portland state university center for transportation studies
DESCRIPTION
PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR TRANSPORTATION STUDIES DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING NOHAD A. TOULAN SCHOOL OF URBAN STUDIES AND PLANNING Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report December 27, 2005. Acknowledgement. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITYCENTER FOR TRANSPORTATION STUDIESDEPARTMENT OF CIVIL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERINGNOHAD A. TOULAN SCHOOL OF URBAN STUDIES AND PLANNING
Second AnnualPortland Metropolitan RegionTransportation System Performance Report
December 27, 2005
2Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
AcknowledgementThis report is based on the Statewide Congestion Overview, prepared by Brian Gregor of the Oregon Department of Transportation in February 2004. This report draws from that work, including some data and methodologies. The graphical technique used to show Portland, seven peer western cities, and the remaining comparison metropolitan areas was originally conceived in the Statewide Congestion Overview. This technique has been replicated for new graphics produced in this report. Much of the information in this report is an update to the Statewide Congestion Overview to include 2003 data. The Statewide Congestion Overview is the inspiration for this report and is available at:http://www.odot.state.or.us/tddtpau/papers/cms/CongestionOverview021704.PDF
We gratefully acknowledge the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) for providing us the advance 2005 Urban Mobility Report (2003 data) for use in this report.
In addition, we sincerely appreciate the input and assistance provided by our other regional and statewide partners including the Oregon Department of Transportation, Metro, TriMet, the City of Portland and the Port of Portland.
3Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
ContributorsRobert L. Bertini and Nick Carey prepared this report, with assistance provided by Amber Springberg. We acknowledge Brian Gregor, Oregon Department of Transportation as a primary contributor, since we used data, methodologies and graphical techniques developed in the Statewide Congestion Overview (February 2004) which he authored. Sonoko Endo, Christopher Monsere, Jennifer Dill and Jacob Baglien, Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies assisted with the earlier version of this report. Any views presented here, or any errors or omissions are solely the responsibility of the Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies.
4Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
PrefaceOur transportation system is a key ingredient in the economy, quality of life and urban fabric of the Portland metropolitan area. It has been stated in the past that it is not possible to manage our transportation system tomorrow unless we understand how it is performing today. In this spirit, the Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies has been working with regional and statewide partners to develop new capabilities to measure, monitor and track the performance of the transportation system in real time and using archived data sources. We believe that it is possible to leverage these disparate data sources toward providing better transportation system performance information for planners, engineers, citizens, researchers and decision-makers. Using this information, we can collaboratively develop policies and programs that can help make our transportation system more efficient, equitable and effective.
With this in mind, we are pleased to present this Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report. We have attempted to make this report comprehensive and multimodal in spirit. We truly view this as a starting point, a work in progress, and we intend to continue to improve the content and format of this report in years to come. We hope that you will help us.
The Center for Transportation Studies strives to stimulate and conduct multidisciplinary research on transportation issues, facilitating the dissemination of information and encouraging the implementation of research results. We welcome both comments on this report and participation in Center for Transportation Studies programs and activities from all interested parties. We invite you to visit our website at www.cts.pdx.edu, and thank you in advance for your interest and input.
Robert L. Bertini, Ph.D., P.E.Associate Professor of Civil & Environmental Engineering and Urban Studies & PlanningDirector, Center for Transportation Studies
5Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Comparing Urban Areas
Using methods suggested by the 2004 Statewide Congestion Overview, this section examines ways that urban areas are compared using national-level data sources.
6Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Comparing Urban Areas
The Texas Transportation Institute’s annual Urban Mobility Report categorizes each urban area by size. In this study, we compare the Portland region to other urban areas in the Large category, with populations between 1-3 million people. The 27 Large areas are listed below. Data reported are through the year 2003.
When graphically comparing Large urban areas from the Urban Mobility Report, the colored lines are for the six western cities: Phoenix, Sacramento, San Diego, San Jose and Seattle, plus Portland. In the sample plot shown here, the grey lines are for the remaining cities in the Large category, and the dashed black line represents the average value measured across all 27 Large cities.
Large Urban Areas:
Atlanta GA Baltimore MD Buffalo NY Cincinnati OH-KY-IN Cleveland OH Columbus OH Denver-Aurora CO Indianapolis IN Kansas City MO-KS Las Vegas NV Milwaukee WI Minneapolis-St. Paul MN New Orleans LA Oklahoma City OK Orlando FL Phoenix AZ Pittsburgh PA Portland OR-WA Riverside-San Bernardino CA Sacramento CA San Antonio TX San Diego CA San Jose CA Seattle WA St. Louis MO-IL Tampa-St. Petersburg FL Virginia Beach VA
Population, 1982-2003
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
1982 1987 1992 1997 2002
Year
Po
pu
lati
on
(10
00s)
Phoenix
Portland
Sacramento
San Diego
San Jose
Seattle
Other
Average
7Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Portland-Vancouver Urbanized Area
This map shows the Portland-Vancouver Urbanized Area, which is used by the Federal Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS). The data reported by the Urban Mobility Report includes estimates of travel, population, land area for this area (different than the area inscribed by the Urban Growth Boundary and the U.S. Census). Changing the boundary of this area would change the results of the Urban Mobility Report.
8Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Urban Growth Boundary
In contrast to the map of the Portland-Vancouver urbanized area, this map shows the Metro 2002 Urban Growth Boundary.
9Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
U.S. Census Areas
From the standpoint of the U.S. Census, the Portland-Vancouver Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area (PMSA) includes Clackamas, Clark, Columbia, Multnomah, Washington and Yamhill Counties. The Salem PMSA includes Polk and Marion Counties. The Portland-Salem Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (CMSA) includes both the Salem and Portland-Vancouver PMSAs.
10Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
HPMS Data Collection Sites
This map shows sites in the Portland metropolitan area where traffic count data were recorded. Typically data are collected for one 48-hour period every three years. Thus, for the 2003 data set, 1/3 of the data were likely recorded in 2000, 1/3 in 2001 and 1/3 in 2002. For data recorded on state highways, the 48-hour data are adjusted to account for seasonal differences.
Data Source: Oregon Department of Transportation.
11Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
State of Oregon Trends
Using methods suggested by the 2004 Statewide Congestion Overview, this section examines trends on a statewide basis.
12Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Oregon Population and Vehicle Miles Traveled
Oregon saw an increase in traffic on major roads in urban areas of about 80 percent between 1980 and 2003. However, its annual growth rate has declined since 1991. Both population and VMT per capita have increased by about 33 percent over the same period. Compared with population, growth in VMT per capita is slowing and has not changed much over the past five years.
Data Sources: VMT - ODOT Finance Section; Population - Portland State University Center of Population Research & Census
(Figure 1-1)
Population and VMT in Oregon
100
120
140
160
180
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000Year
Pe
rce
nt
of
19
80
Va
lue
VMTPopulationVMT per Capita
13Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Population and VMT in Oregon
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
19
80
19
82
19
84
19
86
19
88
19
90
19
92
19
94
19
96
19
98
20
00
20
02
Year
Pe
rce
nt
of
19
80
Va
lue
VMTPopulationVMT per CapitaTransit Ridership
Note: transit ridership is for Portland-Salem CMSA
Oregon Population, Vehicle Miles Traveled and Transit Ridership
In addition to what was shown on the previous page, this graph shows that transit ridership (work trips) decreased between 1980 to 1990, and increased from 1990 to 2000. The increase in transit ridership between 1980 and 2003 was about 30 percent.
Data Sources: VMT - ODOT Finance Section; Population - Portland State University Center of Population Research & Census; Transit – U.S. Census Journey to Work. (Figure 1-2)
14Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Oregon VMT Related to Income
The ratio of VMT to total statewide personal income has not changed much over the past twenty years. It peaked twice in 1985 and 1992, and has been decreasing since then.
Data Sources: Statewide VMT provided by Brian Gregor, Statewide Congestion Overview; VMT - ODOT Finance Section; Personal Income - US Bureau of Economic Analysis
(Figure 1-3)
Statewide VMT Per $1,000 Personal Income (2003 Dollars), 1970-2003
300
350
400
1970 1980 1990 2000Year
Ve
hic
le M
ile
s P
er
$1
00
0
15Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Oregon VMT and Unemployment
This graph shows the relationship between annual VMT per capita and monthly Oregon unemployment rates since 1982.
Source: Statewide VMT provided by Brian Gregor, Statewide Congestion Overview; Unemployment – U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
(Figure 1-4)
Oregon VMT Per Capita and Unemployment
4,000
4,500
5,000
5,500
6,000
6,500
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Unemployment Rate (Percent)
VM
T/C
apit
a
16Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Oregon Per Capita VMT Related to Per Capita Income
Statewide personal income and VMT have shown similar trends of growth. Thus it appears that the increase in VMT is tracking with growth in the economy. This constant relationship between VMT and personal income per capita was a conclusion from the Statewide Congestion Overview.
Data Sources: VMT - ODOT Finance Section; Income - Bureau of Economic Analysis; CPI - Bureau of Labor Statistics
(Figure 1-5)
VMT Per Capita and Personal Income Per Capita, 1970-2003
100%
110%
120%
130%
140%
150%
160%
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000Year
Per
cen
t o
f 19
70 V
alu
e
Indexed Real Income perCapitaVMT per Capita
17Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Oregon Average Wages
Oregonians’ average annual wages (after adjusting for inflation) has not changed much over time. This is a similar conclusion to one shown in the Statewide Congestion Overview.
