Transportation Advisory Committee January 3, 2017 2:00 p.m. 916 Main Street, 2nd Floor Conference Room Lubbock, Texas
1. Call to Order of the Transportation Advisory Committee.
2. Acknowledgement of Quorum of the Transportation Advisory Committee.
3. Safety Procedures.
4. Public Comment Period/Acknowledgement of Guests of the Transportation Advisory Committee.
5. Approval of the October 4, 2016 Transportation Advisory Committee meeting minutes.
6. Consider a Resolution approving the 2016 Annual Performance and Expenditure Report and Listing of Obligated Projects to advance to the Policy Committee. 7. Discuss the status of the 2017/2020 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). 8. Consider a Resolution supporting the extension of I27 to advance to the Policy Committee. 9. Reports: Cities and County TxDOT Citibus LPD/DPS Texas Tech University Director’s
AGENDA ITEM 1 Call to Order of the Transportation Advisory Committee.
AGENDA ITEM 2
Acknowledgement of the Quorum of the Transportation Advisory Committee.
AGENDA ITEM 3 Safety Procedures.
Discussion: None
Staff Recommendation: Review
Safety Procedures
Employee or Public Accident
In the event that an emergency or serious illness of an employee or visitor while in this meeting: 1. Call 911 2. Call Courthouse security at 775-1547 or 775-1548. a. Provide address b. Type of emergency c. Do not move injured or ill person d. Designate someone to wait for the ambulance at the main Entrance Doors. e. HOLD elevator (same person who will wait for Emergency Personnel)
Tornado or Inclement Weather
When a tornado warning has been issued by the National Weather Service the office contacts will be notified by Courthouse Security and an automatic alarm system will sound: 1. All persons will move to the Firewall Stairwell. DO NOT take elevator, proceed to basement. The stairwell is the first exit to the left from the conference room.
Fire Procedures
If you hear fire alarm: Begin evacuation by exiting the conference main doors, take exit immediately to your left, it is a firewall stairwell, exit building immediately and meet at the North East corner of the courthouse. When taking the stairs, remain to the RIGHT, so that fire personnel may get through.
If you see smoke or fire: Isolate fire/smoke by shutting the door (if possible) and activating the alarm. Exit building immediately, again DO NOT take the elevator.
Troubled Individual/Shooter
Lock (if possible) and close all doors. If unable to lock door, place furniture from room in front of doors. Remain calm. Elevator Emergency
Push the talk button, someone will connect with you and ask your emergency. If unable to talk, press alarm button. Remain calm. Do not force elevator doors.
AGENDA ITEM 4
Public Comment Period/Acknowledgement of Guests
DISCUSSION: Opportunity for the public to comment on transportation planning activities.
ACTION REQUIRED: None
AGENDA ITEM 5 Approval of the meeting minutes of October 4, 2016 of the Transportation Advisory Committee.
DISCUSSION: Review and approve the October 4, 2016 Transportation Advisory Committee meeting minutes.
ACTION REQUIRED: Consider approval.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommends approval.
Minutes of the Transportation Advisory Committee Lubbock Metropolitan Planning Organization October 4, 2016
The meeting of the Transportation Advisory Committee of the Lubbock Metropolitan Planning Organization was held at the 2nd floor conference room, 916 Main Street, at 2:00 p.m. on October 4, 2016.
Required notices were given to the members of the Committee and the public. The following Transportation Advisory Committee members were present:
TAC members: Darrell Newsom, Chair, City Manager, City of Wolfforth Bill McCay, Vice-Chair, County Commissioner, Lubbock County Travis Watkins, Director of Finance, Citibus Michael Keenum, City Engineer, City of Lubbock Andrew Paxton, Director of Planning, City of Lubbock Mark Heinrich, County Commissioner, Lubbock County Sharmon Owens, Director Traffic Engineering, City of Lubbock Wood Franklin, Direct of Public Works, City of Lubbock Jerry Brewer, Assistant Chief, Lubbock Police Dept., City of Lubbock
Visitors/Staff: Darrell Westmoreland, Lubbock MPO Tammy Walker, Lubbock MPO Maurice Pearl, General Manger, Citibus Shelley Harris, TxDOT
Call to Order:
Darrell Newsom called the Transportation Advisory Committee to order at 2:07 p.m.
The Committee moved to the next item.
Darrell Newsom acknowledged the quorum of the Transportation Advisory Committee.
The Committee moved to the next item.
Safety procedures: Darrell Newsom reminded everyone to review the safety procedures.
The Committee moved to the next item.
Public Comment Opportunity/Acknowledgment of Guests:
Darrell Newsom asked if there were any public comments, there was no comment. The Transportation Advisory Committee had two visitors, Maurice Pearl, General Manager, Citibus and Shelley Harris, TxDOT. The Committee moved to the next item. Approval of the meeting minutes of September 6, 2016 of the Transportation Advisory Committee.
Darrell Newsom asked if there were any corrections to the meeting minutes dated September 6, 2016. There were no comments for corrections to be made. Wood Franklin made a motion to approve the meeting minutes of September 6, 2016. Bill McCay seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. The Committee moved to the next item. Discuss and take action to elect a Chair and Vice-Chair of the Transportation Advisory Committee. Darrell Newsom stated that the MPO bylaws stipulate that the Transportation Advisory Committee shall elect a Chairperson and a Vice-Chairperson, by majority vote, in October of even number year. He also stated that the Chair and Vice-Chair will serve the Transportation Advisory Committee until October 2018. Darrell Newsom opened the floor for nominations for Chair. Sharmon Owens made a motion to nominate Wood Franklin to Chair the Transportation Advisory Committee. Bill McCay seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Darrell Newsom opened the floor for nominations for Vice-Chair. Bill McCay made a motion to nominate Darrell Newsom as Vice-Chair of the Transportation Advisory Committee. Mark Heinrich seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. The Committee moved to the next item. Reports: City of Lubbock: Mike Keenum reported that the 34th Street project is complete. He also reported that the design for Phase 3 and 4 is underway. Designs should be completed in the next calendar year. He reported on the progress for the 98th Street project. In 2017, plans are to build 98th Street between Milwaukee and Upland, 3 lanes wide with concrete. He stated that they are working on the easement acquisition for Erskine and the City has awarded Phase 3 of the North University project. Wolfforth: Darrell Newsom reported that United has announced they will be building a new supermarket on the West side of MSF and they will also be developing retail around it. He also reported that they are working on a new HAWK system at the new freshman campus. Lubbock County: Bill McCay reported Lubbock County is “maintaining”.
TxDOT: Shelly Harris South Loop 289-frontage roads let this summer and construction will begin soon. He reported the construction will be from I-27 to South Loop for surface repair and replacement.
Shelly Harris reported that he is sending the TTU project, 19th Street, to Austin. The project will add vegetation, median, drip irrigation, and a 10 ft. shared path.
TXDOT is continuing to work on the Outer Route schematics. The alignment is what was present at the last meeting and will go to Public Hearing later this year, after that, right of way acquisition will start and will take 12-18 months.
Shelly Harris reported that the FM 179 project, 19th Street to 82nd Street, will start right of way acquisition in January 2017, and will last about a year.
Shelly Harris reported that TxDOT intends to address the weed problem around I-27 and the Loop.
Shelly Harris also reported the hiring freeze was lifted and that Steve Warren intends to hire a Director of TP&D, Deputy Engineer and a Director of Operations-Traffic.
Citibus: Travis Watkins reported that Citibus is currently under construction for a new HAVC system inside.
LPD/DPS: Nothing to report
TTU: No report.
Director’s: No report.
Darrell Newsom adjourned the meeting of the Transportation Advisory Committee at 2:22 p.m.
AGENDA ITEM 6 Consider a Resolution approving the 2016 Annual Performance and Expenditure Report and Listing of Obligated Projects to advance to the Policy Committee.
DISCUSSION: The Annual Performance Expenditure Report (APER) prepared pursuant to 23 C.F.R. 420.117 and the Annual Listing of Obligated Projects (APL) prepared pursuant to 23 C.F.R. 450.332 when presented together as the MPO’s annual year-end report serve to satisfy the federal requirement of increasing the transparency of government spending on transportation projects and strategies in metropolitan areas to State and local officials, and to the public at large. The required annual listing of obligated projects must not only include the customary street and highway projects but also any investments in pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities along with public transportation investments for which Federal funds have been obligated in the preceding year and shall be published or otherwise made available by the cooperative effort of the State, transit operations, and the MPO for public review. According to law, the listing shall also be consistent with the funding categories identified in the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and subsequent Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The APER is more generally used to show how well the MPO achieved the work tasks set out in the Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP). The complete APER is included as a separate document with your agenda email. Budget summaries from the APER are included in your agenda backup to show percent of budget expended for each of the work tasks. Additional details on task descriptions can be found by accessing the 2016 UPWP on the MPO website (www.LubbockMPO.org). The ALP is included in your APER attachment and shows the status of expenditures compared to budgeted amounts. As shown, the LMPO accomplished 100% of its goals and spent 99% of its operating budget (PL112 and FTA 5303) and finished the year with a $2,366 operating surplus that will fall to the bottom line and be carried over to next year. STP/MM formula allocations and FTA formula and grant allocations are also provided. Staff will review the APER/ALP highlights and ask the Advisory Committee to approve a Resolution accepting the report and advancing it to the Policy Committee. ACTION REQUIRED: Pass a Resolution to approve the FY 2016 APER/APL. STAFF RECOMMENDS: Approve the resolution approving the FY 16 APER/APL.
