: Analysis to Project Tool

Step 5: Compare with Vision Statement for Compatibility Assessed relevance to Vision Statement Step 6: Enter Gaps & Deficiencies as one of several sources to the Project Tool Tool discussion to follow – Concept to right

Surveys Modal Profiles

Bike/Ped Rail Bridge Waterway Highway Aviation Bus & L./R

Stakeholder Input Interviews

June 2011 PAC Presentation

24 Gaps and Deficiencies Analysis–Example

Freight Rail Mode Step 2: Data Collection: NYS Rail Plan, “All about AMTRAK”, NYSDOT staff Step 1: Defined Analysis Area

Mode Gap Location Map Key Notes Freight Rail Weight Restricted Bridge Portage Bridge FR1 Weight & Speed Restrictions Freight Rail Corning Secondary Closed Lyons to Geneva FR2 Out of Service

FR2 FR1

Bike/Ped Rail Bridge Waterway Highway Aviation Bus & L./R

Step 3: Analyzed Existing Technical Data, Compiled and Organized Data Step 4: Stakeholder Input Findings from CPAC and RPAC Meeting #1 Gaps and Deficiencies Identified

June 2011 PAC Presentation

25 Discussion

Any Questions About:

• Where Projects Will Come From?
• Gaps and Deficiencies Analysis – Approach Used?

During Break – Review Gaps and Deficiencies Maps – Provide comments

• Put initials and number on dot and on comment form
• Put dot on area of map
• Additional comment forms available at sign-in table
• Please put form in comment box at end of meeting

June 2011 PAC Presentation

26 Process Elements

Evaluation Process

Supply Side

• Transportation

Projects

• Project

Info

Demand Side

• Key Economic

Driver Clusters

• Transportation

Needs

More info

June 2011 PAC Presentation

27 Demand Side – Key Economic Drivers

What sectors of the region are we focusing on and how did we determine them? Key Economic Drivers

Initial SWOT Analysis RPAC/CPAC Input Final Economic Driver List Designate primary transportation corridors based on locations

• f economic driver

businesses

June 2011 PAC Presentation

28 Demand Side - Regional Economic Drivers

Western RPAC Genesee-Finger Lakes RPAC Central NY-Mohawk Valley RPAC Capital District-Eastern NY RPAC Manufacturing Manufacturing Manufacturing Retail and wholesale trade Retail and wholesale trade Retail and wholesale trade Retail and wholesale trade Education services Education services Higher education Transportation, logistics, distribution Movement of freight in general Distribution centers Professional, scientific, technical services Professional services Professional, scientific and technical services Professional, scientific, technical services Travel and tourism Tourism and travel Travel and tourism Travel and tourism Agriculture and food processing Agriculture and agricultural products Agriculture, dairy, and forestry Health services Healthcare services Healthcare Custom job shops (artesian/specialty) Optics, imaging, and photonics (relocated from emerging) Banking and finance Financial services Electronics & imaging Construction Government Materials processing Biotechnology & life sciences Bio-science and pharmaceuticals Bio-medical devices Advanced manufacturing Advanced manufacturing Advanced manufacturing Advanced manufacturing Medical technology Food processing Diagnostics and medical devices Nano-technology Aerospace/defense Logistics Environmental systems Digital and electronic devices Alternative energy Marcellus shale extraction Emerging Industries Communications, software and media services Existing Economic Drivers

Regular text=technical analysis Italics text= added by CPAC/RPAC

June 2011 PAC Presentation

29 Demand Side - Economic Driver Clusters

• Existing economic driver firms 50+ employees and

emerging economic drivers 10+ employees

• Vet information with area economic development
• rganizations
• Map freight-intensive businesses and people-

intensive businesses

• Locate and map primary tourist destinations
• Estimate volume and value of freight movements

by mode

June 2011 PAC Presentation

30 Discussion

Western RPAC Genesee-Finger Lakes RPAC Central NY-Mohawk Valley RPAC Capital District-Eastern NY RPAC Manufacturing Manufacturing Manufacturing Retail and wholesale trade Retail and wholesale trade Retail and wholesale trade Retail and wholesale trade Education services Education services Higher education Transportation, logistics, distribution Movement of freight in general Distribution centers Professional, scientific, technical services Professional services Professional, scientific and technical services Professional, scientific, technical services Travel and tourism Tourism and travel Travel and tourism Travel and tourism Agriculture and food processing Agriculture and agricultural products Agriculture, dairy, and forestry Health services Healthcare services Healthcare Custom job shops (artesian/specialty) Optics, imaging, and photonics (relocated from emerging) Banking and finance Financial services Electronics & imaging Construction Government Materials processing Biotechnology & life sciences Bio-science and pharmaceuticals Bio-medical devices Advanced manufacturing Advanced manufacturing Advanced manufacturing Advanced manufacturing Medical technology Food processing Diagnostics and medical devices Nano-technology Aerospace/defense Logistics Environmental systems Digital and electronic devices Alternative energy Marcellus shale extraction Emerging Industries Communications, software and media services Existing Economic Drivers

We need confirmation as to the economic driver lists

June 2011 PAC Presentation

31 Demand Side – Transportation Needs

Needs of economic drivers determined from surveys and

• interviews. Needs for the population as a whole relative to

transit and access to recreation, education, and health care will be developed from GIS-based assessment relating density and proximity of services

Reliance on Specific Modes Reliance on Specific Routes Freight Intensive Cluster People-Intensive Business Cluster Tourist-Oriented Cluster

Interviews and Surveys will determine

June 2011 PAC Presentation

32 Process Overview

June 2011 PAC Presentation

33 Transportation Characteristics

What factors will drive the transportation analysis related to economic competitiveness and quality of life?

Connectivity Reliability Accessibility Agility Non-Auto Accessibility

Number of modes a project connects; quality of connection Whether a project addresses congested areas or safety concerns; availability of options during inclement weather Ease of reaching key destinations – number of choices; market access – local, NYS, domestic, international Number of mode/route choices Number of non-highway mode/route choices

June 2011 PAC Presentation

34 Discussion

We need your thoughts on

• Process Framework as a

Whole

– What do you like? – What could be better?

• Key Transportation

Characteristics Driving Analysis

– What do you like? – What is missing?

June 2011 PAC Presentation

35 Next Steps

• Webinar on Economic Driver Surveys
• Finalizing Tool for Review at Next Meeting
• Input on Meeting Locations for Next Meeting When Brief

Elected Officials and Have Public Meetings

Round One

• Study Orientation
• Input to Corridor Vision

Round Two

• Vision Statement
• Input to Evaluation Process

Round Three • Review of Tool Components Round Four

• Review Prioritization Results
• Input to Implementation Plan

Round Five

• Review of Draft Corridor Plan

PACs PACs, Elected Official Briefings, Public Meetings PACs PACs PACs, Elected Official Briefings, Public Meetings Completed This Meeting Target=Summer 2012

www.nysdot.gov/mohawk-erie-study