2010 transportation metropolitan Atlanta performance report

2010 Transportation MAP Report
A Snapshot of Atlanta's Transportation System Performance
Recipient of the AGA's 2009 Bronze Certificate of Achievement in Service Efforts and Accomplishment Reporting

Transportation MAP Report Contact: Valentin Vulov, AICP, Principal Project Manager Georgia Regional Transportation Authority 245 Peachtree Center Avenue, NE, Suite 800 Atlanta, Georgia 30303-1223 Phone: 404-463-2434 E-mail: vvulov@grta.org
Cover photo by Rob Alexander

2010 Transportation Metropolitan Atlanta Performance Report
The Georgia Regional Transportation Authority 245 Peachtree Center Ave., NE, Suite 800 Atlanta, GA 30303 404-463-3000 www.grta.org

CONTENTS
Executive Summary, 1 Overview, 3 Mobility, 5
Freeway Travel Time Index, 5 Freeway Planning Time Index, 11 Freeway Buffer Time Index, 16 Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled per Licensed Driver / Person, 20 Pavement Condition Rating, 21 Transit Passenger Miles Traveled, 22 Annual Transit Passenger Boardings, 23 Transit Accessibility, 24 Transit Service Revenue Hours, 24 Passenger Trips per Transit Service Hour, 26 Number of Vanpools, 27 Air Quality, 28 Daily Vehicle Emissions, 28
Safety, 30 Traffic Crash Fatalities, 30 Pedestrian and Bicyclist Fatalities, 32 Roadway Clearance Time, 34
Customer Satisfaction, 36 Roadway Customer Satisfaction, 36 Xpress Service Customer Satisfaction, 37
Transportation System Performance, 38 Atlanta Transportation Performance Index, 38
Summary of 2010 Transportation MAP Measures, 40
How the Transportation MAP Report is Produced, 42
Purpose and Scope, 42
Goals and Objectives, 42
Data Reliability, 43

Resources Used and Efficiency, 44 Comparisons for Assessing Performance, 45 Appendix: Freeway Travel Time, Planning Time Index, and Buffer Time Index, 47 Freeway Travel Time, 49 Planning Time Index, 69 Buffer Time Index, 89

GRTA's MISSION, PURPOSE AND VALUES
Mission: It is the mission of the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority to improve Georgia's Mobility, Air Quality, and Land Use Practices.
Purpose: Focus the Atlanta region on congestion and mobility by ensuring that the region sets goals and targets, and measures progress.
Advocate, plan, implement and measure public transportation services in the Atlanta region.
Values: Connect transportation with land use.
Remove barriers, implement best practices, and maximize the investment in transportation.
Operate as an open, accountable, efficient and effective public authority.
Operate within a decision-making framework that values public participation.
Base decisions upon fact-based analysis that provides the greatest public benefits for the resources invested.
Work for the best interest of the region in cooperation with federal, state, regional and local partners.
Advocate and implement a transportation system that is multi-modal, seamless and accessible to all.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Georgia Regional Transportation Authority (GRTA) acknowledges and thanks the following partner organizations which contributed to compiling the 2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report:
The Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT). GDOT's financial support made the 2010 report possible. U.S. Department of Transportation
The Environmental Protection Division of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources
The Atlanta Regional Commission
Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA).
The Transportation MAP Report is updated and produced annually by GRTA. To access this report and its appendices online, visit http://www.grta.org under the "Mobility" section.

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The 2010 Transportation MAP Report updates the annual Transportation MAP Report, which sets performance measures for tracking the performance of the transportation system in Metropolitan Atlanta. Measures are organized in six general categories--Mobility, Transit Accessibility, Air Quality, Safety, Customer Satisfaction, and Transportation System Performance. These categories broadly align with the four statewide transportation goals-- supporting economic growth and competitiveness, ensuring safety and security, maximizing the value of transportation assets, and minimizing impact on the environment.
This report paints a broadly positive picture for the Metropolitan Atlanta transportation system, although some of the tracked areas have worsened. More specifically, the pavement condition rating of Atlanta's roads decreased again, reaching the critical pavement deterioration level. This demonstrates a need to direct more investments towards optimizing the maintenance and management of the existing transportation assets.
Freeway congestion during the morning and evening peak period, as measured by the travel time index, marked a third year of improvement since the peak in 2006. Similar positive changes also manifested themselves in the two travel time reliability measures--the planning time index and the buffer time index. Daily vehicle miles traveled per licensed driver decreased again in 2009, continuing an uninterrupted trend that began in 1998. Roadway clearance time, which contributes significantly to reducing congestion in metropolitan Atlanta, dropped to its lowest level since records began with roadway clearance time for tractor-trailers of 32 minutes and 18 minutes for other vehicles in 2009. These positive developments contributed towards lowering transportation costs for commuters and businesses, thus creating better conditions for economic growth and competitiveness.
MARTA revenue service hours increased again in 2009, posting a third annual gain since 2006. However, it should be noted that these data reflect service levels before the recent cuts, and it is anticipated that MARTA revenue hours will show a decrease in 2010. The annual revenue service hours provided by the other transit providers in 2009 --CTRAN, Cobb Community Transit (CCT), Douglas County Rideshare (DCR), GRTA, Gwinnett Transit, and VPSI--have increased by about 370 percent compared to 2001. Both the transit passenger miles traveled and the transit passenger boardings posted gains in 2009. The passenger trips per transit service hour--a measure of transit efficiency--increased to 46 for MARTA, and decreased to 16 for the other transit providers. Finally, the overall number of vanpools in the region dropped to 482 in 2009 after its impressive upward march in the previous years. The vanpool decrease was due to a combination of contractual issues, transfer of vanpools between the private vanpool providers, and a price increase per vanpool seat.
On the air quality front, the efforts to improve air quality will have to continue in anticipation of tougher 8-hour ozone and the fine particulate matter (PM2.5) standards. The emissions measures--daily vehicle emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides and primary fine particulate matter--show that vehicle emissions in 2009 were 57, 52 and 55 percent of their respective year 2000 level--close to a decrease in half over nine years. These results confirm a robust trend of shrinking transportation impact on the environment.
Roadway safety improved again in 2009, closely tracking the national trend, with the absolute number and rate of traffic crash fatalities dropping to a record-low levels. Bicyclist fatalities and fatalities rates declined, while pedestrian fatalities went up demonstrating a need for more safety work in the latter area.

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

2

Customer satisfaction shows the percentage of Metropolitan Atlanta residents that rate a roadway service attribute as excellent or good. Satisfaction with roadway safety improved from 59.2 percent in 2003 to 73.5 percent in 2008. Satisfaction with roadway conditions maintained its highest position, and even increased slightly from 73 percent in 2003 to 76.6 percent in 2008. In contrast, Atlanta's residents are the least satisfied with the traffic flow conditions. Still, satisfaction with traffic flow conditions improved by 5.3 points from 29.9 percent to 35.2 percent for the same period. The overall roadway customer satisfaction index increased during the same period from 54 percent to 62.3 percent. In other words, close to two thirds of Atlanta residents give an overall rating of excellent or good to roadway conditions, traffic flow, and safety combined.
The Atlanta transportation performance indices synthesize in a single number the state of the roadway services, roadway safety, roadway emissions, and transit services in the Atlanta region. The roadway emissions index increased again to 168 in 2009, an improvement of two-thirds over the 2002 base year. The transit services index rose to 121.6 in 2009 demonstrating close to 22 percent progress since 2002. The roadway services index went up to 103.4 in 2009 indicating modest traffic flow improvements. Finally, the roadway safety showed a remarkable jump from 104.6 in 2008 to 119.8 in 2009, reflecting improved safety on Atlanta's roads. Figure 1 depicts the four indices.
Figure 1: Atlanta Transportation Performance Indices

Index, % (going up indicates improvement)

180 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 100
90 80
2002

Roadway Services Index Transit Services Index Roadway Emissions Index Roadway Safety Index

107.8 100.2
97.3 89.8
2003

113.0 102.9 98.4 91.7
2004

121.3 103.1

130.7 108.4

95.9

93.8

87.9

85.8

2005

2006

Year

140.7
115.1 97.4 96.0 2007

168.0 151.4

119.2 104.6 101.8

121.6 119.8 103.4

2008

2009

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

3

OVERVIEW
The Transportation Metropolitan Atlanta Performance (MAP) Report was initiated in 2003 by a group of regional agencies with the objective of documenting current developments, trends, achievements and issues with Metropolitan Atlanta's transportation system. This report summarizes measures grouped in six areas: Mobility, Transit Accessibility, Air Quality, Safety, Customer Satisfaction, and Transportation System Performance. The report's content is organized so that it reflects the outlined structure by functional area, with each area including a high-level summary for one or more specific performance measures. Additionally, detailed information about the freeway travel times, planning time index and buffer time index is provided in the Appendix. These measures are obtained for the 13-county Atlanta area consisting of Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Henry, Paulding, and Rockdale Counties.
Over the past few decades Atlanta's population and economy have grown rapidly. The transportation system is at the heart of this success. However, underinvestment in critical transportation infrastructure, combined with shrinking resources, requires that the region optimize the use of available transportation funds to achieve the best results from operating and maintaining existing transportation assets as well as to continue expanding the system. This holistic investment process should lead to a sustainable transportation system capable of addressing traffic congestion, labor market accessibility, safety, and economic competitiveness in a global economy.
Investing in Tomorrow's Transportation Today (IT3) is Georgia's effort to bring a results-oriented, strategic approach to transportation planning and implementation.1 Work in the first phase of IT3 in the Fall of 2008 achieved the goal of presenting a high level strategy for investing in Georgia's and Atlanta's transportation network. The next step was the adoption of Senate Bill 200 (Transforming Transportation Investment Act or SB 200) in 2009, which revised Georgia's transportation governance structure. The second phase of IT3 work, conducted in the Fall of 2009, culminated in the first Statewide Strategic Transportation Plan (SSTP), which calls for a new, objectives-driven and performance-based approach to the transportation system.2 In this plan the State of Georgia adopted four transportation goals which in turn are supported by ten measurable objectives. A summary of these goals and objectives can be seen in Table 1 on page 4.
Another major step was the adoption of House Bill 277 (the Transportation Investment Act of 2010 or HB 277).3 This bill creates the opportunity for generating new transportation resources by providing the option for twelve special districts in the State to submit a referendum to the voters for a one percent regional sales tax, the proceeds of which will go towards transportation infrastructure projects in each district.
The Transportation MAP report's scope does not include establishing goals and objectives for the Atlanta's transportation system. Such goals and objectives are adopted statewide as a part of the SSTP and are therefore also applicable to Atlanta's transportation system. In light of this, the Transportation MAP Report direction may be adjusted in the

