Developing Measures of Effectiveness for Evaluating ITS in CA National Parks

1
Developing Measures of Effectiveness for
Evaluating ITS in CA National Parks

• Presented by Brandy Sularz

2
Outline

• Project Background
• National Park Background
• Existing ITS Deployments and MOEs
• Developing Goal Areas and MOEs for National Parks
• Data Collection Considerations
• Conclusions and Further Research

3
Project Background

• Intelligent Transportation Systems
• National Park Congestion
• Evaluation

4
Project Background

• CALTRANS Division of Research and Innovation
• Phase 1 2
• Case Study Parks
• Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA)
• Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Park (SEKI)

5
National Park Background

• National Park Service Mission (1918)
• preserve the precious lands in their care and
  to provide the enjoyment of those lands in a
  manner that will leave them unimpaired for future
  generations

6
National Park Background

• Challenges
• Access
• Circulation
• Parking

• Special Considerations
• Diverse geographical locations
• Weather patterns
• Aesthetic concerns
• Lack of power/communication
• Lack of baseline data
• Gateway communities

7
National Park Background

• Transportation Goal Areas
• Enhanced Visitor Experience
• Assist in Resource Protection
• Improving the Management of the Parks
  Transportation System

8
Review of Existing MOEs for Evaluating ITS

• National
• Urban
• Rural
• International
• National Parks

9
National MOEs

• National ITS Program Plan
• Joint Program Office and ITS America
• ITS goals and objectives
• Safety
• Mobility
• Capacity
• Productivity
• Environment
• Customer satisfaction

10
Few Good Measures

• Crashes
• Fatalities
• Cost
• Throughput
• User satisfaction
• Travel time

11
Urban MOEs

• Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative (MMDI)
• New York, San Antonio, Seattle, Phoenix
• Evaluation Goal Areas
• Safety
• Customer satisfaction
• Environment and emissions
• Operational efficiency
• Institutional benefits
• Cost-benefit

12
Rural MOEs

• Specialized Rural ITS Needs
• Field Operational Tests
• Branson, Missouri
• Arizona I-40 Corridor
• Evaluation Goal Areas
• Mobility
• Safety
• Congestion
• Economic Impacts
• Access

13
International MOEs

• Europe
• Japan
• Australia

14
National Parks MOEs

• Acadia National Park
• Evaluation Goal Areas
• Safety
• Customer satisfaction
• Mobility
• Energy and Environment
• Productivity
• Efficiency

• ITS Deployments
• Acadia
• Yellowstone
• Zion
• Grand Canyon
• Yosemite

15
Developing Goal Areas and MOEs for National Parks

• Level of transferability
• Economic impacts
• Surrounding gateway communities
• Reliance on customer satisfaction for return
  trips
• Critical environmental goals
• Perception of capacity

16
Evaluation Goal Areas for National Parks

• Safety
• Mobility
• Customer Satisfaction
• Environment Resource Protection
• Efficiency/Economics (Productivity)
• Access (Capacity/Throughput)

17
Relationship between NPS Goals and Objectives and
Evaluation Goal Areas
18
MOE Selection Process

• Evaluation MOE criteria
• Relevancy to ITS goals and objectives
• Acceptance by stakeholders
• Simple and understandable
• Sensitive and applicable
• Unique National Park characteristics
• Data collection considerations

19
Data Collection Considerations

• Baseline Data
• Data Collection Methods
• Survey (Management/Visitor)
• Park Records and Models
• Direct Observations
• Interviews
• System Data
• Gateway Communities

20
MOEs Related to Primary Goal Areas
21
MOEs Related to Primary Goal Areas
22
Using this Paper

• ITS Deployment
• Select specific goals and objectives tied to the
  project
• Use table that relates NPS goals and objectives
  to the evaluation goal areas
• Select MOEs from the table based on goal areas
  and data collection considerations

23
Conclusion and Further Research

• Integration
• Few Good Measures for National Parks
• Data collection

24
Questions??

• Brandy Sularz
• DKS Associates
• 1400 SW 5th Suite 500
• Portland, OR 97201
• bsularz_at_hotmail.com