Resolution 2017-01
WHEREAS, 23 CFR 420.117 requires the Metropolitan Planning Organization (the “MPO”) to prepare an Annual Performance and Expenditure Report (the “APER”) for approval by the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Transit Administration, and the Texas Department of Transportation; and
WHEREAS, the APER shall contain a comparison of actual performance with established goals; and
WHEREAS, the APER shall contain the status of expenditures in a format compatible with the Unified Planning Work Program; and
WHEREAS; the APER shall contain a comparison of approved budgeted amounts and actual costs incurred by task including any cost overruns or underruns; and
WHEREAS; 23 C.F.R. 450.332 requires the State, public transportation operators, and MPO’s to cooperatively develop a listing of projects for which federal funds were obligated in the preceding program year; and
WHEREAS, 23 U.S.C. 134 (j)(7)(B), 23 U.S.C. 135 (g)(4)(B), 49 U.S.C. 5304 (g)(4)(B), and 49 U.S.C. 5303 (j)(7)(B) require the MPO to provide an Annual Listing of Obligated Projects (the “ALP”) in conjunction with the APER; and
WHEREAS, the ALP shows all projects, including investments in pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities for which Federal funds have been obligated in the preceding year; and
WHEREAS, the ALP shall be consistent with funding categories identified in the Transportation Improvement Program and made available through the cooperative efforts of the State, the local transit operator and the MPO for public review in order to increase the transparency of government spending on transportation projects and strategies in the metropolitan area.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE OF THE LUBBOCK METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATON:
THAT the Transportation Policy Committee approves the 2016 APER as presented.
Passed by the Transportation Policy Committee this ______day of ______, 2017. ______Maurice Pearl, Chairman LMPO Transportation Policy Committee
Attest:
______Tammy Walker, MPO Secretary
Approved as to Content:
______H. David Jones Transportation Planning Director
Approved as to form:
______Amy Sims Assistant City Attorney For the MPO, by MOU
BUDGET SUMMARY
Total Transportation Planning Funds (TPF) Budgeted and Expended for FY 2016
Amount Amount UPWP Task Balance % Expended Budgeted Expended
1.0 $145,180 $160,976 $-15,796 1.10
2.0 115,704 114,456 1,248 .99
3.0 91,758 87,590 4,168 .95
4.0 53,446 43,874 9,572 .82
5.0 10,174 7,000 3,174 .69
TOTAL $416,262 $413,896 $2,366 .99
Local Planning Funds (includes TxDOT) Budgeted and Expended for FY 2016
Amount Amount UPWP Task Balance % Expended Budgeted Expended
1.0
2.0
3.0 $1,662,462 $1,564,348 98,114 .94
4.0
5.0 65,000 0 65,000 0
TOTAL $1,727,462 $1,564,348 163,114 .90
FTA (Sec. 5307) Funds Budgeted and Expended for FY 2016
Amount Amount UPWP Task Balance % Expended Budgeted Expended
1.0
2.0
3.0 $3,157,671 $3,228,810 $-71,139 1.02
4.0
5.0
TOTAL $3,157,671 $3,228,810 $-71,139 1.02
STP – MM Funds Budgeted and Expended for FY 2016
Amount Amount UPWP Task Balance % Expended Budgeted Expended
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0 $200,000 $0 $200,000 0
TOTAL $200,000 $0 $200,000 0
AGENDA ITEM 7 Discuss the status of the 2017/2020 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).
DISCUSSION: We recently received our second work authorization (PL 112 and FTA 5303 funding) for 2017 that also contained a call for the next round of quarterly amendments to the 17/20 TIP. I have found that many larger TMAs use this call as a signal to perform a quarterly review of their TIP projects ahead of any course corrections needed through the amendment process. Given that logic, I have decided to start a quarterly review of our TIP. The staff will provide a summary of all our TIP project during the meeting.
ACTION REQUIRED: Take action as appropriate.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: None
AGENDA ITEM 8
Consider a Resolution supporting the extension of I27 to advance to the Policy Committee.
DISCUSSION: One of the projects supported by the Ports to Plains Board of Directors for 2017 is the extension of I27, north and south. The Ports to Plains staff has crafted a Resolution setting out several of the advantages they see to their advocacy in that regard. The staff will discuss the Resolution and ask the board to send it to the Policy Committee with a favorable recommendation for their endorsement.
ACTION REQUIRED: Advance Resolution to Policy Committee.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Advance Resolution to Policy Committee
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE EXTENSION OF INTERSTATE 27.
WHEREAS, Congress has already designated the Ports-to-Plains Corridor in Texas as a High Priority Corridor on the National Highway System; and
WHEREAS, the Texas Department of Transportation published an Initial Assessment Report on the Extension of I-27/Ports to Plains Corridor in November, 2015 which stated: “The corridor will continue to be a critical link to state, national and international trade, growing population centers and critical energy and agricultural business sectors”; and
WHEREAS, according to the Texas Freight Mobility Plan, “By 2040 over 73 percent of Texas’ population and 82 percent of the state’s employment is projected to be located within five miles of an interstate”; and
WHEREAS, Texas has no major north-south interstate west of Interstate 35; and
WHEREAS, the Texas Freight Mobility Plan notes that further investment alone on I-35 will not fix the problem saying, “The state must focus not only on improving existing facilities, but also on developing future freight corridors to move products to markets and exports”; and
WHEREAS, the Texas Freight Mobility Plan goes on to recommend that TxDOT, “give additional consideration to the extension or designation of other interstate routes. Examples include I-27 and upgrades to portions of US Highway 190 to interstate standards”; and
WHEREAS, the proposed extension of Interstate 27 connects major West Texas population and economic centers including Amarillo, Lubbock, Midland-Odessa and San Angelo in addition to numerous smaller communities; and
WHEREAS, the proposed extension of Interstate 27 intersects with Interstate 40, Interstate 20 and Interstate 10; and
WHEREAS, the proposed extension of Interstate 27 will serve three border crossings with Mexico at Del Rio, Eagle Pass and Laredo; and WHEREAS, the proposed extension of Interstate 27 will be a major backbone for the energy industry in Texas serving top oil and gas producing counties as well as the growing wind energy industry; and
WHEREAS, the proposed extension of Interstate 27 will also serve the agriculture industry including many of Texas top counties for the production of cotton, cattle, sheep and goats and other commodities; and
WHEREAS, extending Interstate 27 in Texas is also a cost-effective option. The Texas Department of Transportation’s Initial Assessment Report on the Extension of I-27/Ports to Plains Corridor estimated that it would cost about $7 billion to upgrade the nearly 1,000 miles of the Ports- to-Plains Corridor from the northern tip of Texas to Laredo. To extend Interstate-27 approximately 500 miles from Lubbock to Laredo is projected to cost $5.2 billion. Compare that to the $4.8 billion it cost to rebuild 28 mile section of Interstate 35 east from Interstate 635 to U.S. Highway 380 in Dallas County; and
WHEREAS, an additional cost saving option is associated with the primarily east-west, recently designated, Interstate 14 which includes a proposed segment that overlaps the Ports-to-Plains Corridor between Midland-Odessa and San Angelo, presenting an opportunity for that segment to be jointly designated as Interstate 14 and Interstate 27; and
WHEREAS, a future interstate designation will be a significant new economic development tool for communities along the corridor. Site selectors for manufacturers, warehousing and distribution recommend sites along an interstate highway and travel services businesses such as hotels, truck stops, convenience stores and restaurants, which can have a dramatic impact on small communities, will also expand. This will create much needed new jobs and expanded tax base in rural West Texas; and
WHEREAS, while designation as a future interstate is the first step in a very long process before the completion of an interstate highway, that does not lessen the importance of extending Interstate 27.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE UNDERSIGNED:
Section I. Support the extension of Interstate 27. AGENDA ITEM 9 Reports:
Cities and County TxDOT Citibus LPD Texas Tech University Director’s
MEMO December 12, 2016 To: Laura Norton TxDOT Lubbock Modeling Lead
Through: Casey Duzsa TxDOT TXSWP WA#4 Project Manager
From: Mike Chaney, AICP Alliance Project Manager, Alliance Transportation Group, Inc.
