Will Connects 2040
Advisory Committee Meeting #4 (Add-On)
September 11, 2015
Today’s Agenda
 Project Update
 Travel Demand Model Update
–
–
–
–
Overview
CMAP Coordination and treatment of Illiana
Freight Modeling Process
Transit Modeling Process
 Discuss Build Scenarios
– Revised Transportation Project List
– Baseline Existing and Future Year Conditions
 Next Steps
2
Project Update
Develop and Assess
the Project List
Survey II – nowOpen
to Mid-October
Houses – Fall 2015
3
Where We’re Heading
Through
 Determine Project Modeling – Assess a
Summer
range of alternative future scenarios to
understand impacts to the transportation
system
 Understand Investment Priorities – Evaluate
the transportation system in light of
forecasted population and employment
growth through 2040
 Determine Investment Priorities – Conduct a
financial analysis and ultimately recommend Early
Spring
a set of future multimodal investments
2016
Through
Summer
& Fall
4
Travel Demand Model Update
5
Forecasting Background
 Travel demand models are tools to estimate travel
behavior and demand for a specific future time frame
 Forecasted volumes can assist in making informed
transportation planning decisions
• All models have limitations
• Specific limitations of the WC model:
– Model is at aggregate level – intersections will not have an
impact on results
– Does not incorporate bicycle or pedestrian movements
– Does not forecast transit trips (more on that later)
 Any model is just a tool and not the final word – need to
apply judgement to forecast results
Differences Between WC and CMAP Models
 Will County TDM
–
–
–
–
3 step travel demand model (no Mode Choice) using TransCAD software
3 time periods (AM, PM and OP)
Detailed zone system for Will County
Good to analyze local projects and impacts in Will County
 CMAP Model
– 4 step Model developed using EMME software
– Detailed trip tables by time of day (8 periods), purpose, vehicle occupancy
– As a regional model, it’s good to study regional projects and impacts
 Given the differences, the two models will never replicate each
other completely
 Goal of this update – WC model reasonably follow CMAP
assumptions, but with greater detail within Will County
7
Model Area
 Study area comprises of Will county and contiguous
sections of Cook, DuPage, Kendall, Grundy and
Kankakee Counties in Illinois and Lake County in
Indiana
 Structure:
– 1,144 zones – 1074 Internal (within WC)
– 50 buffer zones within 3 mile radius of County border
– 20 external points of entry (POE)
8
Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ) Structure
9
Updates to Will County Model
 Be consistent with CMAP modeling process
 Network and socioeconomic updates:
– Base year updated from 2004 to 2010
– Future year updated from 2030 to 2040
 External trips updated using CMAP model data
10
Highway Network Updates
 Bring in line with 2015 CMAP network
 Updated for speeds, missing links, and number of
lanes and major projects
Roadway
Joliet-Naperville Rd
Caton Farm Road
143rd St
Plainfield-Naperville Road
143rd Street
95th Street Extension
I-355
Location
Crossroads Parkway to IL 53
County Line Road to Drauden Rd
Bell Road to Will/Cook Road
119th Street
I-355 to Lemont Road / State Road
Knoch Knolls Road to Boughton Road
I-55 to I-80
Improvement
Add Lanes
Add Lanes
Add Lanes
Add Lanes
Add Lanes
New Road
New Road
Lanes Per
Direction
2 lanes
2 lanes
2 lanes
2 lanes
2 lanes
2 lanes
3 Lanes
11
Base Year Model Update (contd.)
Speeds before the network update
Speeds after the network update
12
Base Year Model Update (contd.)
