Transportation vs The Texas Chain Saw Massacre?

Not everyone listens to radio, but I do. The other evening, a broadcast of "Freakonomics Radio" held my rapt attention. I'd encourage you to turn on your computer or player's speakers, and follow this link to an entertaining, and interesting, half-hour of radio conversation: http://freakonomics.com/podcast/where-have-all-the-hitchhikers-gone-a-new-freakonomics-radio-podcast/

You may find some interesting take-aways that inform your own work. For instance.....

The fear of strangers, which seems to be hard-wired in human nature, is a fear that seems to be far out of scale with statistical likelihood. That fear factor reminds us of a tangential transportation conundrum: the outsized fear that many parents, community members, or even school officials (such as this news piece from a school on the outskirts of Houston: http://www.fox26houston.com/news/117783912-story) have of letting children walk to school. The folks at the National Center for Safe Routes to School not long ago reported that only 13 percent of school-age children walked or biked to school in 2009, down from 48 percent of school kids in 1969. Meanwhile, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention see a correlation between the lack of walking and biking and ever-higher rates of childhood obesity, and local officials everywhere struggle with the challenge of managing the traffic at schools, where long lines of parents' cars queue up every morning and afternoon as part of the modern-day school attendance ritual.

The notion of how we look at transportation system capacity. As the show's hosts point out, if we gauged personal vehicle utilization with the same lenses through which many critics like to view public transportation, we'd be outraged at the fact that 80 percent of the seating capacity of personal vehicles typically goes unused, even when the vehicles are in operation, never mind that most of these vehicles sit idle for the vast majority of the hours in every day. The implication is that if buses were operating at no more than 20 percent of capacity in peak hours, and weren't being used at all in off-peak hours, we would wonder why we're even bothering to invest in the system.

A third take-away from this radio piece was the fascination that people everywhere have with the spontaneous ride-sharing, or "slugging," that exists in the DC metro area and a handful of other cities. This is how we manage to have the transportation guru Alan Pisarski and the horror movie franchise of "The Texas Chain Saw Massacre" mentioned together in the span of a few minutes. To hear how this plays out, you've just got to listen to the Freakonomics piece....

Let's talk about data & transportation planning!

In partnership with RideAmigos, I'm the guest at their next "Coffee Talk." It's on April 14 at 2:00 ET, if you want to join in real life. It will be recorded and posted on the RideAmigos site at some later date if you can't be there then. But I'd really like you to dial in and join us, so that you can be part of the conversation.

Here's how RideAmigos is describing and offering this talk:

RideAmigos Coffee Talk VIII – The Use of Trip-Planning and Travel Inquiry Data in Transportation Planning and Service Design

Host: Chris Zeilinger, Assistant Director | Community Transportation Association of America

Effective transportation planning is informed by good data. With transportation system users turning to dynamic platforms – such as the RideAmigos platform – for making inquiries and arranging trips, planners and managers have a new wealth of data that can help inform their planning and decision making. Chris Zeilinger, of the Community Transportation Association of America, will talk with us about the many ways – both established and new – that we can harness these data for achieving transportation system success.
Sign up here for the web-link to view the presentation and the dial-in number:
http://help.rideamigos.com/coffee-talks/

FTA Has Money for Buses, Facilities

Thanks to the FAST Act, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) is inviting states and urban transit agencies to apply for bus and bus facility funding under its new Section 5339(b) competitive grant program. FTA also invites these entities to apply for low- or no-emission buses and related facility grants under its new Low- or No-Emission (“Low-No”) Bus Program. The application deadline for both programs is May 13, 2016. Details are found in the Federal Register of March 29, 2016, as well as at the FTA website. 

There’s a total of $211 million available for bus and bus facility grants, and a total of $55 million available for Low-No grants.

It’s been a few years since FTA has been able to make discretionary grants for buses and bus facilities. Under MAP-21, all these funds were allocated to urbanized areas strictly by formula, with a small allocation also made to each state. That Section 5339(a) formula-based program remains in place under the FAST Act, but is supplemented by this new set of funds for competitive grants. Previously, FTA was making Low-No grants only to applicants in Clean Air Act non-attainment areas, but now these grants may be awarded anywhere, regardless of an applicant area’s non-attainment status.