Subject: Lubbock MPO TDM Socioeconomic Control Totals
INTRODUCTION
Key socioeconomic data variables required for the application of the Lubbock Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Travel Demand Model (TDM) include population and employment. Ultimately, these two variables must be incorporated into the Lubbock MPO TDM at the Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) level. In order to develop TAZ level estimates of population and employment, model year county-level control totals must first be developed for these variables. The following sections present available demographic and employment data, identify appropriate data for development of county- level control totals, and provide a recommendation of control totals to be used in the Lubbock MPO TDM. AVAILABLE DEMOGRAPHIC AND EMPLOYMENT DATA
To assist in the development of socioeconomic inputs for the Lubbock MPO TDM, Alliance identified available sources of demographic and employment estimates, projections, and forecasts for the Lubbock region. The selected components of these data are intended to serve as the county-level control totals for the estimation and forecasting of population and employment variables at the TAZ- level. The use of a common source for county-level control totals is meant to ensure consistent model inputs across the region. The use of existing socioeconomic data sources also allows the project to avoid the expense of developing custom socioeconomic forecasts. Demographic Control Totals Demographic data includes population and household information. Alliance identified five statewide data sources to help determine model year demographic control totals:
. 2010 U.S. Census Bureau estimates,
OUR VALUES: People • Accountability • Trust • Honesty OUR MISSION: Through collaboration and leadership, we deliver a safe, reliable, and integrated transportation system that enables the movement of people and goods.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
. Texas Demographic Center (TDC)1,
. TxDOT One-Stop,
. Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. Complete Economic and Demographic Data Source (CEDDS)2, and
. U.S Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS)3
A description of each of these demographic data sources is provided below. Additional information is provided under the Employment Control Totals section.
U.S. Census Bureau
The U.S. Census Bureau’s 2010 decennial census produced county-level population counts for that year, and its Population Estimates Program produced mid-year county-level population estimates for 2010. The 2010 mid-year population estimates are distinct from the 2010 population counts, because U.S. Census population counts are for April 1, 2010, while the mid-year estimates are for July 1, 2010. In rapidly growing counties, this three-month difference can account for thousands of new residents. However, differences were minimal in the Lubbock MPO region, so the decennial population count was used instead of the mid-year estimate. The U.S. Census Bureau also produces updated county-level population estimates. The latest estimates were released in 2016, which provide annual population estimates from 2010 to 2015 based on the 2010 Census.
Texas Demographic Center
The Texas Demographic Center (TDC), previously the Texas State Data Center, is the official representative of the U. S. Census Bureau in the state of Texas. This lead agency is located in the Office of the State Demographer in Austin, Texas. In 2014, the TDC produced population projections for each county in Texas out to the year 2050. The population projections assume a constant rate of geometric change for a given time period, which is then is applied to county-level population estimates from the 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census.
TxDOT One-Stop
TxDOT One-Stop is an online demographic data analysis tool, which was developed by the Institute for Demographic and Socioeconomic Research at the University of Texas - San Antonio in 2007 and distributed in 2008. The tool is designed to provide TxDOT personnel, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), and other transportation professionals a quick and easy way to access and report general demographic information. This tool compiles data from various sources and serves as a starting point for further demographic data analysis. TxDOT One-Stop provides demographic projections from 2010 to 2050 for the following geographic units: county, state, district, Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), and Council of Government (COG).
Woods and Poole CEDDS
Woods and Poole Economics, Inc. produces an annual county-level socioeconomic product called the Complete Economic and Demographic Data Source (CEDDS). The 2016 CEDDS is the most recent
1 The TDC’s URL is http://osd.texas.gov/ 2 More information can be found at http://www.woodsandpoole.com/main.php?cat=state 3 More information can be found at https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/
Lubbock MPO TDM Control Totals 2 December 7, 2016
version of the proprietary dataset, which provides an annual projection of population, households, and employment by industry through the year 2050.
American Community Survey
ACS is an ongoing survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau that provides information on population, households, and employment characteristics at the state- and county-level. Data is available at both 1-year and 5-year levels. ACS 1-year estimates provide the most current data, while 5-year estimates provide the most accurate data—though these estimates are also the least current.
The following tables depict and compare the available demographics data, including Lubbock MPO region population totals from each data source. Table 1 provides the 2000 U.S. Census and the 2010 U.S. Census population counts for Lubbock County.
Table 1: Census Population Comparison County 2000 Census 2010 Census Lubbock 242,628 278,831
Table 2 summarizes the most recent series of population projections from CEDDS, as well as a 2010 comparison between U.S. Census and ACS data. Table 3 shows the population projections of the SDC by migration scenario. The three migration scenarios (0.0, 0.5, and 1.0) show varying growth projections where 0.0 is low growth, 0.5 is medium growth, and 1.0 is high growth. The high growth projections from the TDC closely approximate the projections produced in the 2016 CEDDS.
Table 2: Population Forecast Comparison of Census, ACS and CEDDS Totals 2010 2020 2030 2040 2045 County Census ACS CEDDS CEDDS CEDDS CEDDS CEDDS Lubbock 278,831 280,237 280,207 310,348 338,695 364,062 375,153
Table 3: Lubbock County TDC Population Projections Year 0.0 Migration 0.5 Migration 1.0 Migration 2020 299,140 306,938 313,938
2030 317,791 336,835 352,940 2040 333,269 365,090 390,972 2045 340,576 379,410 410,488
Table 4Error! Not a valid bookmark self-reference. shows 2012 population estimates for the different available data sources. ACS 1-year and CEDDS population estimates closely match U.S. Census estimates, especially when compared to TDC projections. TDC projections were based on different migration rates between 2000 and 2010, therefore its growth is not representative of recent growth trends.
Lubbock MPO TDM Control Totals 3 December 7, 2016
Table 4: 2012 Population Estimates by Data Source County TDC - 0.0 TDC - 0.5 TDC - 1.0 ACS-1YR CEDDS ACS – Census Migration Migration Migration 5YR Estimates Lubbock 282,882 284,190 285,385 285,760 286,096 278,339 286,098
Long-term population projections are expected to be consistent with historical trends. Table 5 depicts the historic population in the area from the U.S. Census population estimates, and Table 6 shows the long term average annual population growth rate calculated using the following equation:
푃 − 푃 푔 = 푒 푠 (푌푒 − 푌푠)푃푠 Where
푔 — the average annual linear growth rate from the start year to the end year; 푃푒 — the population of the end year; 푃푠 — the population of the start year; 푌푒 — the end year of the study period; 푌푠 — the start year of the study period;
Table 5: U.S. Census Population Estimates 1970-2010 County 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Lubbock 179,295 211,651 222,636 242,628 278,831
Table 6: Historical Long Term Annual Growth Rate – Based on Census Estimates County 1970-2000 1980-2010 1970-2010 Lubbock 1.18% 1.06% 1.39%
Table 7 shows the projected population growth rates from TDC and CEDDS. The TDC 0.5 migration scenario has the most consistent growth trend compared to the historical growth rates calculated from the U.S. Census data and CEDDS growth trends.
Table 7: Annual Growth Rate 2010-2040 County TDC 0.0 Migration TDC 0.5 Migration TDC 1.0 Migration 2016 CEDDS
Lubbock 0.65% 1.03% 1.34% 1.00%
Figure 1 depicts 2012 the base year population estimates from all data sources, and Figure 2 presents forecasted populations based on the TDC and the CEDDS data. Although the estimated base year population from TDC 1.0 is lower than CEDDS base year estimates, the TDC 1.0 population
Lubbock MPO TDM Control Totals 4 December 7, 2016
projections are greater than CEDDS population projection for forecast years. Notice the ACS 5-Year data estimates a very lower population compared to other data sources. This is because the ACS 5- Year data estimation is highly impacted by the four years before 2012 in which the population is slow-increasing. Figure 3 compares the TDC projected populations using the 0.5 migration scenario to scenarios with linear annual growth rate of 0.5%, 1%, 2% and 3%. This figure demonstrates that the TDC 0.5 scenario projects population growth roughly equal to a 1% linear annual growth rate.
288,000 286,000 284,000 282,000 280,000 278,000 276,000 274,000 Census ACS 1- ACS 5- CEDDS TDC 0.0 TDC 0.5 TDC 1.0 Year Year
Figure 1 2012 Population Estimates from Various Data Sources
410,000 390,000 370,000 350,000 330,000 310,000 290,000 270,000 2010 2012 2020 2030 2040 2045
CEDDS TDC 0.0 TDC 0.5 TDC 1.0
Figure 2 Forecasted Populations based on CEDDS and TDC
Lubbock MPO TDM Control Totals 5 December 7, 2016
528,000
478,000
428,000
378,000
328,000
278,000 2010 2012 2020 2030 2040 2045
TDC 0.5 0.50% 1% 2% 3%
Figure 3 Forecasted Populations based on TDC 0.5 and Growth Rate of 0.5%, 1%, 2% and 3% Employment Control Totals Employment estimates and/or projections for Lubbock County were gathered from the following sources:
. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS),4
. U.S. Census Bureau’s Longitudinal Employer – Household Dynamics (LEHD) Origin- Destination Employment Statistics (LODES),5
. U.S. Census Bureau’s County Business Pattern data (CBP),6
. U.S Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS),7 and
. Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. Complete Economic and Demographic Data Source (CEDDS).
A description of each of the five sources of employment data is provided below.
