1 / 26

Goals and Targets for 2015-2020 CTR Plans Olympia, Washington September 26, 2014

Goals and Targets. for 2015-2020 CTR plans Recommendations to the Commute Trip Reduction Board. Keith Cotton Policy and Analysis Manager. Lynn Peterson Secretary of Transportation. Goals and Targets for 2015-2020 CTR Plans Olympia, Washington September 26, 2014. 092414KC.

neville-barker
Download Presentation

Goals and Targets for 2015-2020 CTR Plans Olympia, Washington September 26, 2014

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Goals and Targets for 2015-2020 CTR plans Recommendations to the Commute Trip Reduction Board Keith Cotton Policy and Analysis Manager Lynn Peterson Secretary of Transportation Goals and Targets for 2015-2020 CTR Plans Olympia, Washington September 26, 2014

  2. 092414KC Today’s discussion and decisions • Where are we in the process? • Feedback from the TAG on goal options • Decision on jurisdiction goals • Discussion and decision on state targets • Next steps

  3. Where are we? Document from July 25, 2014 board meeting

  4. Where are we? Decision from July 25, 2014 board meeting

  5. Where are we? Discussion from July 25, 2014 board meeting

  6. Proposed for Board Decision9/26/2014 To be drafted in local CTR plans for approval by CTR board Board Decision 7/25/2014 Jurisdiction Goal Option 1 (statewide goals and targets) Target 1, 2, 3: nDAR X %, VMT & GHG 18% reduction (statewide targets) Statewide Program Goals Target 1, 2, 3: nDAR X %, VMT & GHG X % reduction Work with WSDOT to tailor these based on local objectives Jurisdiction Goal Option 2 (statewide goals with locally set targets) Proposed for Board Decision9/26/2014 Target 1: nDAR X percent Target 2: VMT – 18 % reduction Content slide option 3 Jurisdiction Goal Option 3 (goals based on local programs needs) Targets developed by local government to support local goals and objectives Work with WSDOT Target 3: GHG – 18% reduction (based on VMT)

  7. Proposed for Board Decision9/26/2014 Jurisdiction Goal Option 1 (statewide goals and targets) Jurisdiction Goal Option 2 (statewide goals with locally set targets) Content slide option 3 Jurisdiction Goal Option 3 (goals based on local programs needs)

  8. Feedback from the TAG on goal options • Support for decoupling the state and local goals and targets • Strong support for Option 2 from local jurisdictions • Some will go with Option 1 and some with Option 3 • Expressing goals as increases rather than decreases is preferred (nDAR vs. DAR)

  9. CTR BoardDiscussion and Decision

  10. Proposed for Board Decision9/26/2014 Target 1: nDAR X percent Target 2: VMT – 18 % reduction Target 3: GHG – 18% reduction (based on VMT)

  11. To start, some definitions Proportion, percentage of y1 / 100 27 / 100 = 27% nDAR Non drive alone rate(Percentage of travelers using modes other than driving alone) Change ofy2 - y133 - 27 = increase of 6 Percent change,percentage change((y2 - y1) / y1) * 100((33-27) / 27) * 100 = 22.2% increase

  12. Target 1: nDAR X percent Executive Order 13-04 Results WA

  13. Four options to set non Drive Alone Rate target: Current CTR nDAR 36.4% Low Medium Aspirational 33% nDAR 42% nDAR 67% nDAR 40% nDAR Based on Executive Order 13-04 Results WA Based on achieving the same numerical increase of 6 percentage points aligned with Results WA, starting in 2007/2008 Based on achieving the total percentage change of 23% aligned with Results WA, starting in 2007/2008 Assumes that the CTR program worksites take on a goal to achieve 33% nDAR goal for 40% of commuters, rather than the current market of 20%)