Here are just a few of the key details from this solicitation: 

• The only eligible applicants are (1) current direct recipients of Section 5307 funds, (2) states, and (3) Indian tribes. However, proposals may include projects that will be implemented by subrecipients, whether urban, rural or tribal.
• Section 5339(b) grants generally pay for 80 percent of project costs, with the possibility of 85 or 90 percent share for projects satisfying certain Clean Air Act or ADA criteria. The non-federal share can be provided through the same array of available options as for Section 5307 urban transit grants or Section 5311 rural or tribal grants, depending on the proposed project.
• Low-No grants pay for 85 percent of project costs. As with Section 5339(b), the non-federal share can be provided through the same array of available options as for Section 5307 urban transit grants or Section 5311 rural or tribal grants, depending on the proposed project.
• As has long been the case for Section 5339 bus and bus facility grants (and its predecessor Section 5309 bus and bus facility grants), Section 5339(b) and Low-No funds may be used for a number of eligible capital projects, but may not be used for mobility management.
•  In accordance with statute, FTA must award at least 10 percent of Section 5339(b) funds for bus and bus facility projects in rural areas.
• While the solicitation does not include any scoring criteria, weights, factors or other metrics, FTA provides detailed verbiage to explain how it will evaluate the applications that are submitted for Section 5339(b) and Low-No funding. Successful applicants will be those whose proposal narratives speak well to these selection criteria. It’s interesting, and possibly helpful, to note that FTA wants to see how proposed projects can be scaled down, in case FTA chooses to award grants for amounts less than are requested.
• In this and other recent solicitations, FTA has begun asking for more substantive documentation in various issues. For Section 5339(b) grants, for example, it appears that FTA has increased the amount of documentation needed to assure that MPOs or state DOTs will amend the relevant TIP or STIP if an applicant’s project is selected. It also appears that FTA is seeking more substantiation of the ability to commit the stated non-federal share of project costs than used to be the case.

Potential applicants and other interested parties should read the solicitation notice closely. For more information on Section 5339(b), contact FTA’s Sam Snead by email at Samuel.snead@dot.gov or by phone at 202-366-1089. For more information on the Low-No program, contact FTA’s Tara Clark at tara.clark@dot.gov or 202-366-2623.

As a late-hour reminder, buses, bus facilities, and many other types of transportation projects are eligible for funding under the DOT’s “TIGER” program. The latest round of TIGER grants are currently being solicited, with TIGER applications due April 29, 2016. For information on TIGER and the 2016 TIGER solicitation, visit the DOT’s TIGER website, https://www.transportation.gov/tiger.

Ready to deploy some advanced transportation technology? Check out this FHWA notice!

As a result of the FAST Act, US DOT has launched an Advanced Transportation and Congestion Management Technologies Deployment (ATCMTD) initiative. It’s funded at about $60 million a year for the life of the FAST Act. This week, FHWA issued a Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) inviting eligible entities to submit applications for its first round of model technology deployment sites.

Planning agencies, local governments, and others are encouraged to apply, and will see that many of the ideas in this NOFO may reflect things you have in the works, or deployments you’ve been wishing to explore.

The full NOFO can be found at https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2016/03/29/2016-07051/notice-of-funding-opportunity-for-the-advanced-transportation-and-congestion-management-technologies#h-12.

Here are a few key facts:

•       This year's applications are due June 3, 2016.

•       Grants are up to $12 million, and require a 50 percent non-federal share.

•       Eligible applicants are states, local governments, transit agencies, MPOs, multi-agency consortia, and consortia of research/academic institutions. 

•       The purpose of these grants is "to develop model deployment sites for large scale installation and operation of advanced transportation technologies to improve safety, efficiency, system performance, and infrastructure return on investment."

•       There's an illustrative list of things for which these grants could be used: 

o   Advanced traveler information systems;

o   Advanced transportation management technologies;

o   Infrastructure maintenance, monitoring, and condition assessment;

o   Advanced public transportation systems;

o   Transportation system performance data collection, analysis, and dissemination systems;

o   Advanced safety systems, including vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure communications, technologies associated with autonomous vehicles, and other collision avoidance technologies, including systems using cellular technology;

o   Integration of intelligent transportation systems with the Smart Grid and other energy distribution and charging systems;

o   Electronic pricing and payment systems; or

o   Advanced mobility and access technologies, such as dynamic ridesharing and information systems to support human services for elderly and disabled individuals.

Interested in these possibilities? Read the notice. If you have questions about the solicitation, contact Robert Arnold of FHWA’ Office of Transportation Management (Robert.arnold@dot.gov; 202-366-1285) or Egan Smith of the DOT ITS Joint Program Office (egan.smith@dot.gov; 202-366-9224).