Bureau of Labor Statistics
The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), through its Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) data, provides an accurate picture of civilian employment. The QCEW program was known as the ES-202 Program prior to 2003. The QCEW is a federal and state cooperative program, which produces employment and wage data for workers covered by state unemployment insurance laws and Federal workers covered by the Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees Program. Data from the QCEW is arranged by the type of industry according to the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). The QCEW data do not include the self-employed, active military, railroad workers, domestic workers, and other specific categories of employees. The BLS provides
4 More information can be found at http://www.bls.gov/data/#employment 5 More information can be found at http://lehd.ces.census.gov/data/ 6 More information can be found at http://www.census.gov/econ/cbp/index.html 7 More information can be found at https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/
Lubbock MPO TDM Control Totals 6 December 7, 2016
full availability for 2012, which is the Lubbock MPO TDM base year. However, the BLS does not prepare regional, state, or sub-state projections.
LEHD Origin – Destination Employment Statistics
LEHD Origin – Destination Employment Statistics (LODES) data corresponds to 2010 census blocks and gives spatial, economic, and demographic information related to workplaces and home-to-work flows. LODES data is comprised of state unemployment insurance (UI) programs, which were shared with the Census Bureau as part of the Local Employment Dynamics (LED) Partnership. The data does not include military, self-employed workers, informally employed persons, and several other specific classes of workers. As of May 2012, the LODES data includes Federal employment for 2010 and later; however, some specific departments and agencies are not included due to security concerns and differences in administrative processing.
County Business Patterns
The U.S. Census Bureau produces employment estimates by industry groups through its County Business Patterns (CBP) program. CBP data only provides information on past years and does not provide employment projections. The CBP is produced annually and uses the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) to classify the employment.
Employment data collected through the QCEW program differ from employment data published in the Census Bureau’s CBP in the following ways:
. QCEW data are published each quarter, with a 6-month lag. CBP data are published annually, with approximately an 18-month lag.
. QCEW data include crop and animal production; the U.S. Postal Service; pension, health, welfare, and vacation funds; trusts, estates, and agency accounts; private households; and public administration. These sources of data are excluded from CBP.
. QCEW data include most government employees but not active military. Most of these workers are excluded from CBP employment.8
American Community Survey
ACS is an ongoing survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau that provides information on social, economic, housing, and demographic characteristics at the state- and county- level. Data is combined into 5-Year Data Profiles that allow users to quickly see growth trends between various years, such as 2008-2012. ACS employment is separated by industry.
Woods and Poole CEDDS
Woods and Poole Economics, Inc.’s 2016 CEDDS data differ from the other sources listed here in that Woods and Poole attempts to account for all employment, including private household employees. CEDDS employment estimates are originally derived from U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) county and state employment estimates. The BEA state and county employment totals, and subsequently the CEDDS data, are generally higher than the BLS estimates because farm workers, active military, the self-employed, household employees, and other miscellaneous workers (e.g. railroad workers) are not included in BLS estimates. The exclusion of the self-employed and
8http://www.bls.gov/cew/cewbultn11.htm
Lubbock MPO TDM Control Totals 7 December 7, 2016
active military personnel account for the most significant differences between CEDDS data and BLS data9.
Since the CEDDS economic data includes population and household forecasts, the data is useful for both economic and population forecasts. However, because the CEDDS data is proprietary, growth rates and/or population to employment ratios (P/E ratios) developed from the data should be used instead of the actual data.
Table 8 and Table 9 below compare the five sources of employment data in which a common geography and time frame are available. The Lubbock MPO TDM base year is 2012, but the 2010 comparison provides a useful reference to evaluate the different data sources trends over a short amount of time.
Table 8: Employment Comparison for Year 2010 County CBP BLS LODES ACS CEDDS Lubbock 103,336 122,250 128,862 132,826 165,727
Table 9: Employment Comparison for Year 2012 County CBP BLS LODES ACS CEDDS Lubbock 105,683 125,800 132,372 137,251 171,787
Table 10 lists employment forecasts by CEDDS for the years 2010, 2012, 2020, 2030, and 2040 for Lubbock County. Figure 4 presents the average annual population growth rate based on CEDDS for different time periods.
Table 10: Employment Forecast by CEDDS County 2010 2012 2020 2030 2040 2045 Lubbock 165,727 171,787 197,493 224,709 248,324 259,263
9 2016 CEDDS Technical Documentation, http://www.woodsandpoole.com/main.php?cat=country#cedds
Lubbock MPO TDM Control Totals 8 December 7, 2016
2.00% 1.83% 1.87% 1.80% 1.60% 1.38% 1.40% 1.20% 1.05% 0.88% 1.00% 0.80% 0.60% 0.40% 0.20% 0.00% 2010-2012 2012-2020 2020-2030 2030-2040 2040-2045
Figure 4 Average Annual Employment Growth Rate Based on CEDDS
RECOMMENDATION
Lubbock MPO TDM Control Totals 9 December 7, 2016 DocuSign Envelope ID: F6D1B8A3-C57C-4BB4-9452-F88C7CC790D7
PS Contract No. 4978 Contract No. 50-6IDP5005 Work Authorization No. 4 PS No. 12747 WORK AUTHORIZATION NO. 4 CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES
THIS WORK AUTHORIZATION is made pursuant to the terms and conditions of Article 5 of Engineering Contract No. 50-6IDP5005 (the Contract) entered into by and between the State of Texas, acting by and through the Texas Department of Transportation (the State) and Alliance Transportation Group, Inc. (the Engineer).
PART I. The Engineer will perform engineering services generally described as: Statewide planning activities, data analysis and travel demand modeling in support of the ongoing statewide transportation planning and programming activities undertaken by TxDOT personnel to meet federally-mandated, performance-based planning goals, TxDOT Strategic Plan goals, and objectives in the Texas Transportation Plan 2040 in accordance with the project description attached hereto and made a part of this Work Authorization. The responsibilities of the State and the Engineer as well as the work schedule are further detailed in exhibits A, B and C which are attached hereto and made a part of the Work Authorization.
PART II. The maximum amount payable under this Work Authorization is $351,088.83 including a fixed fee of $31,163.29 and the method of payment is Cost Plus Fixed Fee as set forth in Attachment E of the Contract. This amount is based upon fees set forth in Attachment E, Fee Schedule, of the Contract and the Engineer’s estimated Work Authorization costs included in Exhibit D, Fee Schedule, which is attached and made a part of this Work Authorization.
PART III. Payment to the Engineer for the services established under this Work Authorization shall be made in accordance with Articles 3 thru 5 of the contract, and Attachment A, Article 1.
PART IV. This Work Authorization shall become effective on the date of final acceptance of the parties hereto and shall terminate on August 31, 2017, unless extended by a supplemental Work Authorization as provided in Attachment A, Article 1.
The maximum contract time is the time needed to complete all work authorizations that will be issued in the first two years of the contract. All work authorizations must be issued within the initial two-year period, starting from the contract execution date.
PART V. This Work Authorization does not waive the parties' responsibilities and obligations provided under the Contract.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Work Authorization is executed in duplicate counterparts and hereby accepted and acknowledged below.
THE ENGINEER THE STATE OF TEXAS
______(Signature) Jack Foster, (Signature) P.E. ______Gayle L. Heath______(Printed Name) (Printed Name) ______Chief Executive Officer______Deputy Director TPP (Title) (Title) 11/15/2016 11/15/2016______(Date) (Date)
LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit A Services to be provided by the State Exhibit B Services to be provided by the Engineer Exhibit C Work Schedule Exhibit D Fee Schedule/Budget Exhibit H-2 Subprovider Monitoring System Commitment Agreement
Engineering-Engineering_IndefDelWA.doc Page 1 of 1 Rev. 07/23/2014 DocuSign Envelope ID: F6D1B8A3-C57C-4BB4-9452-F88C7CC790D7
PS Contract No. 4978 Contract No. 50-6IDP5005 Work Authorization No. 4 PS No. 12747 Exhibit A SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY THE STATE
1. The State will furnish all available mapping, studies, reports, plans, drawings, and other documents which are applicable as background information to be used in performance of this work authorization. 2. The State will supply copies of the most current version of any travel demand models (TDM) for the study area including networks, TAZ layers, available input data and working components. 3. The State will supply documentation from the most recently completed household travel survey, work place surveys, commercial vehicle surveys and other survey data for the study area as appropriate. 4. The State will supply trip rates, trip lengths and a regional distribution of households by household size and income estimated from travel surveys previously conducted in Lubbock; 5. The State will supply available State special generator surveys; 6. The State will supply historic traffic counts and projected traffic volumes available to supplement traffic data and projections to be performed by the Engineer. 7. The State will supply project data from DCIS. 8. The State will supply RHINO data base and projected traffic volumes. 9. The State will provide a Technical Working Group to provide input and conduct reviews of applicable deliverables under this study. 10. The State will provide timely reviews and approvals of working documents, reports, drawings, population and economic forecasts, travel demand forecasts, etc. 11. The State will provide functioning example of the State’s TexPACK TDM interface for an example MPO area along with a User’s Manual and documentation of the underlying models; 12. The State will provide GISDK scripts and all required inputs and outputs for the selected example implementation of the TexPACK TDM interface that is to serve as the starting point for the TDM; 13. The State will provide TexPACK Operators Manual in MS word format; 14. The State will provide TripCAL5 and ATOM2 executables for use with TexPACK; 15. The State will provide updated license agreements for TripCAL5 and ATOM2; 16. The State will provide TripCAL5 and ATOM2 Users Manuals; 17. The State will provide Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) vehicle miles traveled (VMT) data for the TDM base year segmented by truck and passenger vehicles; 18. The State will provide presentation templates for use in developing MPO presentations; and 19. The State will provide a report template for use with model documentation.