1 Investing in Tomorrow's Transportation Today accessed at http://www.it3.ga.gov/Pages/default.aspx 2 Statewide Strategic Transportation Plan accessed at http://www.it3.ga.gov/Documents/Final-SSTP.pdf 3 Transportation Investment Act of 2010 accessed at http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2009_10/pdf/hb277.pdf

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

4

future to provide performance measurement in better alignment with the SSTP goals and objectives.
Table 1: Statewide Strategic Transportation Plan Goals and Objectives

Goal
Supporting Georgia's economic growth and competitiveness
Ensuring safety and security Maximizing the value of Georgia's assets, getting the most out of the existing network Minimize impact on the environment

Objective Improved access to jobs encouraging growth in private-sector employment Reduction in traffic congestion costs Improved efficiency, reliability of commutes in major metropolitan areas Efficiency and reliability of freight, cargo, and goods movement Border-to-border and interregional connectivity Support for local connectivity to statewide transportation network
Reduction in crashes resulting in injury and loss of life
Optimized capital asset management
Optimized throughput of people and goods through network assets throughout the day
Reduce emissions, improve air quality statewide, limit footprint

The agencies tracking the measures in this report are the U.S. Department of Transportation, GDOT, the Environmental Protection Division (EPD) of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, the Atlanta Regional Commission, GRTA, and MARTA.
Base years have been set for the measures, typically 2000 or 2001. Each year, after the data is collected and certified, the agencies present a report of the region's progress in the transportation arena. New measures are developed and added to this report as they become necessary.

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

5

MOBILITY
The mobility measures listed below track highway and transit system mobility:
Freeway travel time index,
Planning time index,
Buffer time index,
Daily vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per person or driver,
Pavement condition rating,
Transit passenger miles traveled, and
Annual transit passenger boardings.
The first five measures address the ease and reliability with which an individual vehicle can travel over the roads, the distances the average person or driver drives each day, and the physical condition of the roadway. The final two measures track how far people in the region travel on public transit in a year, which is roughly analogous to annual vehicle miles traveled, and the number of trips that people make using public transit each year.
The freeways are at the heart of Atlanta's highway system. The roads that move traffic onto and off the freeway are called arterials. The amount of traffic a road is designed to handle is the road's capacity. The traffic actually on the road is its volume. The volume, capacity and travel time are used to calculate mobility measures.
FREEWAY TRAVEL TIME INDEX
Measuring congestion on the region's freeways is a difficult task that can be approached using a variety of tools. The travel time index (TTI) is one measure of congestion. It summarizes the degree of congestion, in terms of travel time, that a traveler experiences compared to free-flow conditions. A TTI of 1 is a free-flow condition typically a speed-limit ride. A TTI of more than 1 illustrates how much more time it takes to make a trip during the congested periods. For example, for I-75 northbound from I-285 to Wade Green Road, a distance of 14 miles, the TTI at the evening peak (5:15 p.m.) is 1.57. This means that at the speed limit the trip takes about 13 minutes, but that the congestion at 5:15 p.m. adds another seven minutes to the trip (1.57 x 13 minutes = 20.4 minutes). A TTI number closer to 1 is better.
TTI is obtained as the ratio of the average travel time over the free-flow travel time to traverse a certain portion or segment of the freeway system. For this report, measurements were created using GDOT's NaviGAtor video detection cameras. The Metropolitan Atlanta freeway network covered by the Georgia NaviGAtor system is split into 20 bidirectional segments (segments 17 and 18 came online in 2007, followed by segments 19 and 20 in 2008). Coverage is determined by the functioning NaviGAtor infrastructure across the Metropolitan Atlanta freeway system as depicted on Figure 2 on page five.
These cameras are strategically placed to monitor speeds and volumes, with each camera taking a measurement every 20 seconds. As many as 1.5 billion measurements are taken by these cameras each year. The measurements are examined and aggregated into 15minute intervals for the morning peak period (6:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.) and evening peak period (3 p.m. to 7 p.m.) for the weekdays only. Subsequently, the freeway travel time index during the slowest region-wide one-hour morning (7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m.) and evening peak

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

6

(5:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.) period is obtained for each of the 20 segments. The regional travel time index is then obtained as the weighted average of the freeway segment TTIs with VMT used as weight. In cases when a segment TTI is less than one the respective segment TTI is assumed equal to one. The higher the TTI number the worse the congestion is. Figure 3 on page six depicts the Metropolitan Atlanta TTI for the slowest one-hour morning and afternoon peak period, respectively.
The freeway travel time index measure is the VMT-weighted average of the freeway segments' TTIs for the one-hour morning and evening peak period with the slowest regional freeway travel speed, averaged across all directional freeway segments.
Figure 2C: NHaEviRGOAtKorEVEideo Detection Coverage

575

Legend

19 COBB
75
1

NaviGAtor Instrumented Freeway Segments
Future Coverage
Segment Boundary
285
1-20 Segment Numbers

20

FULTON 10

400

11
285

12
285

GWINNETT

141

7

85

400

2

8

85 75

285
13 78

CITY OF ATLANTA

75/85

20

15 3

20

75/85

166

4

285

9 75

85

5 17

285
14 DEKALB 16
20
285 18

FULTON
85

285
75
CLAYTON

675
6

ROCK HENRY DALE

Mobility

FAYETTE

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

7

For the 2002 base year, during the morning peak period, TTI was 1.22. This TTI reached a peak of 1.34 in 2006 and has improved sharply since then to 1.18 in 2009. Similarly, during the afternoon peak period the average TTI worsened from 1.26 in 2002 to 1.36 in 2006 and dropped to 1.20 in 2009.
The worst performing morning segment in 2009 was northbound I-75 between I-85 and I-20, with an average TTI of 1.69. The worst performing evening segment was southbound I-75/I-85 between I-85 and I-20, with TTI of 2.35. The actual travel times by freeway segment used in obtaining the regional TTI are summarized in the Appendix.4
It is important to recognize that the regional TTI measure is a VMT-weighted average. With speeds on some segments of the freeway network in excess of 70 mph and others at less than 30 mph, at the same time of day, the average TTI may seem low to those who regularly travel the segments with slower speeds. The freeway travel time index, by creating a weighted average TTI for the slowest one-hour periods of the day, provides a constant by which the performance of the freeway network can be compared from year to year. Additionally, the measure provides a record of the performance of individual segments of the network, thus making it easier for the region to assess the impacts on congestion of improvements or degradations to individual segments of the freeway network.
In order to put the regional TTI measure in context, the travel time index, by individual segment, is summarized in Table 1 on page nine. Additionally, the 2009 TTIs, depicted by freeway segment, are presented in Figure 4 (morning peak hour) and Figure 5 (evening peak hour) on pages seven and eight, respectively.

Figure 3: Freeway Travel Time Index
1.40

Freeway Travel Time Index

1.35 1.30 1.25 1.20 1.15

1.36

1.33

1.30 1.29

1.30

1.26

1.26

1.27

1.22

AM (7:30 a.m. - 8:30 a.m.)

1.34 1.33
1.31

1.23

1.21 PM (5:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m.)

1.20 1.18

2002

2003

2004

2005 2006 Year

2007

2008

2009

4 The travel time graphs by freeway segment are located at http://www.grta.org/valentin/Appendix_2010_MAP_Report.pdf, starting on page 49.
Mobility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

8

Figure 4: 2009 Travel Time Index Morning Peak (7:30 a.m. 8:30 a.m.)

Mobility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

9

Figure 5: 2009 Travel Time Index Afternoon Peak (5 p.m. 6 p.m.)

Mobility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

10

Table 2: 2009 Travel Time Index by Freeway Segment (Segment-Specific Peak Hour)

Freeway Segment Description 1: I-75 NB (from I-285 to Wade Green Road) 1: I-75 SB (from Wade Green Road to I-285) 2: I-75 NB (from I-85 to I-285) 2: I-75 SB (from I-285 to I-85) 3: I-75/I-85 NB (from I-20 to I-85) 3: I-75/I-85 SB (from I-85 to I-20) 4: I-75 NB (from I-85 to I-20) 4: I-75 SB (from I-20 to I-85) 5: I-75 NB (from I-285 to I-85) 5: I-75 SB (from I-85 to I-285) 6: I-75 NB (from Hudson Bridge Road to I-285) 6: I-75 SB (from I-285 to Hudson Bridge Road) 7: I-85 NB (from I-285 to Old Norcross Road) 7: I-85 SB (from Old Norcross Road to I-285) 8: I-85 NB (from I-75 to I-285) 8: I-85 SB (from I-285 to I-75) 9: I-85 NB (from Camp Creek Parkway to I-75) 9: I-85 SB (from I-75 to Camp Creek Parkway) 10: GA-400 NB (from I-285 to Old Milton Parkway) 10: GA-400 SB (from Old Milton Parkway to I-285) 11: I-285 EB (from I-75 to GA-400) 11: I-285 WB (from GA-400 to I-75) 12: I-285 EB (from GA-400 to I-85) 12: I-285 EB (from I-85 to GA-400) 13: I-285 NB (from US-78 to I-85) 13: I-285 SB (from I-85 to US-78) 14: I-285 NB (from I-20 to US-78) 14: I-285 SB (from US-78 to I-20) 15: I-20 EB (from I-285 to I-75/I-85) 15: I-20 WB (from I-75/I-85 to I-285) 16: I-20 EB (from I-75/I-85 to I-285) 16: I-20 WB (from I-285 to I-75/I-85) 17: I-285 NB (from Airport Tunnel to I-675) 17: I-285 SB (from I-675 to Airport Tunnel) 18: I-285 NB (from I-675 to I-20) 18: I-285 SB (from I-20 to I-567) 19: I-575 NB (from I-75 to Hwy 92) 19: I-575 SB (from Hwy 92 to I-75) 20: I-285 NB (from I-20 to I-75) 20: I-285 SB (from I-75 to I-20)