  14. % nDAR 60 Results WA 50 40 33% 30 27.8% 26.9% 20 2007 2015 2020

  15. % nDAR Results WA target applied to CTR 60 50 40 35.5% Same 33% 34.3% 33% 33% 30 27.8% 26.9% 20 2007 2015 2020

  16. % nDAR Results WA change increase applied to CTR Baseline 60 50 40% Increase of 6 40 35.5% Same 33% 34.3% 33% 33% 30 Increase of 6 27.8% 26.9% 20 2007 2015 2020

  17. % nDAR Results WA percent change applied to CTR Baseline 60 42% 50 Same Percentage Change of 23% 40% Increase of 6 18% change 40 35.5% Same 33% 34.3% 33% 33% 30 Increase of 6 23% percent change 27.8% 26.9% 20 2007 2015 2020

  18. Double the proportion of trips needed to meet the 33% target % nDAR 67% 60 Double Proportion 42% Same Percentage Change of 23% 50 Increase of 6 18% change 40% 40 35.5% Same 33% 34.3% 33% 33% 30 Increase of 6 23% percent change 27.8% 26.9% 20 2007 2015 2020

  19. Four options to set non Drive Alone Rate target: Current CTR nDAR 36.4% Low Medium Aspirational 33% nDAR 42% nDAR 67% nDAR 40% nDAR Based on Executive Order 13-04 Results WA Based on achieving the same numerical increase of 6 percentage points aligned with Results WA, starting in 2007/2008 Based on achieving the same percentage change of 23% aligned with Results WA, starting in 2007/2008 Assumes that the CTR program worksites take on a goal to achieve the 33% nDAR goal for 40% of commuters, rather than the current market of 20%

  20. Target 2: VMT – 18 % Reduction Reduce the state’s annual per capita vehicle miles traveled by 18 percent by 2020 (RCW 47.01.440 – state VMT goals) VMT 2007/8 = 10.9 miles per person one-way to work VMT 2019/20 target = 8.9

  21. Target 3: GHG – based on VMT Reduce the state’s greenhouse-gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 (RCW 70.235.020 – state GHG goals) Reduce daily GHG (lbs) per employee by 18% (if tied to VMT)(may need further exploration)

  22. CTR BoardDiscussion and Decision

  23. Proposed for Board Decision9/26/2014 To be drafted in local CTR plans for approval by CTR board Board Decision 7/25/2014 Jurisdiction Goal Option 1 (statewide goals) Target 1, 2, 3: nDAR X %, VMT & GHG 18% reduction (statewide targets) Statewide Program Goals Target 1, 2, 3: nDAR X %, VMT & GHG X % reduction Work with WSDOT to tailor these based on local objectives Jurisdiction Goal Option 2 (statewide goals with locally set targets) Proposed for Board Decision9/26/2014 Target 1: nDAR X percent Target 2: VMT – 18 % reduction Content slide option 3 Jurisdiction Goal Option 3 (goals based on local programs needs) Targets developed by local government to support local goals and objectives Work with WSDOT Target 3: GHG – 18% reduction (based on VMT)

  24. Board expectations for local targets • Option 1 expectations • Continued flexibility in individual employer target-setting • Six percentage point increase or 23 percent increase? Will align with state target decision • 20% baseline + 6 points = 26% target • 20% + 23% = 24.6% target • 50% + 6 points = 56% target • 50% + 23% = 61.5%

  25. Board expectations for local targets • Option 2 expectations for local target setting • Do no worse • Demonstrate integration with local plans and goals • Develop targets tied to local plans and goals • Work with WSDOT to develop local targets • Option 3 principles • Demonstrate relevance to local plans and goals • Ensure that goals and targets can be measured • Work with WSDOT to develop local goals and targets

  26. Next steps • Do we really want to call it nDAR? • Non SOV rate? • Commute alternatives rate (CAR)? • Alternative mode share? • Efficient mode share? • Luke Skywalker mode share? • WSDOT technical assistance for local target development • CTR Board’s funding policy • Program measurement

More Related