Page 1 of 1 EXHIBIT A
DocuSign Envelope ID: F6D1B8A3-C57C-4BB4-9452-F88C7CC790D7
PS Contract No. 4978 Contract No. 50-6IDP5005 Work Authorization No. 4 PS No. 12747 EXHIBIT B SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY THE ENGINEER
The work to be performed by the Engineer shall consist of project administration, project meetings, data review, data analysis, and regional travel demand model development in support of statewide and regional transportation plans, programs, and planning studies within the State of Texas. To carry out these activities the Engineer shall complete the following tasks:
Task A: PROJECT MANAGEMENT The Engineer shall provide project administration and oversight of identified tasks and coordinate all technical issues with the State.
A.1 Project Meetings The Engineer shall maintain ongoing communication and coordination with the State and with subcontractors regarding WA scope, objectives and timeline including maintenance of schedule. Communications shall be carried out in accordance with the overall Communication Management Plan (CMP). The Engineer shall prepare, schedule, conduct and document meetings throughout the course of the work authorization. The Engineer shall plan and carry out these meetings, with approval from the State, to promote clear communication and keep all participants to the study, including the State and any technical committees, well informed of the progression of project objectives. Meetings shall include:
A.1.1 Kick-off Meeting – The Engineer shall prepare and conduct one (1) kick-off meeting with the State Project Manager (State PM) to confirm the schedule and set dates for key milestones within two weeks of the work authorization execution.
A.1.2 Project Meetings – The Engineer shall prepare and conduct up to four (4) quarterly project meetings to maintain communication and coordination with the State regarding WA scope, objectives and timeline, including maintenance of schedule. Meetings shall be carried out and documented in accordance with the overall Communication Management Plan.
Deliverables for A.1 • Meeting Minutes of Kick-off meeting submitted electronically to the State within seven (7) calendar days of the meeting. • Meeting Minutes of each Project meeting submitted electronically to the State within seven (7) calendar days of the meeting.
A.2 Quality Assurance The Engineer shall review all work to ensure it is in accordance with State requirements, that it meets project objectives, and is completed in a timely and efficient manner.
Deliverables for A.2 • Quality Assurance Review – a copy of the quality control review of major work products submitted electronically.
Page 1 of 15 EXHIBIT B DocuSign Envelope ID: F6D1B8A3-C57C-4BB4-9452-F88C7CC790D7
PS Contract No. 4978 Contract No. 50-6IDP5005 Work Authorization No. 4 PS No. 12747 A.3 Monthly Progress Reports and Invoicing A.3.1 Progress Reports – The Engineer shall submit a written progress report to the State indicating the actual work accomplished during the month, scheduled work to be accomplished for that month, and the estimated work to be accomplished for the following month.
A.3.2 Invoices – The Engineer shall prepare and submit to the State an invoice consolidating all work performed by the Engineer and its subcontractors. The Engineer shall invoice in accordance with the rate schedule and function codes authorized in the work authorization and any associated supplemental to the work authorization.
Deliverables for A.3 • Electronic Monthly Progress Reports throughout the duration of the project (up to 12 progress reports). • Electronic Monthly Consolidated Invoices covering all labor, overhead, fee and reimbursable expenses (up to 12 invoices).
TASK B: DEVELOPMENT OF PLANS OR STUDIES TOSUPPORT STATEWIDE LONG- RANGE TRANSPORTATION AND FREIGHT PLANS – N/A
Task C: TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION The Engineer shall develop, update and calibrate regional, urbanized area travel demand models used for forecasting travel demands and assessing performance measures.
C.1 Travel Demand Model Technical Working Group and Stakeholder Engagement The coordination activities being carried out under this subtask are designed to ensure that the Lubbock Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) and their planning partners are fully aware of and engaged in the development and analysis of model input data and other components and gain an understanding of the value of the Lubbock MPO Travel Demand Model (TDM) to their planning process and their role in supporting model application and maintenance.
C.1.1 Technical Working Group Meetings – The Engineer shall coordinate a series of two (2) Technical Working Group (TWG) meetings to coordinate the input data development and analysis for the Lubbock MPO TDM. The TWG shall include Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI), the State, a representative of the State demographer’s office and other key technical resources identified by the State through the State PM. The TWG shall ensure that the work being performed takes maximum advantage of previous work through the use of existing model products and components and is consistent with and conforms to the specifications of the State’s standard TexPack travel demand model interface. C.1.2 Travel Demand Model Stakeholder Workshops – The Engineer shall conduct up to four (4) TDM stakeholder workshops with the State, the MPO and selected technical resources and planning partners. The workshop shall be
Page 2 of 15 EXHIBIT B DocuSign Envelope ID: F6D1B8A3-C57C-4BB4-9452-F88C7CC790D7
PS Contract No. 4978 Contract No. 50-6IDP5005 Work Authorization No. 4 PS No. 12747 conducted in the Lubbock region and shall be designed to promote MPO understanding of the data development and analysis process and facilitate collaborative discussion and consensus decision making on MPO objectives for the TDM, to include collaboration on data development and TDM application and maintenance.
Deliverables for C.1 • TWG meeting summary notes submitted electronically to the State within seven (7) calendar days of the meeting. • Stakeholder Workshop summary notes submitted electronically to the State within seven (7) calendar days of the meeting. • Timeline with the State standard milestones for demographic and model development submitted electronically 14 days after the work begins.
C.2 Travel Demand Model (TDM) Data Development and Maintenance The Engineer shall coordinate with the State staff to obtain existing, available data and data analysis resources that are appropriate and relevant data resources for this study.
C.2.1 Assemble and Format Input and Benchmark Data – The Engineer shall assemble and format datasets for development of data inputs and data analysis. The Engineer shall obtain existing, available data from the State, State planning partners and public domain sources and assemble into usable file structures and format for use in this study, to include: • Trip rates, trip lengths and a regional distribution of households by household size and income estimated from travel surveys previously conducted in Lubbock; • Available State special generator surveys; • US 2010 Census data and American Community Survey (ACS) data; • Available Maps, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) layers and data useful in developing network geography; • The State’s available traffic counts; • Available point level employment data; • Available Travel time data; • Available origin-destination information at major external stations; • Current Metropolitan Transportation Plan, recent updates, and related GIS layers; • Previous model datasets; • Available Congestion Management Program (CMP); • Annual transit ridership by route; • Recent updates to the Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) and related GIS layers; • Functioning example of the State’s TexPACK TDM interface for an example MPO area along with a User’s Manual and documentation of the underlying models;
Page 3 of 15 EXHIBIT B DocuSign Envelope ID: F6D1B8A3-C57C-4BB4-9452-F88C7CC790D7
PS Contract No. 4978 Contract No. 50-6IDP5005 Work Authorization No. 4 PS No. 12747 • GISDK scripts and all required inputs and outputs for the selected example implementation of the TexPACK TDM interface that is to serve as the starting point for the TDM; • TexPACK Operators Manual in MS word format; • TripCAL5 and ATOM2 executables for use with TexPACK; • Updated license agreement for TripCAL5 and ATOM2; • TripCAL5 and ATOM2 Users Manuals; • Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) vehicle miles traveled (VMT) data for the TDM base year segmented by truck and passenger vehicles; • Presentation templates for use in developing MPO presentations; and • Report template for use with model documentation.
C.2.2 Assemble Calibration Data – The Engineer shall assemble data for TDM calibration and implementation. The Engineer shall obtain existing, available data from the State and assembled for use in this study, to include: • Lubbock 2005 Household Travel Survey Report; • Lubbock 2009 Workplace Survey Report; • Lubbock 2004 Commercial Vehicle Survey Report; and • Lubbock 2005 External Travel Survey Report.
Deliverables for C.2 • Data files (e.g., census, employment, etc.) submitted as TransCAD files 20 days after the work begins. • Travel survey reports submitted as TransCAD files 20 days after the work begins.
C.3 Develop Base Year and Forecast Year Demographic and Socioeconomic Data The services being carried out under this subtask are being provided to complete a demographic update for the Lubbock study area. Activities being performed by the Engineer shall include the standard tasks recommended by the State.
C.3.1 Develop Base Year and Preliminary Forecast Year Control Totals – The Engineer shall review 2012 base year estimates and 2017 and 2045 forecast year control totals for population, number of households, average households size, median household income (in base year dollars), total employment, and employment by type (basic, retail, service, and education) for each county and the TDM area. The Engineer shall prepare a brief technical memo describing the review of and recommendations for use of the base year and forecast year estimates of population, number of households, average household size, median household income, and basic, retail, service, and total employment. This memo shall include sufficient analysis of historic data and anticipated trends to enable the MPO to assess the reasonableness of the base and forecast year control totals.