Segment Length (miles) 14.00 14.55 8.45 7.86 4.41 4.40 3.88 3.75 4.00 4.12 14.53 14.45 10.71 10.66 9.96 10.45 4.86 4.20 13.14 13.16 6.82 7.21 6.48 6.37 5.37 5.89 8.20 7.45 6.43 7.12 9.85 9.39 6.22 6.26 5.98 6.14 6.22 6.26 5.98 6.14

Morning Peak Hour 9:00 7:45 6:00 8:15 8:15 8:45 8:00 9:00 9:00 6:00 7:30 6:00 6:00 7:45 8:45 8:15 7:15 7:15 N/A N/A 8:00 9:00 9:00 8:15 8:00 9:00 7:45 9:00 8:00 9:00 6:00 8:00 9:00 7:15 8:15 7:30 7:30 7:30 8:00 8:15

Morning Peak
Hour TTI 1.00 1.43 1.00 1.02 1.29 1.06 1.69 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.13 1.00 1.01 1.52 1.00 1.07 1.00 1.00 N/A N/A 1.19 1.00 1.00 1.32 1.23 1.00 1.18 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.58 1.02 1.00

Evening Peak Hour 17:15 15:15 17:00 18:00 17:15 17:15 16:15 17:00 17:00 17:15 16:45 17:15 17:15 17:15 17:30 17:15 15:15 17:15 N/A N/A 17:30 17:15 17:15 17:15 16:00 17:15 17:30 17:15 18:00 17:15 17:30 15:00 17:30 18:00 17:30 17:45 17:15 17:45 17:15 17:15

Evening Peak Hour
TTI 1.57 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.42 2.35 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.49 1.51 1.03 1.00 1.07 1.00 1.00 N/A N/A 1.00 1.64 1.81 1.11 1.00 1.80 1.01 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.34 1.00 1.00 1.30

The TTIs presented in this table are the VMT-weighted average TTI for each of the segments during the one-hour segment-specific peak period with the slowest average speed.

Mobility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

11

FREEWAY PLANNING TIME INDEX
Travel time reliability can be defined as how much trip travel times vary over the course of time. This variability in travel times from one day to the next is due to the fact that underlying conditions vary widely. Consequently, travelers must plan for these unreliable conditions on congested roadways by leaving earlier than normal just to avoid being late.
The planning time index (PTI) is a measure of trip reliability and is expressed similarly to the TTI with PTI of 1 being a speed-limit trip and a PTI of 2 being a trip that takes twice as long to make. PTI tells a traveler how much extra time she needs to plan for to make a trip so that she can be sure to arrive at her destination on time 19 times out of 20 (95 percent of the trips). For example, for I-75 northbound from I-285 to Wade Green Road, a distance of 14 miles, the PTI at the evening peak (5:00 p.m.) is 2.15. That means that if a traveler wants to be sure to get from the I-75 and I-285 intersection to Wade Green Road reliably (19 times out of 20) that she would have to plan for a trip of about 28 minutes (2.15 x 13 minutes = 28 minutes), versus the 13 minutes she would expect during free-flow conditions. PTI is computed as the ratio of the 95th percentile travel time, also known as planning time, over the free-flow travel time obtained for a certain portion or segment of the freeway system. A PTI number closer to 1 is better.
Measurements for the planning time index were created using GDOT's NaviGAtor video detection cameras as described in the freeway travel time index section of the report. The Metropolitan Atlanta freeway network covered by the Georgia NaviGAtor system is split into 20 bidirectional segments. Coverage is determined by the functioning NaviGAtor infrastructure across the Metropolitan Atlanta freeway system as depicted on Figure 1 on page five. The measurements are examined and aggregated into 15-minute intervals for the morning peak period (6:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.) and evening peak period (3 p.m. to 7 p.m.) for the weekdays only. Subsequently, the freeway planning time index during the slowest region-wide one-hour morning (7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m.) and evening peak (5:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.) period is obtained for each of the 20 segments. The regional planning time index is then obtained as the weighted average of the freeway segment PTIs with VMT used as weight. In cases when a segment PTI is less than one the respective segment PTI is assumed equal to one. The higher the PTI number the less reliable the travel time is. Figure 6 on page 11 depicts the Metropolitan Atlanta PTI for the slowest one-hour morning and afternoon peak period, respectively.
The freeway planning time index measure is the VMT-weighted average of the freeway segments' PTIs for the one-hour morning and evening peak period with the slowest regional freeway travel speed, averaged across all directional freeway segments.
For the 2002 base year, during the morning peak period, PTI was 1.53. This PTI reached its highest regional value of 1.80 in 2006 and then decreased sharply to 1.50 in 2009. Similarly, during the afternoon peak period the average PTI worsened from 1.83 in 2002 to 2.02 in 2006 and then improved to 1.72 in 2008.
The worst performing morning segment in 2009 was northbound I-75 between I-85 and I-20, with an average PTI of 2.45. The worst performing evening segment was southbound I-285 between I-85 and US-78, with PTI of 3.55. The actual planning time index

Mobility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

12

values by freeway segment used in obtaining the regional PTI are summarized in the Appendix.5
The freeway planning time index, by creating a weighted average PTI for the slowest one-hour periods of the day, provides a benchmark by which the travel time reliability of the freeway network can be compared from year to year. Additionally, the measure provides a record of the reliability of individual segments of the network, thus making it easier for the region to assess the impacts on reliability of improvements or degradations to individual segments of the freeway network.
In order to put the regional PTI measure in context, the planning time index, by individual segment, is summarized in Table 2 on page 14. Additionally, the 2009 PTIs, depicted by freeway segment, are presented in Figure 7 (morning peak hour) and Figure 8 (evening peak hour) on pages 12 and 13, respectively.

Figure 6: Freeway Planning Time Index

Freeway Planning Time Index

2.10

2.00

1.90 1.83
1.80

1.70

1.60 1.53
1.50

1.40

2002

1.98

2.02

1.93

1.93

1.91

1.62

1.68

1.72

AM (7:30 a.m. - 8:30 a.m.)

1.80 1.72

1.77 1.72

1.57 1.50
PM (5:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m.)

2003

2004

2005 2006 Year

2007

2008

2009

5 The planning time index graphs by freeway segment are located at http://www.grta.org/valentin/Appendix_2010_MAP_Report.pdf, starting on page 69.
Mobility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

13

Figure 7: 2009 Planning Time Index Morning Peak (7:30 a.m. 8:30 a.m.)

Mobility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

14

Figure 8: 2009 Planning Time Index Afternoon Peak (5 p.m. 6 p.m.)

Mobility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

15

Table 3: 2009 Planning Time Index by Freeway Segment (Segment-Specific Peak Hour)

Freeway Segment Description 1: I-75 NB (from I-285 to Wade Green Road) 1: I-75 SB (from Wade Green Road to I-285) 2: I-75 NB (from I-85 to I-285) 2: I-75 SB (from I-285 to I-85) 3: I-75/I-85 NB (from I-20 to I-85) 3: I-75/I-85 SB (from I-85 to I-20) 4: I-75 NB (from I-85 to I-20) 4: I-75 SB (from I-20 to I-85) 5: I-75 NB (from I-285 to I-85) 5: I-75 SB (from I-85 to I-285) 6: I-75 NB (from Hudson Bridge Road to I-285) 6: I-75 SB (from I-285 to Hudson Bridge Road) 7: I-85 NB (from I-285 to Old Norcross Road) 7: I-85 SB (from Old Norcross Road to I-285) 8: I-85 NB (from I-75 to I-285) 8: I-85 SB (from I-285 to I-75) 9: I-85 NB (from Camp Creek Parkway to I-75) 9: I-85 SB (from I-75 to Camp Creek Parkway) 10: GA-400 NB (from I-285 to Old Milton Parkway) 10: GA-400 SB (from Old Milton Parkway to I-285) 11: I-285 EB (from I-75 to GA-400) 11: I-285 WB (from GA-400 to I-75) 12: I-285 EB (from GA-400 to I-85) 12: I-285 EB (from I-85 to GA-400) 13: I-285 NB (from US-78 to I-85) 13: I-285 SB (from I-85 to US-78) 14: I-285 NB (from I-20 to US-78) 14: I-285 SB (from US-78 to I-20) 15: I-20 EB (from I-285 to I-75/I-85) 15: I-20 WB (from I-75/I-85 to I-285) 16: I-20 EB (from I-75/I-85 to I-285) 16: I-20 WB (from I-285 to I-75/I-85) 17: I-285 NB (from Airport Tunnel to I-675) 17: I-285 SB (from I-675 to Airport Tunnel) 18: I-285 NB (from I-675 to I-20) 18: I-285 SB (from I-20 to I-567) 19: I-575 NB (from I-75 to Hwy 92) 19: I-575 SB (from Hwy 92 to I-75) 20: I-285 NB (from I-20 to I-75) 20: I-285 SB (from I-75 to I-20)

Segment Length (miles) 14.00 14.55 8.45 7.86 4.41 4.40 3.88 3.75 4.00 4.12 14.53 14.45 10.71 10.66 9.96 10.45 4.86 4.20 13.14 13.16 6.82 7.21 6.48 6.37 5.37 5.89 8.20 7.45 6.43 7.12 9.85 9.39 6.22 6.26 5.98 6.14 6.22 6.26 5.98 6.14

Morning Peak Hour 6:00 7:15 6:00 8:00 7:45 8:15 7:45 6:00 7:00 6:00 7:00 6:00 7:30 7:30 7:30 8:00 7:30 6:00 N/A N/A 7:30 9:00 7:30 7:45 7:45 9:00 7:30 9:00 7:45 8:00 6:00 7:45 8:00 7:30 7:30 7:15 9:00 7:30 8:00 7:15

Morning Peak
Hour PTI 1.08 1.94 1.00 1.49 1.63 1.48 2.45 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.40 1.09 1.09 2.11 1.00 1.49 1.10 1.00 N/A N/A 1.49 1.03 1.00 1.66 1.99 1.02 2.38 1.00 1.22 1.00 1.00 1.26 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 2.65 1.49 1.00

Evening Evening Peak Peak Hour Hour PTI

17:00

2.15

17:45

1.06

17:00

1.70

17:15

1.23

17:15

2.51

16:45

3.12

16:00

1.89

17:15

1.15

17:15

1.12

16:45

1.34

17:00

1.20

17:00

2.46

17:00

1.95

17:15

1.22

17:00

1.22

17:00

1.63

15:30

1.00

16:45

1.00

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

17:15

1.63

17:00

2.46

17:00

3.05

17:00

1.97

16:45

1.17

17:00

3.55

16:15

1.19

17:15

1.55

15:30

1.00

17:00

1.11

17:15

1.27

18:00

1.00

17:30

1.00

17:45

1.00

17:00

1.51

17:30

1.00

17:30

1.84

17:45

1.02

18:00

1.16

17:30

2.03

The PTIs presented in this table are the VMT-weighted average PTI for each of the segments during the one-hour segment-specific peak period with the slowest average speed.