Lanes before the network update
Lanes after the network update
13
Validation
 Model was run with updated inputs and adjustments
made and checks made (to reasonably replicate
traffic conditions)
 Screenlines identified from the previous model
version updated to observed latest counts provided
by the County
 Screenline level comparison performed between
modeled and observed volumes
– External trips adjusted and model re-run
– Final screenline comparisons reasonably close to observed
14
Screenline Locations
15
2010 Model Statistics
Screenline Level Comparison
2004 Model (Previous Calibration)
Baseline (2010 Model)
2010
Diff= ModelPct
Diff= ModelPct
Screenline Counts Model
Count
Deviation Model
Count
Deviation
A-A
273,725
234,168
-39,557
-14% 250,862
-22,863
-8%
B-B
246,363
221,803
-24,560
-10% 208,471
-37,892
-15%
C-C
279,967
248,626
-31,341
-11% 233,191
-46,776
-17%
D-D
243,195
178,291
-64,904
-27% 193,380
-49,815
-20%
E-E
130,771
126,531
-4,240
-3% 121,326
-9,445
-7%
F-F
107,183
117,437
10,254
10% 108,068
885
1%
1-1
360,871
284,897
-75,974
-21% 304,939
-55,932
-15%
2-2
422,961
354,054
-68,907
-16% 370,917
-52,044
-12%
3-3
203,275
199,551
-3,724
-2% 223,707
20,432
10%
4-4
181,625
175,971
-5,654
-3% 208,060
26,435
15%
5-5
19,762
20,317
555
3%
27,268
7,506
38%
6-6
30,314
25,075
-5,239
-17%
25,248
-5,066
-17%
Total
2,500,012 2,186,721
-313,291
-13% 2,275,437
-224,575
-9%
All screenline deviations fall within the desirable range according to FHWA criteria from NCHRP 255.
16
Updating WC Model Forecast Year
 Updated from 2030 to 2040
 Updated population, employment and other
household characteristics
 Updated socioeconomic data helps to predict the
travel demand and trip behavior better
17
Future Year Highway Network Update
 Networks
updated to
bring in line
with 2040 CMAP
network
 Updated for
speeds, missing
links, and
number of
lanes, and major
projects
Roadway
Location
Improvement
Lanes Per
Direction
Eola Rd
248th Ave
Between Montgomery Rd and 87th St
Between 95th St and 103rd St
Add Lanes
Add Lanes
2 Lanes
2 Lanes
I-80
Between Ridge Rd and Lincoln Hwy
Add Lanes
3 lanes
CH 17 - Arsenal - Manhattan Rd
80th Ave
Weber Rd
143rd St
Bell Rd
Between Baseline Rd and IL 53
Between 191st St and 183rd St
Between 119th St and 135th St
Between State St and Bell Road
Between 131st St and 159th St
Add Lanes
Add Lanes
Add Lanes
Add Lanes
Add Lanes
2 Lanes
2 Lanes
3 lanes
2 Lanes
2 Lanes
Lincoln Hwy
Add Lanes
2 Lanes
159th St
Between Division St and North of I-55
Between Veterans Memorial Tollway
and Will-Cook Rd
Add Lanes
2 Lanes
143rd St
Laraway Road
Laraway Road
80th Avenue
80th Avenue
Cedar Road
Illiana
Between 143rd St and Steiner Rd
Nelson Road to Cedar Road
Gougar Rd to Nelson Rd
191st Street to 183rd Street
Over I-80
At Laraway Road
From I-55 to Stateline Rd
Extend Rd
Add Lanes
Add Lanes
Add Lanes
Add Lanes
Add Lanes
New Road
1 Lane
2 Lanes
2 Lanes
2 Lanes
2 Lanes
2 Lanes
2 Lanes
18
Future Year Model Update (contd.)
Speeds before the network update
Speeds after the network update
19
Future Year Model Update (contd.)