Page 4 of 15 EXHIBIT B DocuSign Envelope ID: F6D1B8A3-C57C-4BB4-9452-F88C7CC790D7
PS Contract No. 4978 Contract No. 50-6IDP5005 Work Authorization No. 4 PS No. 12747 C.3.2 Develop Base Year Traffic Analysis Zone Data – The Engineer shall develop 2012 base year estimates for population, number of households, average household size, median household income (in base year dollars), employment by type (basic, retail, service, and education), total employment, and special generator information for each traffic analysis zone (TAZ). Additionally, in the data set, the Engineer shall identify available major group quarters data (type and population) for each traffic analysis zone. The group quarters data shall be input into the data file for that zone and identified in the comment section of the data file. All base year TAZ data shall be consistent with the control total data previously developed.
The State shall provide to the Engineer available point level employment data and shall be utilized in the development of the milestone year. The point level employment data file provided shall have the employment type already identified for each establishment and shall be consistent with the North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes.
C.3.3 Develop Forecast Year Socioeconomic Data – Based on GIS table top analysis and input from the MPO and planning partners combined with additional research from available data resources, the Engineer shall develop 2017 and 2045 forecast year estimates for population, number of households, average household size, median household income (in base year dollars), employment by type (basic, retail, service, and education), and total employment for each TAZ. The TAZ level socioeconomic data shall be consistent with the agreed upon forecast year control.
C.3.4 Develop Special Generators – The Engineer shall identify the candidate special generators for the study area and develop required special generator information for the base year and the 2017 and 2045 forecast years using the results of the States Special Generator Survey (SGS) combined with input from the MPO. Data developed for each special generator shall vary by type of generator but shall be based upon and conform to State standard data requirements for trip generation.
C.3.5 Format Demographic and Socioeconomic Data – The Engineer shall format the final 2012 base year along with the 2017 and 2045 forecast year demographic information to the format required for the TexPACK interface and associated TripCAL5 software. Special generators identified shall also be formatted for inclusion in the TexPACK format and associated TrilCal5 trip generation model. C.3.6 Develop Demographic and Socioeconomic Data Methodology Report – The Engineer shall develop a technical memorandum on the data sources, input data, assumptions, methodology and outcomes of the TDM demographic and socioeconomic data development. The memorandum shall include text, tables and graphic exhibits describing the steps in the processes, summary statistics on
Page 5 of 15 EXHIBIT B DocuSign Envelope ID: F6D1B8A3-C57C-4BB4-9452-F88C7CC790D7
PS Contract No. 4978 Contract No. 50-6IDP5005 Work Authorization No. 4 PS No. 12747 the analysis performed and a synopsis of results including any challenges encountered and how these challenges were resolved. Deliverables for C.3 • Base Year and Preliminary Forecast Year Control Totals for input into the socioeconomic process technical memorandum submitted electronically 45 days after the work begins. • A completed Excel file of base and forecast year TAZ based population, households, group quarters population, median household income, total employment, basic employment, retail employment, service employment, education employment submitted electronically 45 days after the work begins. • An inventory of Special Generators assigned to the appropriate TAZ along with a database of required special generator data attributes for use in calculating special generator productions and attractions technical memorandum submitted electronically 115 days after the work begins. • Draft TDM socioeconomic data in TexPACK format that reflects edits required to validate the TDM submitted 30 days after the work begins. • Final TDM socioeconomic data in TexPACK format submitted 45 days after the work begins. • A demographic and socioeconomic data development methodology report describing the data, data sources, assumptions, methodology and outcomes of the demographic and socioeconomic data development submitted 45 days after the work begins. • Draft technical memorandum to the State and the MPO for review and feedback in accordance with the review milestones and timeline agreed to in the PMP submitted electronically 30 days after the work begins. • Final demographic and socioeconomic data development technical memorandum submitted electronically 45 days after the work begins.
C.4 Estimate External Trips The Engineer shall develop an update of the 2012 base year, 2017 and 2045 external trips (trips with at least one end outside of the Lubbock MPO TDM area) for input to the TDM with the assistance of the 2006 base year external trips tables provided by the State, growth rates developed from historic count and socioeconomic information, and local knowledge.
C.4.1 Estimate Base Year External Trips – The Engineer shall use the State’s available traffic counts and other available traffic counts performed by the MPO or study area planning partners to identify estimated 2012 base year volumes at external station locations. Using these data as a starting point, the Engineer shall use the 2006 base year external trips tables provided by the state combined with ACS data, the Texas Statewide Analysis Model (SAM-V3) and its statewide trip tables. The Engineer shall develop updated 2012 base year External to External and External to Local trip tables for use in application of the base year model. The Engineer shall populate the selected external stations with directional vehicle
Page 6 of 15 EXHIBIT B DocuSign Envelope ID: F6D1B8A3-C57C-4BB4-9452-F88C7CC790D7
PS Contract No. 4978 Contract No. 50-6IDP5005 Work Authorization No. 4 PS No. 12747 trip volume information for the 2012 base year. The Engineer shall format the external station trip information to the requirements of the TDM interface. C.4.2 Estimate Forecast Year External Trips – The Engineer shall use the 2012 base year external trips tables developed in the previous subtask, growth rates developed from historic count and socioeconomic information, combined with SAM-V3 forecast year trips tables and local knowledge, to estimate forecast year trip patterns between the complete set of external stations at the TDM boundary for all regionally significant roadways carrying traffic into and out of the study area. The Engineer shall populate the selected external stations with directional vehicle trip volume information for the forecast year. The Engineer shall format the external station trip information to the requirements of the TDM interface.
Deliverables for C.4 • Summary of draft base year auto and commercial external station trips for use in Model development, in Excel format submitted electronically 30 days after the work begins. • Summary of final base year auto and commercial external station trips for use in Model development, in Excel format submitted electronically 30 days after the work begins. • Summary of draft auto and commercial forecast year external station trips for use in Model development, in Excel format submitted electronically 30 days after the work begins. • Summary of final auto and commercial forecast year external station trips for use in Model development, in Excel format submitted electronically 30 days after the work begins.
C.5 Review and Finalize Roadway Network Geography and Attributes The work to be carried out under this subtask consists of reviewing and finalizing the full inventory of roadway network geography and attributes necessary to accurately represent the regional highway system for the base year and Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) horizon year. A 2006 base year network was developed by the State for the existing TDM and will serve as a starting point for developing updated base and future year networks.
C.5.1 Develop the Base Year Roadway Network – The Engineer shall use the 2006 roadway network, available maps, GIS layers, as well as State and MPO plans and program documents to develop a new 2012 base year highway network depicting the alignment and geometry of collector streets or higher in sufficient detail to accurately represent the transportation system and fully validate the TDM. The Engineer shall confirm that all link attribute fields needed to perform base year SKIMS (matrices of TAZ to TAZ travel time), traffic assignments and to support TDM validation are fully populated, are accurate and are in the correct data format. C.5.2 Develop Forecast Year Roadway Networks – The Engineer shall use the 2012 base year roadway network and available updates to the MPO MTP and TIP to ensure the final TDM network is as up-to-date as possible. The Engineer shall confirm that all link attribute fields needed to develop the 2017 and 2045
Page 7 of 15 EXHIBIT B DocuSign Envelope ID: F6D1B8A3-C57C-4BB4-9452-F88C7CC790D7
PS Contract No. 4978 Contract No. 50-6IDP5005 Work Authorization No. 4 PS No. 12747 forecast year highway networks depicting the alignment and geometry of collector streets or higher in sufficient detail to accurately represent the future year transportation system. The Engineer shall confirm that all link attribute fields needed to perform base year SKIMS (matrices of TAZ to TAZ travel time), traffic assignments and to support scenario analysis are fully populated, are accurate and are in the correct data format specified.
All network coding and attribute development shall be performed in TransCAD format. During development of the base year highway network, the Engineer shall adhere to and comply with established and published State coding conventions and protocols except as mutually agreed upon.
Deliverables for C.5 • Draft TDM base year and forecast year roadway networks of regionally significant roadways by functional class in TransCAD format submitted electronically 21 days after the work begins. • Final TDM base year and forecast year roadway networks of regionally significant roadways by functional class in TransCAD format submitted electronically 31 days after the work begins.
C.6 Develop Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) Geography The work to be carried out under this subtask consists of developing traffic analysis zone geography and attributes to support development of the TDM.
C.6.1 Develop Traffic Analysis Zone Geography – The Engineer shall develop a TAZ geography in TransCAD format that is consistent in scale and resolution to the base year network but is also sensitive to potential TAZ splits needed to adequately depict future growth as well as to support future milestone year and horizon year network development.
The Engineer shall use available maps, GIS layers and data resources to develop a TAZ geography depicting the boundaries and configuration of TAZs in sufficient detail to adequately interpret the interaction of area land uses and the transportation system network. The TAZ geography shall conform to and respect US 2010 Census block boundaries to the extent feasible for the study area.