The Community Transportation Association is not an official partner in this initiative, but we have some experience in some of these topics. You’re welcome to reach out to me to brainstorm and refine possible ideas or strategies. I’m at Zeilinger@ctaa.org (or chris.zeilinger@gmail.com, if the CTAA address rejects you), or 202-250-4108.

Upcoming FHWA Planning Webinar: Enhanced Data Sharing, Systems, and Tools

You probably have heard about this through other channels, but here's your reminder that the next in FHWA's series of webinars on "Regional Models of Cooperation" is taking place in late April 2016. 

The topic of the April 28 webinar is "Enhanced Data Sharing, Systems and Tools." Remembering that one of my maxims of good planning is that it's data-driven, I would urge all my planning colleagues to consider this webinar.

Here's how FHWA is describing this upcoming webinar:

"Regional cooperation among MPOs, State DOTs, transit agencies, and their partners is increasing efficiency, improving transportation decision-making , and strengthening relationships. This webinar will feature the methods and tools that organizations use to successfully share data and collaborate across jurisdictional boundaries. State DOT and MPO presenters will describe the systems and how they are used to make data sharing and collaboration across boundaries work in their regions."

For details on the April 28 webinar, to play back prior webinars, and to see what future webinars FHWA has in store for you through this series, visit http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/regional_models/webinars/. 

How We Listen to Our Community

Recently, I posed a question to a few hundred planners at metropolitan planning organizations for urbanized areas with populations less than 200,000. I asked them what they were doing to engage their areas’ low-income and minority communities in some facet(s) of their planning processes. I got some great responses, a few of which I compiled into a short “scanning report,” as part of an FHWA-funded research project I’m conducting.

It's a brief report. To summarize it, what I found was that community engagement in smaller metropolitan areas tended to follow one or both of two paths. Half of the responding MPOs reported their staff carried out a variety of strategies in which they engaged directly with community members, such as through direct interviews, attendance at community meetings, appearances at community events, etc. Half of the responding MPOs reported various forms of using trusted intermediaries (e.g., advocacy groups, community organizations, churches, schools) to host meetings, conduct focus groups, etc. In a few instances, MPOs carried out more extensive activities to include low-income or minority community participation in planning processes, such as conducting day-long workshops or multi-day community charrettes.

The responding MPOs have given us some neat case studies. I encourage you to read this scanning report (it’s only six pages), and perhaps you can offer up your own success stories.

Which is better: technology or shoe leather?

I’m sure you saw this coming, but the answer really is “You need them both.”

We have a wealth of data and analytic tools out there that can summarize and profile all sorts of important things. We all have our go-to platforms, based on what we’re doing. Perhaps the most obvious, long-extant resource is the Census Transportation Planning Product (CTPP). In my mind, this was a data mash-up that’s been around since before mash-ups were a thing. All things Census-related that pertain to transportation are under this hood, which you can find via http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/census_issues/ctpp/, among other places.

Because of the work I do, I’m often spending time in the “On The Map” site, which is maintained through Census’s Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics site, mashing up labor statistics with Census’ own data. It does one set of things, but it does them pretty well, and is a great way to start conversations about the jobs, housing and commuting patterns in an area. If you’ve never been there, take time to go to http://onthemap.ces.census.gov.

Recently, EPA released a data tool called “EJSCREEN.” It’s a screening and mapping tool around environmental justice, and helps you see how a dozen environmental indicators mash up with a half-dozen demographic indicators for any place in the country, I saw a presentation on this at the latest Transportation Research Board meeting, and definitely am intrigued. It’s another of these tools that is meant for a single purpose. In this case, it’s great for framing the context of EJ concerns in any particular area. It won’t solve a single thing, or plan your strategies for you, but it sure is a great way to start the conversation. I’m going to spend a fair amount of time at http://www.epa.gov/ejscreen; maybe you’ll be there, too.

But here’s the thing: these tools are not going to generate answers. If anything, they create the questions that are appropriate to a community. If you’re going to create any viable plans, strategies or solutions, you’ve got to get out of your office or cubicle, and go meet with people. Ask the questions that these and other tools can help frame for you. Listen to what’s important to people, and then discern how their concerns fit in with your plans and programs. Listening is often hard work, especially if you’ve got community differences, cultural diversity, or the simply stated challenge of busy people without a lot of time on their hands to come to meetings or events.