Mobility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

16

FREEWAY BUFFER TIME INDEX
The buffer time index (BTI) is another measure of trip reliability. It represents the extra time (or buffer) that a traveler needs to add to a congested trip time to consistently arrive on time 19 out of 20 times. BTI is expressed as a percentage of the average congested trip time. So, for the same 5:00 o'clock evening trip on I-75 from I-285 to Wade Green Road, which takes on average about 20 minutes, a traveler needs to allow for a buffer of 38 percent if she wants to be on time 19 out of 20 times. In other words, this traveler needs to give her selves about 28 minutes--38 percent more time than 20 minutes, if she wants to be sure of arriving on time 19 out of 20 times. A lower BTI percentage (closer to 0) is better.
Measurements for the buffer time index were created using GDOT's NaviGAtor video detection cameras as described in the freeway travel time index section of the report. The freeway buffer time index measure is the VMT-weighted average of the freeway segments' BTIs for the one-hour morning and evening peak period with the slowest regional freeway travel speed, averaged across all directional freeway segments. The resulting BTI for Metropolitan Atlanta is depicted on Figure 9.
For the 2002 base year, during the morning peak period, BTI was 26.1%. This BTI worsened to 33.8% in 2006, and then declined to 28.5% in 2009. During the afternoon peak period the average BTI stayed roughly flat until 2006, declining since then to 37.9% in 2008.
The worst performing morning segment in 2008 was northbound I-285 between I-20 and US-78, with BTI of 103%. The worst performing evening segment was northbound I-75 between I-85 and I-20, with an average BTI of 89%. The actual BTI values by freeway segment used in obtaining the regional BTI are summarized in the Appendix.6
The buffer time index, by individual segment, is summarized in Table 3 on page 18. Additionally, the 2009 BTIs, depicted by freeway segment, are presented in Figure 10 (morning peak hour) and Figure 11 (evening peak hour) on pages 16 and 17, respectively.
Figure 9: Freeway Buffer Time Index
50

Freeway Buffer Time Index, %

45

43.3

42.9

43.9

42.9

41.7

40.2

40

38.3

37.9

35
30 26.1
25
20 2002

33.8

31.5

32.0

30.7

28.1

28.9 28.5

AM (7:30 a.m. - 8:30 a.m.)

PM (5:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m.)

2003

2004

2005 2006 Year

2007

2008

2009

6 The buffer time index graphs by freeway segment are located at http://www.grta.org/valentin/Appendix_2010_MAP_Report.pdf, starting on page 89.

Mobility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

17

Figure 10: 2009 Buffer Time Index Morning Peak (7:30 a.m. 8:30 a.m.)

Mobility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

18

Figure 11: 2009 Buffer Time Index Afternoon Peak (5 p.m. 6 p.m.)

Mobility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

19

Table 4: 2009 Buffer Time Index by Freeway Segment (Segment-Specific Peak Hour)

Freeway Segment Description 1: I-75 NB (from I-285 to Wade Green Road) 1: I-75 SB (from Wade Green Road to I-285) 2: I-75 NB (from I-85 to I-285) 2: I-75 SB (from I-285 to I-85) 3: I-75/I-85 NB (from I-20 to I-85) 3: I-75/I-85 SB (from I-85 to I-20) 4: I-75 NB (from I-85 to I-20) 4: I-75 SB (from I-20 to I-85) 5: I-75 NB (from I-285 to I-85) 5: I-75 SB (from I-85 to I-285) 6: I-75 NB (from Hudson Bridge Road to I-285) 6: I-75 SB (from I-285 to Hudson Bridge Road) 7: I-85 NB (from I-285 to Old Norcross Road) 7: I-85 SB (from Old Norcross Road to I-285) 8: I-85 NB (from I-75 to I-285) 8: I-85 SB (from I-285 to I-75) 9: I-85 NB (from Camp Creek Parkway to I-75) 9: I-85 SB (from I-75 to Camp Creek Parkway) 10: GA-400 NB (from I-285 to Old Milton Parkway) 10: GA-400 SB (from Old Milton Parkway to I-285) 11: I-285 EB (from I-75 to GA-400) 11: I-285 WB (from GA-400 to I-75) 12: I-285 EB (from GA-400 to I-85) 12: I-285 EB (from I-85 to GA-400) 13: I-285 NB (from US-78 to I-85) 13: I-285 SB (from I-85 to US-78) 14: I-285 NB (from I-20 to US-78) 14: I-285 SB (from US-78 to I-20) 15: I-20 EB (from I-285 to I-75/I-85) 15: I-20 WB (from I-75/I-85 to I-285) 16: I-20 EB (from I-75/I-85 to I-285) 16: I-20 WB (from I-285 to I-75/I-85) 17: I-285 NB (from Airport Tunnel to I-675) 17: I-285 SB (from I-675 to Airport Tunnel) 18: I-285 NB (from I-675 to I-20) 18: I-285 SB (from I-20 to I-567) 19: I-575 NB (from I-75 to Hwy 92) 19: I-575 SB (from Hwy 92 to I-75) 20: I-285 NB (from I-20 to I-75) 20: I-285 SB (from I-75 to I-20)

Segment Length (miles) 14.00 14.55 8.45 7.86 4.41 4.40 3.88 3.75 4.00 4.12 14.53 14.45 10.71 10.66 9.96 10.45 4.86 4.20 13.14 13.16 6.82 7.21 6.48 6.37 5.37 5.89 8.20 7.45 6.43 7.12 9.85 9.39 6.22 6.26 5.98 6.14 6.22 6.26 5.98 6.14

Morning Peak Hour 6:00 7:15 6:00 8:00 7:45 8:15 7:45 6:00 7:00 6:00 7:00 6:00 7:30 7:30 7:30 8:00 7:30 6:00 N/A N/A 7:30 9:00 7:30 7:45 7:45 9:00 7:30 9:00 7:45 8:00 6:00 7:45 8:00 7:30 7:30 7:15 9:00 7:30 8:00 7:15

Morning Peak
Hour BTI 12% 42% 15% 48% 30% 42% 51% 8% 8% 5% 27% 9% 9% 41% 10% 42% 20% 12% N/A N/A 37% 17% 13% 31% 62% 10% 103% 9% 29% 5% 9% 33% 5% 14% 15% 10% 13% 67% 47% 16%

Evening Evening

Peak Peak Hour Hour BTI

17:00

38%

17:45

8%

17:00

63%

17:15

35%

17:15

77%

16:45

37%

16:00

89%

17:15

19%

17:15

25%

16:45

43%

17:00

16%

17:00

67%

17:00

30%

17:15

19%

17:00

29%

17:00

51%

15:30

13%

16:45

14%

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

17:15

70%

17:00

53%

17:00

71%

17:00

79%

16:45

23%

17:00 100%

16:15

30%

17:15

40%

15:30

4%

17:00

15%

17:15

30%

18:00

5%

17:30

10%

17:45

10%

17:00

56%

17:30

13%

17:30

38%

17:45

7%

18:00

33%

17:30

58%

The BTIs presented in this table are the VMT-weighted average BTI for each of the segments during the one-hour segment-specific peak period with the slowest average speed.
Mobility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

20

DAILY VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED PER LICENSED DRIVER / PERSON
Daily vehicle miles traveled per licensed driver/person reports how many miles the average metropolitan Atlantan driver drives each day and how many miles the average metropolitan Atlantan rides in a non-transit vehicle each day.7 A lower number is better.
In the baseline year of 2000, the daily vehicle miles traveled per licensed driver were 57.1 miles. In 2009, that number had declined to 39.5 miles, a 31 percent drop. Similarly, daily vehicle miles traveled per person fell from 33.7 miles in 2000 to 28.1 miles in 2009, a 17 percent decline.
Reduction of VMT may be interpreted as a sign that people are choosing to live closer to their daily work, play, and other destinations, that they are more carefully choosing their routes or are trip chaining, or that they are engaging in other behaviors such as carpooling, vanpooling, riding transit, walking or biking that result in reducing the distances that they drive each day.
Reducing VMT reduces the amount of emissions generated by the vehicles. With the 13-county region's population expected to increase to approximately six million persons by 2030, reducing VMT will be a necessary component of controlling the vehicle emissions that contribute to poor air quality.

Figure 12: Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled Per Licensed Driver / Person

Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled per Licensed Driver / Person

70

2000 Baseline VMT per Driver

60 57.1 55.1 55.1 52.4

50

48.9

46.4 45.7 44.8

42.3 41.3 41.1 39.5
40

30

33.7

32.4

31.9

31.6

31.1

30.7

31.5

30.7

29.6

29.0

28.7

28.1

2000 Baseline VMT per Person

20 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Year

7 Daily vehicle miles traveled per licensed driver is computed as the total daily VMT divided by the number of the licensed drivers in the 13-county Atlanta area. The VMT data and licensed drivers data are obtained from GDOT and the Department of Driver Services (DDS), respectively. Daily vehicle miles traveled per person is computed as the total daily VMT divided by the total population for the former 13-county Atlanta area. The population data are obtained from ARC.
Mobility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

21

PAVEMENT CONDITION RATING
It is important to keep pavement in good shape. When roadway surfaces are not maintained, the roadway must be rebuilt from the ground up. It is more economical to systematically maintain roadways than to rebuild them.
The PACES (Pavement Condition Evaluation System) rating is a system by which GDOT measures the quality of the roadway pavement. A pavement in perfect condition receives a maximum value of 100, meaning an excellent ride. A rating of zero would mean the road is pretty much impassable. GDOT reviews roads with a rating of 70 or below to determine if they are good candidates for a preservation action, typically resurfacing or rehabilitation. Although it may be expanded in the future, currently the PACES rating covers only state and national highway system routes, i.e. those roads for which GDOT has maintenance responsibility. A higher number is better.
Pavement condition rating is the percentage of pavement rated better than PACES of 70. In the baseline year of 2000, 88 percent of the GDOT roads had a PACES rating of 70 or better.8 The 2005 spike in pavement condition rating, due to GDOT implementing several resurfacing projects during that year, was followed by a sharp decline in this rating to 62 in 2010. This result may be viewed as a reflection of under-investment in maintaining the existing roadway system.