C.6.2 Traffic Analysis Zone Geography Review and Revision – The Engineer shall provide the draft TAZ geography to the State and MPO for review. The TAZ geography shall be transmitted to the State as an electronic TAZ layer in TransCAD format along with a TransCAD bin file of TAZ attribute fields and hard copy pdf format. Based upon review comments and feedback from the State and MPO, the Engineer shall provide corrections, edits and amendments to the draft TAZ geography to produce a final base year TAZ geographic layer in TransCAD format for use in the TDM development and implementation.
The Engineer shall adhere to and comply with established and published State conventions and protocols related to TAZ size, configuration, and attributes
Page 8 of 15 EXHIBIT B DocuSign Envelope ID: F6D1B8A3-C57C-4BB4-9452-F88C7CC790D7
PS Contract No. 4978 Contract No. 50-6IDP5005 Work Authorization No. 4 PS No. 12747 naming except as mutually agreed upon. All TAZ geography development shall be performed in TransCAD format.
C.6.3 Centroid Connectors and External Stations – The Engineer shall develop and code preliminary centroid connectors to integrate the TAZ geography with the Base year roadway network once the roadway network and TAZ geography have been finalized. Centroid connectors shall remain in draft form until adjusted during the validation task of the TDM.
C.6.4 Traffic Analysis Zone Development Technical Memorandum – The Engineer shall prepare a technical memorandum describing the development of the TAZ geography and attributes, the methodology used, any challenges encountered and how they were addressed. The technical memorandum shall provide documentation and annotations as to the sources used in compiling the TAZ geography.
Deliverables for C.6 • Draft TDM TAZ geography layer in TransCAD format submitted electronically 6 days after work begins. • Final TDM TAZ geography layer in TransCAD format submitted electronically 10 days after work begins. • Draft Centroid Connectors and External Stations for use in Model development, calibration and validation in TransCAD format submitted electronically 10 days after the work begins. • TAZ geography development technical memorandum documenting data sources, methodology and outcomes of the TAZ development process submitted electronically 10 days after work begins.
C.7 Incorporate TDM Inputs into TexPACK Interface and Test The services being carried out under this subtask shall develop travel models to customize the TexPACK TDM interface to the region and allow for stream lined operation by MPO staff. The Engineer shall perform all tasks necessary to develop a three-step TDM. To accomplish this task, the Engineer shall adapt the TexPACK TDM interface developed by the State for use as the regions TDM.
The Engineer shall modify and adapt the TexPACK scripts and required input files to the specific geographic parameters, and model years necessary to execute a modified version of TexPACK for the Lubbock MPO TDM. Input files include the roadway network, TAZ layer, socioeconomic data, external trip files, trip rates, and trip lengths.
The Engineer shall complete each of the following sub-subtasks, designed to implement and test the TDM. The execution of a complete model run can double both as functional testing that ensures that the system provides the required features to users and as integration testing that ensures the functionality of the TDM components.
C.7.1 Implement Trip Generation Model – The Engineer shall implement the trip generation TDM step, within the TexPACK interface framework, based on the trip
Page 9 of 15 EXHIBIT B DocuSign Envelope ID: F6D1B8A3-C57C-4BB4-9452-F88C7CC790D7
PS Contract No. 4978 Contract No. 50-6IDP5005 Work Authorization No. 4 PS No. 12747 rates previously estimated by the State with the household travel survey (HHTS) and the workplace survey (WPS). Trip generation shall produce motorized vehicle trip productions and attractions at the TAZ level.
The Engineer shall structure the TDM to rely on the socioeconomic data as the basis of the Trip Generation TDM step.
The Engineer shall calibrate the trip generations model against known data sources. These sources shall include the National Cooperative Highway Research Report 365 (NCHRP 365), the National Household Transportation Survey (NHTS), the State issued guidelines and other accepted sources.
C.7.2 Implement Trip Distribution Model – The Engineer shall implement the trip distribution TDM step, within the TxPACK interface framework, utilizing trip lengths and friction factors previously estimated by the State with the HHTS and WPS. Trip distribution shall link the zonal level productions and attractions developed in trip generation using a gravity model.
The Engineer shall identify zone-to-zone travel impedance such as travel time, distance and cost to develop a travel impedance matrix (Skims) using the network attributes developed by the state, and refined in the network task. This identification of zone-to-zone travel impendence shall be used to measure the expenditure of effort required to travel among the zones and to define the most likely paths for this travel. The Engineer shall use the trip lengths and friction factors estimated from the Household travel survey to estimate the trip distribution model by trip purpose.
The Engineer shall calibrate the trip distribution model by the use of friction factors to match the trip length distribution produced by the model to average trip lengths and trip length frequency distributions derived from the available survey data.
C.7.3 Implement Truck/Commercial Vehicle Components – The Engineer shall incorporate truck/commercial vehicle trip purposes into the specific models that comprise the TDM passenger trip components (generation, distribution, traffic assignment) with the goal of increasing the accuracy of commercial vehicle (trucks) represented in the TDM. Commercial vehicle trips are trips served by light duty trucks (two axle, four tire). These trips shall be accounted for in order to validate the model, since they cannot be identified by automatic vehicle classification counts. The Engineer shall implement the trip generation TDM step utilizing truck/commercial vehicle trip rates previously estimated by the State with the commercial vehicle survey along with available supporting information on truck trips and facilities.
C.7.4 Implement Traffic Assignment Model – The Engineer shall implement a GISDK script based traffic assignment procedure to accurately reflect routing decision for both passenger vehicles and trucks. The assignment procedure shall
Page 10 of 15 EXHIBIT B DocuSign Envelope ID: F6D1B8A3-C57C-4BB4-9452-F88C7CC790D7
PS Contract No. 4978 Contract No. 50-6IDP5005 Work Authorization No. 4 PS No. 12747 use a capacity-restrained equilibrium model that employs the capability of the TransCAD as implemented in TexPack.
The Engineer shall document parameters required for the assignment model and inputs to the traffic assignment procedure.
C.7.5 Incorporate Forecasts and Test Scenarios – The Engineer shall incorporate the 2017 and 2045 forecast scenarios into the TexPack interface, test the implementation, and document its functionality.
C.7.5.1 Incorporate Forecasts into Interface – The Engineer shall incorporate the 2017 and 2045 socioeconomic data and the 2040 external trip information into the Lubbock MPO TDM TexPack interface.
C.7.5.2 Run Forecast Year TDM Model and Confirm Results – In order to document the outcomes of the 2017 and 2045 TDM and provide the comparative metrics and statistics that allow the State and the MPO to determine that the TDM is providing consistent results, the Engineer shall run a set of comparative tests to insure the TDM provides results that are reproducible. The results shall be archived and documented. The documentation shall include step-by-step instruction to repeat the exercise.
C.7.5.3 Run Scenarios to Stress Test the TDM – In order to ensure that the TDM is capable of successfully performing the required range of rigorous alternative analyses performed when the TDM is used for various projects, corridor or policy analyses, the Engineer shall conduct runs designed to represent two possible analyses that the State or the MPOs may be asked to perform as stress tests. These tests shall include full execution of all models that comprise the TDM and shall include network modifications designed to represent a new roadway and the modification of demographics. The results shall be archived and documented. The documentation shall include step-by-step instruction to repeat the exercise.
Deliverables for C.7 • Draft TDM trip generation setup files in TexPACK format that reflect edits required to validate the TDM submitted electronically 25 days after the work begins. • Final TDM trip generation setup files in TexPACK format submitted electronically 25 days after the work begins. • Draft TDM trip distribution setup files in TexPACK format that reflect edits required to validate the TDM. • Final TDM trip distribution setup files in TexPACK format submitted electronically 25 days after the work begins. • Draft technical memorandum documenting each of the components of the model update / development assumptions, methodology and outcomes including results
Page 11 of 15 EXHIBIT B DocuSign Envelope ID: F6D1B8A3-C57C-4BB4-9452-F88C7CC790D7
PS Contract No. 4978 Contract No. 50-6IDP5005 Work Authorization No. 4 PS No. 12747 of testing, validation and quality assurance analysis submitted electronically 20 days after the work begins. • Final technical memorandum documenting each of the components of the model update / development assumptions, methodology and outcomes including results of testing, validation and quality assurance submitted electronically 25 days after the work begins. • After model validation the Engineer shall package and deliver TDM including all files required to run the TDM for each of its required scenario years. The delivered model shall reflect the efforts of tasks included in this work authorization submitted electronically 25 days after the work begins.
C.8 Model Validation The objective of this subtask is to ensure the validity of each major model component (i.e. trip generation, trip distribution, mode share, and traffic assignment).
C.8.1 Dynamic Validation – The Engineer shall perform dynamic validation to test the sensitivity and reasonableness of travel demand models and differs from static validation which focuses on statistically testing how well travel demand models replicate existing travel conditions. Dynamic validation involves modifying input parameters and examining the resulting impact for reasonableness in terms of expected direction and magnitude of the changes. The Engineer shall test input variables and analyze the subsequent impacts, as follows:
• First, the Engineer shall test the land use within the model. The number of households in a single TAZ shall be modified with increasing and decreasing magnitude. Key attributes to be analyzed following the model run include the number of vehicle trips, vehicle trips per household, VMT, and VMT per household.