Lanes before the network update
Lanes after the network update
20
2040 Model Statistics
Screenline Level Comparison
Screenline Counts 2010 Model
A-A
273,725
250,862
B-B
246,363
208,471
C-C
279,967
233,191
D-D
243,195
193,380
E-E
130,771
121,326
F-F
107,183
108,068
1-1
360,871
304,939
2-2
422,961
370,917
3-3
203,275
223,707
4-4
181,625
208,060
5-5
19,762
27,268
6-6
30,314
25,248
Total
2,500,012
2,275,437
2040 EplusC Growth
Pct
Model
Vol
Growth
409,703 158,841
63%
379,504 171,033
82%
514,597 281,406
121%
459,055 265,675
137%
252,911 131,585
108%
167,536
59,468
55%
587,622 282,683
93%
656,108 285,191
77%
481,617 257,910
115%
409,118 201,058
97%
85,473
58,205
213%
78,020
52,772
209%
4,481,262 2,205,825
97%
21
Freight Analysis Assumptions
 Developed freight analysis in response to AC
feedback
 CMAP provided truck tables from by vehicle class for
2015 and 2040 (with and without Illiana)
 Directly replace internal truck trips
 Truck trips from outside Will County allocated
22
Allocating Truck Trips
 Grouped TAZs outside WC to POEs
 Summed vehicle classes
 Compared the
assigned truck
volumes to
CMAP truck
numbers and
scaled the
external to
external (EE)
trips
Freight Analysis Results
 Some differences in truck volumes between WC and
CMAP models
 TAZ assignments to POEs
 Adjustments to EE trips
 Balance analysis with available resources
Forecasting Transit Trips
 WC model does not have Mode Choice so cannot
model transit directly
 Modified approach using Federal Transit
Administration (FTA)’s System Trips on Project Software
(STOPS) tool
– RTA’s implementation
– Used / will be used for high level analysis on Metra and Pace
projects
– Link results to WC model to account for reduction in auto
trips
25
Transit Analysis Assumptions
 Includes the local bus route network and existing
Metra lines
 Off-line discussion with Metra and Pace to enable
detailed coding
 Project Coding:
– Express bus-on-shoulder
routes (dedicated lane)
– ART (faster speeds)
– Metra extensions
– New Metra service
– Service changes
Updated Project List
27
Updated Project List
 Revised transportation project list incorporates
AC feedback
 “Universe” of projects
– Represents a starting point of identified needs
• Finish line is the fiscally constrained Plan
– There may be deficiencies without a project
currently identified
– Outreach to solicit local submissions through WCGL
and DOT
28
Updated Project List (contd.)
 Project list is the basis from which to draw from
when developing the build scenarios
 Some projects may not have been identified as a
need by a sponsor agency, but may be identified
through this planning process
– In the end Will Connects 2040 is intended to articulate a
reasonable set of priorities in line with where the County
envisions growth
 Are there projects the AC would like to discuss?
29
Modeling Alternatives
30
Overview of Alternatives Analysis
 Start with the baseline
– 2040 Existing + Committed (E+C)
•
•
•
•
FY 2014-2019 CMAP TIP
FY 2015- 2020 Will County TIP
Build Will projects that have not yet been programmed
Illiana and South Suburban Airport (inaugural build)
 Alternatives Analysis
– Identify future year mobility issues and evaluate potential
improvements
– Assess roadway impacts under different scenarios, such as
excluding Illiana from the baseline
31
INSERT 2040 VOLUMES
32
INSERT 2040 TRUCK VOLUMES
33
INSERT 2040 LOS
34
Alternatives Analysis Framework
 Stepwise approach
– Iterative process that pivots from a
core package of improvements
– Engage AC throughout
Test Scenarios
and Assess
Benefits
 Identify deficiencies via:
–
–
–
–
Technical analysis
AC input
Survey and public input
DOT local knowledge
 Underlying principle – build
packages that include
complementary projects
Build
Build
Build
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Address Deficiencies
and Concepts
35
Build 1 Scenario
 Regional Priority
Improvements
– I-80 expansion
– I-55 expansion
REGIONAL
PRIORITIES
Build Scenario 1
Address Deficiencies and Concepts
36
I-355 to IL 126
(4 lane/each direction)
I-355 to Harlem Ave.
(4 lane/each direction)
I-80 to U.S. 6
(3 lane/each direction)
I-355 to I-55
(3 lane/each direction)
37
Build 2 Scenario
 Regional Priority
Improvements
Countywide Priority
Improvements
COUNTYWIDE
PRIORITIES
– Build 1 +
– Additional
Countywide
projects
 With / without
Illiana
Build Scenario 2
Address Deficiencies and Concepts
38
Build 3 Scenario
 Regional Priority
Improvements
Local Priority
Improvements
Modified, New, or
Illustrative Projects
MODIFIED, NEW
OR ILLUSTRATIVE
PROJECTS
– Build 1 & 2
– Projects that
address remaining
deficiencies
Build Scenario 3
Address Deficiencies and Concepts
39
Build 1 Results
40
INSERT BUILD 1 RESULTS
41
INSERT BUILD 1 RESULTS
42
INSERT BUILD 1 RESULTS
43
Next Steps
44
Next Steps





Conduct Alternatives Analysis
Finalize Project List
Develop Evaluation Criteria
Begin to Plan for the Open Houses
Continue Online Public Engagement Through
October 10
 Next Meeting – November 6 @ 10 AM
45
Thank You
Will County Division of Transportation
Christina Kupkowski, PE
(815) 727-8476
[email protected]
46