Figure 13: Percent of Pavement Rated Better than PACES 70

Percent of Pavement Rated Better than PACES 70

100

95

90

90

88 88

88 N/A 87

89

85

85 85

84

2000 Baseline

80

75 71 72

70

65

65

62

60 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year

8 A 2001 pavement condition rating estimate is not available because of a statewide data collection problem. Mobility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

22

TRANSIT PASSENGER MILES TRAVELED
Transit passenger miles traveled is similar to vehicle miles traveled. Rather than reporting a daily average, however, it reports the annual total miles metropolitan Atlantans rode on buses and trains in a given year. A higher number is better.
Increasing transit passenger miles traveled may reduce the growth in VMT that can be expected from increased population. Lower VMT can result in lower emissions, which contributes to improved air quality.
In the base year of 2001, passengers using public transit traveled 874 million miles. That figure slid to a low of 780 million miles in 2003 and climbed since then to 992 million miles in 2009, surpassing the 2001 passenger miles travelled by about 14 percent.
Figure 14: Transit Passenger Miles Traveled9

Passenger Miles Traveled (in millions)

1050

1000

950
900 874
850 808 803
800
750

2001 Baseline 889
856
806 811 780

992 978
911

700 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Year

9 The transit passenger miles information comes from the National Transit Database (NTD). Mobility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

23

ANNUAL TRANSIT PASSENGER BOARDINGS
Annual transit passenger boardings reports how many times in a given year individuals boarded a bus or train. Every boarding is counted, including transfers. Thus a transit user making a trip to and from work boards twice if they make a trip with no transfers or four times if they make a trip with one transfer each way. For example, riding MARTA rail from Decatur to Five Points and transferring to the North Springs Line to travel to Medical Center and returning again counts as four separate boardings. A higher number is better.
In the base year of 2001, there were 167 million passenger boardings. That number declined to 148 million boardings in 2004, and rebounded to 169 million boardings in 2009, slightly above the 2001number. As with transit passenger miles traveled, increasing transit boardings may offset potential increases in VMT attributable to increased population, with the corresponding reduction in vehicle emissions.
Figure 15: Annual Transit Passenger Boardings10

Annual Transit Passenger Boardings (in millions)

180

175

170 2001 Baseline 170

166 165

166 167

160

155

151

150

148

156 154

169 163 162

145 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Year

10 The transit passenger boardings (unlinked passenger trips) information comes from the NTD. Mobility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

24

TRANSIT ACCESSIBILITY
The transit accessibility measures assess the availability of transit to the public. There are three specific measures:
Transit revenue service hours, Passenger trips per transit service hour, and Number of vanpools.
The more accessible and available transit is, the more likely it is to be used, leading to increased transit passenger miles traveled and transit boardings and their associated benefits.
TRANSIT REVENUE SERVICE HOURS
People can't use transit if it is not in service when they need it. The transit revenue service hours measure reflects the availability of transit to the public. This measure reports how many hours in a given year transit vehicles (buses and train cars) were available to carry passengers. One vehicle in operation for one hour equals one revenue service hour. Higher numbers are better in that more transit service is available for more hours.
In the baseline year of 2001 there were 3,339,000 revenue service hours provided by MARTA, CCT, DCR, transit providers reported through GRTA and Gwinnett County Transit (GCT). MARTA provided 3,182,000 revenue service hours. The other transit systems combined provided a total of 157,000 revenue service hours. (C-TRAN service began in October of 2001 and Gwinnett County Transit began service in November of 2001. Their first year revenue service hours are reported as part of the 2002 statistics.). MARTA has provided a combined total of 3,426,000 revenue service hours in 2009, reversing a downward trend that started in 2003.
Figure 16: Transit Revenue Service Hours MARTA11

4,000 3,500

2001 Baseline

Rail

Bus

2,285 2,319 2,321 2,298 2,255 2,263 2,004 2,034 2,190
2,475 2,505

Transit Revenue Service Hours - MARTA (in thousands)

3,000

2,500 2,000

1,500

1,000 500

838 817 861 896 863 837 875 803 833 873 921

0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Year

11 The transit revenue service hours are the sum of the rail and bus revenue service hours. The bus figure also includes the paratransit service. The revenue service hours information comes from the NTD.

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

25

Figure 17: Transit Revenue Service Hours: C-TRAN, Cobb Community Transit, Douglas County Rideshare, GRTA Xpress, Reported by GRTA, Gwinnett County Transit, and VPSI

900 800

Reported by GRTA C-TRAN VPSI Gwinnett Transit GRTA Xpress DCR CCT

117 107

133 101 38

195

250

101 99

247

149

140

139 89

223

Transit Revenue Service Hours: C-TRAN, VPSI, Gwinnett Transit, GRTA, DCR, and CCT (in thousands)

700

600

500 2001 Baseline
400

173

27 80

24 71

196 19 48 146

190 18 40

179 15 27 129

300

171 12 138

156 8 120

153 724 81

200

229

223

150 7

144 6

143 5

100

0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Year

C-TRAN, Cobb Community Transit, Douglas County Rideshare, GRTA Xpress,
other transit providers reported through GRTA, Gwinnett County Transit, and VPSI have
provided a combined total of 709,000 revenue service hours in 2009, an increase of about 350 percent over the base year of 2001.12

12 The transit service providers reporting to the NTD through GRTA are C-TRAN, Quicklink, Emory Shuttle, and VPSI for 2002; C-TRAN, Quicklink, Emory Shuttle, VPSI, and GRTA Vanpool for 2003; Buckhead Shuttle, Quicklink, and GRTA Vanpool for 2004; C-TRAN, Buckhead Shuttle, and GRTA Vanpool for 2005; C-TRAN, Buckhead Shuttle, and GRTA Vanpool for 2006; Buckhead Shuttle, and GRTA Vanpool for 2007; GRTA Vanpool for 2008; none for 2009.
Transit Accessibility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

26

PASSENGER TRIPS PER TRANSIT SERVICE HOUR
It is important for a transit system to operate efficiently in order for the system to be sustainable over the long term. Passenger trips per transit service hour reflects transit system effectiveness. This measure reports the average number of people using a transit vehicle in a revenue service hour. One vehicle in operation for one hour equals one revenue service hour. A rail car is assumed to be able to carry twice as many passengers as a bus. In other words, a transit bus or rail car in service for one hour can expect to see this many boardings. A higher number is better.
In the baseline year of 2001 there were 52 passenger trips per transit service hour for MARTA. That number declined to 46 in 2009. The other transit systems combined (CTRAN, Cobb Community Transit, Douglas County Rideshare, GRTA, Gwinnett County Transit, and VPSI) had 19 passenger trips per transit service hour in 2001, which declined to 16 in 2009.
Figure 18: Passenger Trips per Transit Service Hour

70

2001 MARTA Baseline

60

53 52 52 53

50

49 49 49

50

52

46 44

45 46

40

2001 Non-MARTA Baseline

30

22 19

20

20

16

24

21 22 21

17

18 17 16

19

10

0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Year

Transit Accessibility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

27

NUMBER OF VANPOOLS
This measure reports how many vanpools are in operation at the end of each year. It captures vanpools operating in formal programs in the metropolitan Atlanta region. A higher number is better.
Vanpools operate at the convenience of the vanpool group and are able to be in service at any hour of the day and to travel any route the group desires, from door-to-door service to pickup and drop-off at fixed locations. This flexibility is particularly useful for people working second and third shifts, and those working at locations not currently served by public transportation. A typical vanpool operating a 15-passenger van takes seven cars off the road, contributing to reductions in both emissions and congestion.
Prior to 1997, there were four vanpool programs operating in the region CCT's vanpool program, VPSI, Douglas County Rideshare and the Georgia Building Authority's (GBA) vanpool program. When CCT's vanpool program disbanded service in October of 1997, all 28 of its routes were taken over by VPSI. VPSI is a private operator in the region and also provides some service to the public operators. Another private operator, Enterprise, entered the market in 2005 and started offering vanpool services. In October of 2003 GRTA absorbed the GBA's vanpools into its operation. Subsequently, GRTA disbanded service in October of 2008. The base year for vanpools in the region is 2002, when 178 vanpools were operating. The total number of vanpools in metro Atlanta was 482 at the end of 2009. This is a 170 percent increase in the number of vanpools in the region over that period of time.
Figure 19: Number of Vanpools
600
Enterprise GRTA GBA Douglas County VPSI Cobb County
500

58 50 74

109

61 50

31 48 62

30 50 50

Number of Vanpools

400 2002 Baseline = 178
300

25 55 2

367

28 50

200

262

205

193

120 23 35

122 21 35

166

100

138

281014 36

0 1997

2002

2003

2004

2005 Year

2006

2007

2008

2009

Transit Accessibility

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

28

AIR QUALITY
DAILY VEHICLE EMISSIONS
This measure tracks certain pollutants that are released from cars and trucks each day. The pollutants measured are fine particulate matter, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx). Fine particulate matter is a general term used for solid particles and liquid droplets that are in the air and have a diameter of less than 2.5 microns. (The average human hair is about 70 microns in diameter and talcum powder particles are about 10 microns in diameter). VOCs are organic compounds that can vaporize and enter the atmosphere under normal conditions. Nitrogen oxides are produced from nitrogen and oxygen during combustion. NOx and VOCs are precursors to ozone. Lower emissions numbers are better.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has designated the metropolitan Atlanta area as a nonattainment area under the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for 8hour ozone and fine particulate matter. The 8-hour ozone standard is based on the measured concentration of ozone in the air, averaged over eight-hour periods. Emissions of VOC and NOX, as well as primary particulate matter, which is emitted directly by vehicle engines, are used as proxies for air quality since they are directly related to the performance of the transportation system.
Total daily vehicle emissions of VOC, NOX and primary PM2.5 are estimated for the 13-county Atlanta area by multiplying the total daily VMT for the area by the corresponding MOBILE6 emissions factors. In order to make the measures directly comparable, their absolute values are converted into percentages and then compared to the baseline (year 2000) levels. The figure on page 29 shows that total daily vehicle VOC, NOX and primary PM2.5 emissions in 2009 were 57, 52, and 55 percent of their respective year 2000 levels--close to a decrease in half over nine years. Since the average total daily VMT has continued to increase most years, these decreases in emissions are mostly due to declining emission factors resulting from advanced emission control technologies on newer vehicles and the Georgia Environmental Protection Division's clean gasoline and vehicle emissions inspection programs. As a result of these and other emission reductions, Atlanta came into compliance with the fine particulate matter standard in 2009 and is projected to comply with the ozone standard in 2010.13

13 Due to data completeness issues, Georgia EPD has yet to request classification of the Metro Atlanta PM2.5 nonattainment area to attainment. Georgia EPD is continuing to work with U.S. EPA to resolve this issue.