• Next, the Engineer shall employ in a single TAZ to be modified with increasing and decreasing magnitude. The same attributes shall be analyzed as with the household modification. The analysis of the household and employment modifications shall ensure that the land use changes result in appropriate travel patterns within the network.
• Lastly, the Engineer shall test the roadway network. The number of lanes on roadway corridors within different area types shall be adjusted to different degrees. The Engineer shall verify suburban or rural area and urban area roadway analysis that the travel changes on the roadway network are distinguished for different area types expected for the network changes made.
C.8.2 TDM Validation - The Engineer shall validate the model and perform appropriate validation checks and document at each step of TDM development. Validation criteria shall be defined based on best practices and the expertise of the Engineer and may include overall trip rates within +/- 10 percent of surveyed
Page 12 of 15 EXHIBIT B DocuSign Envelope ID: F6D1B8A3-C57C-4BB4-9452-F88C7CC790D7
PS Contract No. 4978 Contract No. 50-6IDP5005 Work Authorization No. 4 PS No. 12747 data, trip lengths within +/- 15 percent of the surveyed average trip lengths and comparisons to HPMS VMT data.
The Engineer shall assess the validity of each major model component by calculating the statistics necessary to populate a battery of comparative tests and measures developed in conjunction with the state.
To assess the quality of Trip Generation, Trip Distribution and Mode share components, the Engineer shall make use of TransCAD’s features and available data sets, such as the NHTS and census transportation planning products, to calculate comparative measures, including trip production and attraction rates by trip purpose and household characteristics, average trip length by purpose, trip length frequency distribution, and auto occupancy rates. The Engineer shall compare the results of the base year TDM passenger models to the statistical parameters for each measure to demonstrate the accuracy and validity of the model results.
The Engineer shall compare passenger volumes, truck volumes, and total volume to available traffic counts. Volumes and assigned VMT (volumes multiplied by link length) shall be compared to observed (counts) volumes and counted VMT by roadway type, area type, screen line, validation district, and volume range.
The Engineer shall use sources for standards and benchmarks that include the following:
• Observed data – model statistics shall be compared to available travel survey data collected in Arkansas, Census American Community Survey, NHTS, and ground counts; and • Standards/guidelines – published validation standards from NCHRP, Federal Highway Administration, the State, and other states shall be referenced as a means of assessing model accuracy (e.g., root mean square error by volume group, volume-over-count ratio by screenline, etc.).
Deliverable for C.8 • Draft technical memorandum documenting the agreed upon dynamic and final validation parameters and the results of the dynamic and final validation tests and any adjustments made to the TDM as a result submitted electronically 25 days after the work begins. • Final technical memorandum documenting the agreed upon dynamic and final validation parameters and the results of the dynamic and final validation tests and any adjustments made to the TDM as a result submitted electronically 35 days after the work begins.
C.9 TDM Documentation and MPO Presentation Material and Training
Page 13 of 15 EXHIBIT B DocuSign Envelope ID: F6D1B8A3-C57C-4BB4-9452-F88C7CC790D7
PS Contract No. 4978 Contract No. 50-6IDP5005 Work Authorization No. 4 PS No. 12747 The objective of this subtask is to document the development and operation of the TDM, train the MPO’s staff of the capabilities and operational details of the TDM, and present the TDMs to the MPO policy boards.
• C.9.1 TDM Documentation – The Engineer shall provide documentation on the data parameters, processes and methodology used to develop the TDM, how the model functions and how to access it, and the use and interpretation of the model outputs and report products. The documentation provides users with the information needed to successfully apply the model, detailed parameter and architecture information to perform updates and modifications, and how to access and interpret the model results.
The Engineer shall provide the following documentation:
• An Operator’s Manual to include all enhancements made by the Engineer in work performed to construct and update the TDM. The objectives of Operator’s Manual are to: • Provide the necessary information on model components and the required instructions on model operational procedures to facilitate model execution and ease of use by transportation professionals applying the TDM; • Provide a step-by-step set of instructions for installing, and applying the TDM; and • Provide sufficient depth and background information to promote sustainable quality control, reliability of model performance, and credibility of results. • A data dictionary for the network, node, and TAZ layers to provide concise information on each attribute, its values, and default values.
The Operator’s Manual shall be based on existing documentation of the TexPack interface provided by the State. The manual shall be formatted to match existing TexPack documentation.
C.9.2 Presentations and Training – The objective of this sub-subtask is to inform and train the MPO’s staff of the capabilities and operational details of the TDM.
C.9.2.1 MPO Presentation – The Engineer shall prepare materials for and make a presentation to the MPO technical advisory and policy advisory committees to present the results of the model development. Meeting materials shall be updated to or developed using the State’s presentation and report templates. Meeting materials will be reviewed and approved by the State prior to any presentation.
C.9.2.2 Training – The Engineer shall design a comprehensive training curriculum that meets the needs of modeling staff at both the MPO and the State. The training shall be accessible and useful to transportation professionals who, while not modelers, may have need to access and use the TDM results or reports.
Page 14 of 15 EXHIBIT B DocuSign Envelope ID: F6D1B8A3-C57C-4BB4-9452-F88C7CC790D7
PS Contract No. 4978 Contract No. 50-6IDP5005 Work Authorization No. 4 PS No. 12747 The Engineer shall provide hands-on training for up to ten (10) TDM users for one eight-hour session in accordance with the training curriculum approved by the State. The Engineer shall work with State and MPO to determine the combination of format, delivery mechanism and content that best meets the needs of the State and each participant. The Engineer shall provide training that is personalized to the skill level and experience of each participant and include both instruction and hands-on exercises using real world examples similar to model procedures and analyses that the participants are likely to perform in their day-to-day working environment.
The Engineer shall provide the training at the State’s choice of the facilities, to include the Engineer’s offices, a location provided by State, or the MPO offices. The Engineer shall not be required to provide computers or access to TransCAD for the training.
The Engineer shall produce and provide to the State an updated Operator's Manual that is revised as necessary based on (1) issues noted by the Engineer or the State during the training, (2) feedback received from those being trained during the training required by task 9.2.2, and any other comments or feedback provided by others through the State.
Deliverables for C.9 • Draft Operator’s Manual in MS Word format submitted electronically submitted electronically 10 days after the work begins. • Final Operator’s Manual in MS Word format submitted electronically 15 days after the work begins. • A PowerPoint presentation presenting an overview of the MPO TDM, and its uses submitted electronically 15 days after the work begins. • A PowerPoint presentation presenting information on how to setup and operate the MPO TDM submitted electronically 15 days after the work begins. • Operator's Manual revised based on feedback received during training submitted electronically 20 days after the work begins.
Page 15 of 15 EXHIBIT B DocuSign Envelope ID: F6D1B8A3-C57C-4BB4-9452-F88C7CC790D7
PS Contract No. 4978 Contract No. 50-6IDP5005 Work Authorization No. 4 PS No. 12747
EXHIBIT C WORK SCHEDULE
Task Name Duration Start Finish
WA #4 EXECUTION 1 day 11/15/16 11/15/16
A: PROJECT MANAGEMENT 192 days 11/16/16 8/10/17
A.1: PROJECT MEETINGS 191 days 11/16/16 8/9/17 A.2: QUALITY ASSURANCE 191 days 11/14/16 8/7/17 A.3: MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORTS AND INVOICING 191 days 11/14/16 8/7/17 C: TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL DEVELOPMENT AND FORECASTS 189 days 11/16/16 8/7/17
C.1: TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP AND STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT 14 days 11/16/16 12/5/16
C.2: TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL (TDM) DATA DEVELOPMENT AND MAINTENANCE 20 days 12/6/16 1/2/17
C.3: DEVELOP BASE YEAR AND FORECAST YEAR DEMOGRAPHIC AND SOCIOECONOMIC DATA 45 days 12/20/16 2/20/17
C.4: ESTIMATE EXTERNAL TRIPS 30 days 2/7/17 3/20/17
C.5: REVIEW AND FINALIZE ROADWAY NETWORK GEOGRAPHY AND ATTRIBUTES 31 days 3/9/17 4/20/17
C.6: DEVELOP TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE (TAZ) GEOGRAPHY 10 days 4/11/17 4/24/17
C.7: INCORPORATE TDM INPUTS INTO TEXPACK INTERFACE AND TEST 25 days 4/25/17 5/29/17
C.8: MODEL VALIDATION 35 days 5/30/17 7/17/17
C.9: TDM DOCUMENTATION AND MPO PRESENTATION MATERIAL AND TRAINING 20 days 7/11/17 8/7/17
Page 1 of 1 Exhibit C
AGENDA ITEM 4
Public Comment Period/Acknowledgement of Guests
DISCUSSION: Opportunity for the public to comment on transportation planning activities.
ACTION REQUIRED: None