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

29

Figure 20: VOC, NOX and PM2.5 Vehicle Emissions in the Atlanta Area Relative to Year 2000

VOC, NOx and Primary PM2.5 Vehicle Emissions Relative to 2000 Levels

110% 100%
90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10%
0%

2000

2001

2002

VOC NOx PM2.5
2003 2004 2005 2006 Year

2007

2008

2009

Air Quality

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

30

SAFETY
The safety measures address personal transportation safety as well as the roadway clearance time. The latter measure also affects mobility in the region, as each minute an incident blocks a travel lane results in three to seven minutes of delay and increases the probability of secondary incidents as traffic backs up.
Metropolitan Atlanta's safety record is influenced by the efforts to improve safety across the state. Georgia is addressing the needed traffic safety work to decrease the number of fatalities by implementing the Governor's Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP).14 The SHSP addresses statewide highway fatalities by organizing a 22 agency collaborative leadership, including GRTA, SHSP operations manager, safety program data evaluation, and 14 task team action plans. The four safety E's of education, engineering, enforcement, and emergency medical services are incorporated to achieve the goal of continuously reducing highway fatalities by 41 each year. Georgia has reduced highway fatalities from 1,693 in 2006 to 1,284 in 2009, a 24 percent drop.
TRAFFIC CRASH FATALITIES
This measure counts how many people die in traffic crashes in metropolitan Atlanta each year. To understand how the raw number of deaths compares across the state and country, the number of deaths per 100 million miles driven is calculated. Fewer are better.
In the base year of 2001, the 13-county Atlanta region experienced 494 traffic crash fatalities at a rate of 1.12 fatalities per 100 million miles driven.15 After the peak of 542 fatalities and 1.17 fatalities per 100 million miles in 2006, 2009 registered a remarkable decrease in both absolute traffic crash fatalities to 377 and the fatalities per 100 million miles to 0.81. Although the Atlanta region has much lower fatality rate compared to the state of Georgia and the nation as a whole more work needs to be done to improve traffic safety and decrease the number of fatalities.

14 Governor's Strategic Highway Safety Plan may be viewed online at www.gahighwaysafety.org/shsp/ 15 Data for the safety measures comes from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System web-based encyclopedia
located at http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov. The total number of traffic crash fatalities includes the vehicle
occupants, motorcycle riders, and nonmotorists fatalities on all roads in the 13-county Atlanta area.

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

31

Figure 21: Traffic Crash Fatalities
600

Highway Fatalities

550

543 542

504

500

490 494

496

466 460

450

2001 Baseline 441

400

489 451
377

350 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Year

Figure 22: Traffic Crash Fatality Rates per 100 Million Vehicle Miles Traveled

Highway Fatality Rates per 100 Million VMT

1.7 1.63 1.58
1.5
1.3 1.10
1.1
0.9

Atlanta Fatality Rate

Georgia Fatality Rate

1.55

1.53

1.54

1.51

1.48

1.53

1.49

1.51

1.46 1.48

1.56 1.46

1.43

1.44

1.14 1.12 1.09

1.16 1.11
1.08

0.99 2001 Atlanta Baseline

U.S. Fatality Rate

1.52

1.42

1.47

1.38 1.36

1.17

1.26

1.18

1.05

1.13

0.95

0.81

0.7 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Year

Safety

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

32

PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLISTS FATALITIES This measure counts how many pedestrians and bicyclists die in traffic-related
incidents each year. The comparative measure is the number of pedestrian and bicyclist deaths per 100,000 in population. Fewer are better.
In the base year of 2001 there were 67 pedestrian and six bicyclist fatalities in the 13county Atlanta region. Pedestrian fatalities decreased from 77 in 2006 to 71 in 2009, while the bicyclist fatalities declined from six to three during the same period.
Figure 23: Pedestrian and Bicyclist Fatalities

Pedestrian and Bicyclist Fatalities

100

82 80

Pedestrian Fatalities

Bicyclist Fatalities

79

80

77

74

67

69

69

71

65

60

58

2001 Pedestrian Baseline

40

20 7
0 1999

6 2000

2001 Bicyclist Baseline

6

4

8

9

3

2001

2002

2003

2004 2005 Year

6 2006

4 2007

4 2008

3 2009

Safety

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

33

The pedestrian fatality rate per 100,000 population decreased from 1.79 in 2006 to 1.56 in 2009, while the respective bicyclist fatality rate declined from 0.14 to 0.07 during the same period. The 2009 bicyclist fatality rate of 0.07 is less than half the baseline rate of 0.16 in 2001.
Figure 24: Pedestrian Fatality Rate per 100,000 Population

2.6

Atlanta Pedestrian Fatality Rate per 100,000 Population

2.30

2.2
1.81 1.8
1.4
1.0 1999

2001 Baseline 1.89

1.98

1.97

1.75

1.79

1.69

1.65

1.72

1.68

1.64

1.60

1.65

1.54

1.57

1.59

1.47

Atlanta Pedestrian Fatality Rate per 100,000 Population US Pedestrian Fatality Rate per 100,000 Population

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004 2005 Year

2006

2007

1.53 1.44
2008

1.56 1.33 2009

Figure 25: Bicyclist Fatality Rate per 100,000 Population

Atlanta Bicyclist Fatality Rate per 100,000 Population

0.3
0.28
0.3
0.20
0.2 0.2

0.25 0.16

0.26 0.16

0.23

0.22

0.27 0.25
0.22

0.26

0.20 0.14

0.24 0.23

0.21

0.1
0.10 2001 Baseline
0.1

0.07

0.09 0.09

Atlanta Bicyclist Fatality Rate per 100,000 Population

US Bicyclist Fatality Rate per 100,000 Population

0.0 1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Year

0.07
2009

Safety

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

34

ROADWAY CLEARANCE TIME
This measure calculates the amount of time between the first time a responsible agency such as the police, HERO, fire or other agency becomes aware of an incident and when all lanes of the affected road are available for service. In other words, it is the amount of time from when somebody who can do something about it knows about an incident until all the lanes are open for traffic again. A lower number is better.
Over fifty percent of all congestion nationally is non-recurring. It is caused by traffic incidents, work zones, and weather.16 For each minute an incident blocks a travel lane, roughly three to seven minutes of delay is created. Some studies have shown as much as seventy percent of daily delay is due to non-recurring congestion.17
Traffic incident management is a strategy that uses many different techniques to help emergency responders quickly and safely clear traffic incidents so the roadway can return to normal flow with a minimum of additional delay. The Traffic Incident Management Enhancement (TIME) Program, a partnership between transportation agencies, police, fire, towing and recovery operators, and other emergency responders, has been implementing techniques to improve traffic incident management in Metro Atlanta.
The TIME Program sponsors a Towing and Recovery Incentive Program (TRIP). TRIP is a recovery incentive program to pay heavy-duty recovery companies a monetary bonus for clearing commercial vehicle wrecks quickly. TRIP helps to reduce the impact of major traffic incidents in Metro Atlanta while meeting TIME's aggressive clearance goal of 90 minutes or less. The TRIP program, which began in January 2008, has contributed to reducing the length of major lane-blocking incidents.
The key performance measure for traffic incident management in Atlanta is roadway clearance time. Roadway clearance time is defined as the time between first recordable awareness of incident by a responsible agency and first confirmation that all lanes are available for traffic flow.18 The response time is the time between the first recordable awareness of an incident and the first arrival by a responder on scene.
In 2002, the baseline year, response time for tractor-trailer incidents was 17 minutes and for automobiles 10 minutes. On-scene time for tractor-trailer incidents was 65 minutes, and 30 minutes for automobiles. The roadway clearance time for a typical tractor-trailer incident was more than twice (82 minutes) the 40 minute duration of an automobile incident.19 The difference in time is influenced by a number of factors, including degree of seriousness, HAZMAT concerns, number of lanes affected, and availability of equipment necessary to accommodate tractor-trailer size and weight.
The 2009 the roadway clearance time for incidents involving tractor-trailers at 32.2 minutes has dropped to about 40 percent of its 2002 value. The roadway clearance time for incidents involving automobiles was 17.8 minutes in 2009, less than a half of its respective 2002 value.20

16 http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/program_areas/reduce-non-cong.htm 17 http://depts.washington.edu/trac/bulkdisk/pdf/568.2.pdf 18 FHWA Focus States Initiative - Traffic Incident Management Performance Measures - Action Plan.
http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/eto_tim_pse/preparedness/tim/pm.htm 19 Data source--monthly incident data found in the GDOT's HERO Monthly Statistics publication. 20 The 2007 data is available for the months April through December only.
Safety

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

35

Figure 26: Roadway Clearance Time Tractor-trailers

120 2002 Baseline
100
80

Response Time

Clearance Time

Roadway Clearance Time - Tractor-trailers (in minutes)

60 86.5
64.6

40

52.3

53.1

44.2

23.4

22.4 12.9

20

16.7

11.6

11.1

11.4

12.4

13.2

13.6 19.3

0

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Year

Figure 27: Roadway Clearance Time Passenger Vehicles

Roadway Clearance Time - Vehicles (in minutes)

45 2002 Baseline
40 Response Time Clearance Time
35

30

25

29.8

22.8

20

22.8

18.2

19.9

12.3

9.3

15

7.2

10

5

10.3

9.6

9.4

11.7

11.6

12.1

13.6 10.6

0 2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Year

2007

2008

2009

Safety

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

36

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
The transportation system has its customers and transportation agencies recognize the need to improve customer service and customer satisfaction. The following performance measures reflect the satisfaction of the transportation user, in addition to other aspects of the transportation system construction, maintenance, and service delivery. Customer satisfaction measures provide balance from the perspective of the end user and can be a valuable tool for informing decision-makers on how well transportation services are being provided.
ROADWAY SYSTEM CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
This set of measures, newly introduced in the 2010 report, tracks the customer satisfaction of Metropolitan Atlanta residents with the state roadway system. The data come from the 2008 public opinion survey conducted for GDOT by Georgia State University. The poll surveyed a cross-section of 360 residents from the 13-county Atlanta area. The sample is also representative of Atlanta's population in terms of age and gender.
The respondents were asked, to use an A to F grading scale (A for Excellent, B for Good, C for Fair, D for Poor, and F for Failing) to rate the following aspects of the state roadways that they normally use:
1. Their condition and ride quality;
2. Traffic flow and congestion; and
3. Safety.
The cumulative percentage of A and B grades is then used for the following customer satisfaction measures, corresponding to the above questions:
1. Roadway Conditions Satisfaction
2. Traffic Flow Satisfaction
3. Roadway Safety Satisfaction
The percentages of Atlanta's respondents that rate as a very high priority roadway maintenance, reducing traffic congestion, and roadway safety are 67, 65, and 72 percent, respectively. A composite Atlanta Transportation Satisfaction Index is produced based on these three basic satisfaction measures weighted by their relative priority. The three basic satisfaction measures and the satisfaction index are depicted in Figure 29.
Review of the ratings of Metropolitan Atlanta residents of the state roadway system reveals a broadly positive picture. Satisfaction with roadway safety shows the highest improvement from 59.2 percent in 2003 to 73.5 percent in 2008. The validity of this development is confirmed objectively by a significant reduction in traffic fatalities since 2005. Satisfaction with roadway conditions maintained its highest position, and even increased slightly from 73 percent in 2003 to 76.6 percent in 2008. In contrast, Atlanta's residents are the least satisfied with the traffic flow conditions, reflecting the persistent congestion problem in the region. Still, satisfaction with traffic flow conditions improved by 5.3 points from 29.9 percent in 2003 to 35.2 percent in 2008. The overall roadway customer satisfaction index increased during the same period from 54 percent to 62.3 percent. In other words, close to two thirds of Atlanta residents give an overall rating of excellent or good to the roadway conditions, traffic flow, and safety combined.

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

37

Figure 28: Customer Satisfaction Measures

Customer Satisfaction, Percent Rating as Excellent or Good

90

80 73.0
70
59.2 60

50

54

40
29.9 30

20

77.0 63.4 56.3
27.0

72.5 54.9 49.9
21.1

73.5 56.6 51.4
23.0

71.7 65.7 56.4
30.4

76.6 73.5 62.3
35.2

10

Roadway Conditions Satisfaction

Roadway Safety Satisfaction

Traffic Flow Satisfaction Atlanta Transportation Satisfaction Index

0 2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Year

XPRESS SERVICE CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
This new measure tracks the customer satisfaction of Metropolitan Atlanta residents with the Xpress transit service. The data come from the 2010 Xpress customer satisfaction survey conducted by UrbanTrans on behalf of GRTA. The survey covered all 29 Xpress routes managed by GRTA, including five CCT routes and three GCT routes. In addition, CCT and GCT each manage and operate three of their own express bus routes, for a total of 35 routes included in the survey. A total of 4,506 survey responses were returned by riders. Survey respondents were asked to score 17 key service characteristics and their overall satisfaction with the transit service as Excellent, Very Good, Good, Fair, or Poor. A total of 84 percent rated their overall experience with GRTA Xpress service as either Excellent or Very Good. CCT comes next with a total of 74 percent of respondents providing the same rating. Finally, 69 percent of riders rated GCT service as excellent or very good. These results demonstrate a very high level of customer satisfaction with the Xpress transit service. This is an important finding especially in light of the fact that the vast majority of the Xpress riders are not transit dependent.

Customer Satisfaction

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

38

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
ATLANTA TRANSPORTATION PERFORMANCE INDEX
The Atlanta Transportation Performance Index synthesizes a number of different factors reflecting roadway, transit, safety and air quality performance measures. This composite index is a single measure that tracks the state of the metropolitan Atlanta transportation system, similarly to the way the temperature is the main weather-related measure. The main advantage of the transportation performance index is that it minimizes the number of measures reported.
The Atlanta transportation performance index is obtained by employing the weighted sum model. A composite index is produced based on 12 input measures weighted by their relative importance.21 The composite transportation performance index consists of four basic indices--Roadway services index, Roadway safety index, Roadway emissions index, and Transit services index--tracking separately important performance aspects of roadway and transit services.22 Each of these indices is normalized to a 100 scale for the base 2002 year for ease of presentation. An index number of more than 100 indicates improvement over the base year.
The composite transportation performance index is not published in this year's report due to the ongoing reassessment of the weights of the four basic indices.
The four transportation performance indices help the region understand whether the different aspects of the region's transportation system are improving or worsening. The roadway emissions index maintained its upward trend reaching 168 in 2009, an improvement of two-thirds over the 2002 base year. The key contributing factor here is the decreasing emission rates per vehicle miles traveled. The transit services rose to 121.6 in 2009, demonstrating close to 22 percent progress since 2002. The main reason is the rapid growth of new and small transit providers in the region. The roadway services index and the roadway safety index help improve the overall transportation system's performance with values of 103.4 for 2009 and 104.8 for 2008, respectively. Contributors to this positive change are the relative decline in congestion and especially the decrease in the number of traffic, pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities.

21 The ATPI is composed of the following measures: Travel time index, Planning time index, Daily vehicle miles traveled, Transit revenue service hours - MARTA, Transit revenue service hours - other, Transit passenger miles traveled, Transit passenger boardings, Vehicle NOx emissions, Vehicle VOC emissions, Vehicle PM2.5 emissions, Traffic crash fatality rate per 100 million VMT, Pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities per 100,000 population. 22 The roadway services index is composed of the following measures: travel time index, planning time index, and daily vehicle miles traveled. The roadway safety index consists of the traffic crash fatality rate per 100 million VMT and pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities per 100,000 population. The transit services index includes transit revenue service hours - MARTA, transit revenue service hours - other, transit passenger miles traveled, and transit passenger boardings. The roadway emissions index is based on the vehicle nitrogen oxides emissions, vehicle volatile organic compounds emissions, and vehicle primary fine particulate matter emissions.

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

39

Figure 29: Atlanta Transportation Performance Indices

Index, % (going up indicates improvement)

180 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 100
90 80
2002

Roadway Services Index Transit Services Index Roadway Emissions Index Roadway Safety Index

107.8 100.2
97.3 89.8
2003

113.0 102.9 98.4 91.7
2004

121.3 103.1

130.7 108.4

95.9

93.8

87.9

85.8

2005

2006

Year

140.7
115.1 97.4 96.0 2007

151.4
119.2 104.6 101.8 2008

168.0
121.6 119.8 103.4
2009

Transportation System Performance

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

40

Mobility

SUMMARY OF 2010 TRANSPORTATION MAP MEASURES

Performance Measure
Freeway travel time index The slowest periods: 7:30 a.m. 8:30 a.m. 5:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m.
Freeway planning time index The slowest periods: 7:30 a.m. 8:30 a.m. 5:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m.
Freeway buffer time index The slowest periods: 7:30 a.m. 8:30 a.m. 5:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m.
Daily vehicle miles traveled per licensed driver / per person
Pavement condition rating
Transit passenger miles traveled
Annual transit passenger boardings

Description
Freeway TTI, weighted by segment VMT, during the slowest regional one-hour morning and evening peak period
Freeway PTI, weighted by segment VMT, during the slowest regional one-hour morning and evening peak period
Freeway BTI, weighted by segment VMT, during the slowest regional one-hour morning and evening peak period
Vehicle miles traveled per licensed driver / person per day
Percent of the state roadway system with a PACES rating greater than 70
Transit passenger miles traveled (in millions)
Cumulative sum of the number of passengers who board public transportation vehicles annually (in millions)

Baseline Value Year 1.22 2002 1.26 (PM)
1.53 2002 1.83 (PM)
26.1% 2002 41.7% (PM)
55.1 2000 31.9 2000 88% 2000
874 2001
167 2001

Update Value Year 1.18 2009 1.20 (PM)
1.50 2009 1.72 (PM)
28.5% 2009 37.9% (PM)
39.5 2009 28.1 2009 62% 2010
992 2009
169 2009

Transit revenue service hours (MARTA, C-TRAN/CCT/DCR/ GRTA/VPSI/ Gwinnett Transit)

Total number of hours trains and buses are running and available to carry passengers in a year (in thousands)

MARTA

3,182 2001 3,426 2009 157 2001 709 2009

Transit Accessibility

Other

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

41

Air Quality Transit Accessibility

Safet y

SUMMARY OF 2010 TRANSPORTATION MAP MEASURES (CONTINUED)

Performance Measure
Passenger trips per transit service hour (MARTA, C-TRAN/CCT/DCR/ GRTA/VPSI/ Gwinnett Transit)

Description
Average number of unlinked passenger trips per revenue hour trains and buses are running and available to carry passengers in a year

Other MARTA

Baseline Value Year
52 2001

Update Value Year
46 2009

19 2001 16 2009

Number of vanpools
Daily vehicle emissions (relative to 2000 levels)

Total number of vanpools operating in a given year in the 28- county Atlanta area
VOC
NOx

178 2002 482 2009
100% 2000 57% 2009 100% 2000 52% 2009

Primary PM2.5

Traffic crash fatalities/ Total number of traffic crash

Traffic crash fatality fatalities

rate

Traffic crash fatality rate per

100 million VMT

Pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities / Pedestrian and bicyclist fatality rate per 100,000 pop.

Pedestrian fatalities Bicyclist fatalities Pedestrian fatality rate Bicyclist fatality rate

Roadway clearance time

Incidence Tractor-

response and trailers

clearance time (in min.)

Vehicles

Roadway Customer Satisfaction*
* This is the percentage of respondents rated the respective condition as Excellent or Good.

Roadway Conditions Satisfaction
Traffic Flow Satisfaction
Roadway Safety Satisfaction
Atlanta Transportation Satisfaction Index

Xpress / CCT / GCT Service Customer Satisfaction

The percentage of riders that rated the respective transit service as Excellent or Good

Atlanta Transportation Roadway services index

Performance Indices*

* An index number of Transit services index

more than 100

Roadway emissions index

indicates improvement

over the base year. Roadway safety index

100% 2000 494 2001

1.12 2001

67 2001 6 2001 1.75 2001 0.16 2001 81 2002

40 2002 73% 2003

29.9% 59.2% 54.0%

2003 2003 2003

84 Xpr. 2010 74 CCT 69 GCT
100 2002
100 2002 100 2002 100 2002

55% 377
0.81
71 3 1.56 0.07 32
18 76.6%
35.2% 73.5% 62.3%
84 Xpr. 74 CCT 69 GCT 103.4 121.6 168.0 119.8

2009 2009
2009
2009 2009 2009 2009 2009
2009 2008
2008 2008 2008
2010
2009 2009 2009 2009

Customer Satisfaction

Transp. System Performance

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

42

HOW THE TRANSPORTATION MAP REPORT IS PRODUCED
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
This is the seventh annual Transportation MAP Report published by GRTA. The report is posted publicly on the GRTA website www.grta.org, distributed electronically across the region and nationally, and its findings are presented before various professional and policy forums.
The data collection and publishing of the report is based on the state's fiscal year cycle beginning July 1st and ending June 30th but also includes the latest calendar year data whenever available. The purpose of this work is to document the current state of, and recent trends in Metropolitan Atlanta's transportation system performance. This report presents the performance results but does not attempt to fully analyze the reasons for those results. Moreover, the report is intended to be a high-level snapshot of the regional transportation system across institutional and jurisdictional boundaries, and to disseminate this information to the policy makers and citizens across the region as well as nationally. This report will evolve over time to better align with the goals and objectives of the Georgia's Statewide Strategic Transportation Plan and to eventually support its implementation in the Atlanta region.
The scope of this report is shaped by the fact that it tracks the performance of a regional transportation system and not the performance of individual departments or jurisdictions responsible for various functional and geographical elements of this system. This more holistic approach in tracking and reporting on a transportation system, however, makes it impossible to relate system performance and outcomes to specific efforts and resources spent by any single agency or jurisdiction. Therefore, for the most part, presented results are not associated with actual expenses or resources spent. The report tracks the performance of the Metropolitan Atlanta transportation system in six areas--Mobility, Transit Accessibility, Air Quality, Safety, Customer Satisfaction, and Transportation System Performance. The intent is to capture these different and complementing aspects in a holistic picture of the transportation system. The report's content is organized so that it reflects the outlined structure by functional area, with each area including a high-level summary for one or more specific performance measures. Additionally, detailed information about the freeway travel times, planning time index and buffer time index is provided in the Appendix to the report.
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
A starting motivation for the Transportation MAP Report is to help implement the GRTA's mission statement and purpose by ensuring that the Atlanta region sets goals and measures progress, and expands the practice of performance-based transportation planning by creating an integrated set of performance measures. Due to this report having a regional scope, GRTA spearheads a cooperative effort with other partner agencies responsible for Atlanta's transportation system--the Federal Highway Administration, Atlanta Regional Commission, GDOT, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, and MARTA. A steering committee comprising of representatives of these agencies, the media, the Georgia Institute of Technology, and others, guides the development of this transportation performance measurement effort.

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

43

The report has a regional and cross-agency scope and as such cannot include establishing goals and objectives for Atlanta's transportation system in isolation. Such goals and objectives are an integral part of the first Statewide Strategic Transportation Plan (see Table 1 on page 3) adopted in 2010, and consequently are applicable to the Atlanta's transportation system. Hence, the Transportation MAP Report's natural direction is towards providing performance measurement aligned with the SSTP goals and objectives.
These transportation goals and objectives were developed based on a collaborative and inclusive approach, which started with the Investing in Tomorrow's Transportation Today initiative (with GRTA being instrumental in the process) in 2008 and was finalized as part of the SSTP in 2009. Synthesizing the best practices across the nation and internationally was the starting block in this process. These practices were then integrated with a Georgia customer perspective, addressing the needs and expectations of Georgia's citizens and businesses. This perspective was created by involving and completing interviews with the major stakeholders (commercial users, rural residents, medium-sized city residents, urban residents) and professionals across the State of Georgia.
DATA RELIABILITY
A special quality of the Transportation MAP Report is that all but two measures are based on observed or measured data (as opposed to model data). Information used in this report is gathered from a variety of sources deemed to be the most reliable for each specific metric. The data for the transit-related measures come from the National Transit Database. Although it is considered the best source of quality-controlled transit data, the reasonableness of this information is checked against data from the transit providers in the region. Similarly, the source of safety information is the Fatality Analysis Reporting System web-based encyclopedia. The rest of the information is gathered by the GRTA staff from regional sources. GDOT provides VMT, pavement condition, roadway clearance, and NaviGAtor real-time freeway information. GRTA, in conjunction with the Georgia Institute of Technology, processes the NaviGAtor data to produce freeway travel times and indices. Population data is obtained from ARC and verified against data from the U.S. Census. The number of licensed drivers is provided by the Department of Driver Services. The Environmental Protection Division is a source of air quality data. Data processing in order to obtain the measures is done by the GRTA staff. The transportation performance indices are an original work of the GRTA staff. Each of them is based on a number of related measures and synthesizes them into a single number for ease of use and presentation.
Each data element and the overall information are reviewed for reasonableness. Any data issues are discussed and resolved with the party providing this information. Special care is taken to make sure that data definitions, collection methods, and processing methodologies are the same across years. Changes in any of these elements are duly noted in the report. In the rare occasions where data points are missing or determined not be accurate, they are omitted from the respective period and a note is provided. This qualitycontrolled data is then subjected to the same processing procedures and measures' definitions, which ensures consistency in the measurement results and reliable historic trends.

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

44

RESOURCES USED AND EFFICIENCY
As noted earlier, this report tracks the performance of the Metropolitan Atlanta regional transportation system as a whole, not the performance of individual departments or jurisdictions within the region. Moreover, transportation users' behavior interacts with the characteristics of the transportation system producing outcomes and measurements that cannot, for the most part, be attributed singularly to the resources invested in or used to operate this system. Examples of such measures are the vehicle miles travelled per licensed driver, and the number of fatalities (traffic, pedestrian, bicyclists). Therefore, it is appropriate, whenever possible, to relate the system-wide performance and outcomes to the total regional capital and operating expenditures, and not to specific resources spent by any single agency or jurisdiction. This approach is applicable to the regional transit systems, taken as a whole, and their related expenditures. Figure 31 summarizes the historical transit capital and operational expenditures for the Atlanta region, which can be compared to the respective transit-oriented measures--transit passenger miles traveled, annual transit passenger boardings, transit revenue service hours, and number of vanpools. Passenger trips per transit service hour is a standalone effectiveness measure providing historical information on the effectiveness of the transit service provided by MARTA and the other transit providers. Although the overall transit expenditures have increased over the 10-year period the capital portion has been stagnant. The operating transit expenditures are not sufficient to maintain the existing transit systems and fresh capital investments are necessary for these systems to meet the future transit needs in the Atlanta region.

Figure 30: Metropolitan Atlanta Transit Capital and Operating Expenditures

$900 $800

Transit Capital Expenditures

Transit Operating Expenditures

$700

Transit Expenditures (in millions)

$600

$500

$400

$300

$200

$100

$0 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010 Transportation MAP (Metropolitan Atlanta Performance) Report

45

COMPARISONS FOR ASSESSING PERFORMANCE
Comparative historical information for each measure provides the basis for assessing any positive or negative trends. Since the adoption of the first Statewide Strategic Transportation Plan Metropolitan Atlanta transportation agencies have been working together to establish specific investment and performance targets for the region. Adopting such targets will provide an opportunity to determine whether the system's performance is meeting the region's goals.
Another way of assessing Atlanta's transportation performance is by comparing it to the performance of other regions with similar transportation systems and characteristics-- Charlotte, NC; Chicago, IL; Dallas, TX; San Diego, CA; and Seattle, WA. The regional data for the daily VMT per person, travel time index, congestion cost per person, passenger miles traveled per person, passenger boardings per person, congestion cost savings per person due to operational treatments, and public transportation are for the year 2009 and come from the 2010 Urban Mobility Report.23 The data source for the fatality rate and pedestrian fatality rate per 100,000 population is the Traffic Safety Facts 2009.24
Table 5: 2009 Atlanta and Other Regions Comparison

Freeway

Congestion Congestion

and

Annual Annual Cost Savings Cost Savings

Pedestrian

Arterial

Annual Passenger Passenger per Person per Person Fatality Fatality

Streets Travel Congestion Miles

Boardings Due to

Due to

Rate per Rate per

Population Daily VMT Time Cost per Travelled per

Operational Public Trans- 100,000 100,000

Urban Area (thousands) per Person Index Person per Person Person Treatments portation Population Population

Atlanta, GA

4,200

21.0 1.22

$649

224

37

31

48

8.69

2.22

Charlotte, NC

1,005

20.6 1.17

$435

122

22

20

16

8.23

1.85

Chicago, IL

8,519

12.1 1.25 $1,112

468

73

48

276

5.33

1.19

Dallas, TX

5,013

21.4 1.22

$728

94

15

46

27

8.00

2.15

San Diego, CA

3,048

19.5 1.18

$549

183

33

48

49

5.82

1.53

Seattle, WA

3,187

17.5 1.24

$665

388

59

56

109

4.87

2.11

Although Atlanta has the third highest population amongst these cities, the region is also the least densely populated. This generally requires that Atlantans travel longer distances--21 miles daily per person-- and contributes to the region sharing with Dallas the rank of second most congested as measured by the travel time index of 1.22. However, Atlanta's annual congestion cost per person of $649 is below the middle of the range, with only Charlotte and San Diego ranking better. The Atlanta region has a relatively well developed transit system, which places it comfortably in the middle of the range as measured by the annual passenger miles traveled per person (224) and the passenger boardings per person (37). The beneficial effects of Atlanta's transit system are demonstrated by congestion cost savings per person of about $31 annually. Still, the Atlanta region ranks second to last here, underscoring the need to continue maintaining and expanding efficiently its transportation system. Similarly, operational treatments contribute to reducing congestion costs per Atlantan by $48 annually. Nevertheless, Atlanta lags significantly behind Chicago ($276) and Seattle ($109) in this area. Finally, there is much more to be done for improving safety where Atlanta has the highest fatality rates per 100,000 population and pedestrian fatality rate per 100,000 population.

23 The 2009 Annual Urban Mobility Report's regional summaries accessed at
http://mobility.tamu.edu/ums/congestion_data/ 24 Traffic Safety Facts 2006 accessed at http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811402EE.pdf