Data Sources: Income - Bureau of Economic Analysis; CPI - Bureau of Labor Statistics
(Figure 1-6)
Oregon Average Annual Wages
$20,000
$22,000
$24,000
$26,000
$28,000
$30,000
$32,000
$34,000
$36,000
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Year
Yea
r 20
03 D
oll
ars
18Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Oregon Highway Capital Investment
The ratio of highway capital investment to statewide personal income has declined rapidly over the past 43 years. It peaked in 1968 at about 3 percent, and has dropped to about 0.6 percent in 2000. As stated in the Statewide Congestion Overview (2004, p. 13) the decrease in highway capital investment increases the gap between VMT and lane-miles.
Data Sources: Personal Income - US Bureau of Economic Analysis; Capital Expenditures - Highway Statistics Summary to 1995, Table HF-202C, Highway Statistics reports for years 1996-2000, Table HF2 (Figure 1-7)
Percent of Highway Capital Investment to Oregon Personal Income, 1957-2000
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
1957 1962 1967 1972 1977 1982 1987 1992 1997
Year
Per
cen
t
19Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Oregon Gasoline Pump Prices
$0.00
$0.50
$1.00
$1.50
$2.00
$2.50
$3.00
1920 1940 1960 1980 2000Year
Do
lla
rs
Nominal Dollars
Constant Dollars (2003)
Oregon Gasoline Prices
This shows gasoline prices in nominal (unadjusted dollars) over the past 80 years. Also the prices have been adjusted for inflation which indicates that real gasoline pump prices have been declining steadily since 1920, with several large spikes in the 1970s. Since 1998 the trend has been increasing.
Data Sources: Pump prices – American Petroleum Institute and Oregon Department of Energy; CPI - Bureau of Labor Statistics
(Figure 1-8)
20Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Oregon Gasoline Taxes
Fuel taxes (federal and state) are calculated as a fixed number of cents per gallon purchased. As shown, the nominal Oregon gasoline tax (currently 24¢/gallon) has increased since 1920, but has not kept up with inflation. Similarly, the federal tax (currently 18¢/gallon) has lost purchasing power due to inflationary effects.
Data Sources: Pump prices – American Petroleum Institute and Oregon Department of Energy; CPI - Bureau of Labor Statistics
(Figure 1-9)
Oregon Gasoline Tax
$0.00
$0.10
$0.20
$0.30
$0.40
$0.50
$0.60
$0.70
$0.80
1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000Year
Do
lla
rs
State Gas Tax Nominal
State Gas Tax Constant (2003)
Federal Gas Tax Nominal
Federal Gas Tax Constant (2003)
21Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Portland Metropolitan Region Trends
Using methods suggested by the 2004 Statewide Congestion Overview, this section examines trends observed in the Portland Metropolitan Region.
22Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Portland Metropolitan Region Trends
This figure shows the proportion change in VMT, total annual travel time in peak periods, population and size (sq. mi.) in the Portland-Vancouver urbanized area. With growth in population, land area and the Oregon economy, VMT has increased. But as the urban area did not see increases in the ratio of size/population, travel time remained nearly constant.
Note: the size data used here are from the Urban Mobility Report and do not match the data used in the Statewide Congestion Overview.Data Sources: VMT, Population, Size, Speed & Travel Time - 2005 Urban Mobility Report (Figure 2-1)
Portland Area Trends 1982-2003
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
2.4
2.6
1982 1987 1992 1997 2002Year
Pro
po
rtio
n t
o 1
98
2 V
alu
e
VMTPopulationSizeSize/PopulationTravel Time
23Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Portland Area VMT and Transit Trends
This figure shows the proportion change in VMT, VMT per capita, transit boardings and transit boardings per capita in the Portland-Vancouver urbanized area.
Data Sources: VMT, Population, Size, Speed & Travel Time - 2005 Urban Mobility Report; Transit Boardings - TriMet
(Figure 2-2)
Portland Area VMT and Transit Trends 1982-2003
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
2.4
2.6
1982 1987 1992 1997 2002
Year
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f 1
98
2 V
alu
e
VMT
Population
VMT Per Capita
TriMet Boardings (1987 Ref)
TriMet Boardings Per Capita
24Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Portland Area Per Capita VMT and Transit Trends
This figure shows the proportion change in VMT per capita in the Portland-Vancouver urbanized area and Tri-Met transit boardings per capita.
Data Sources: VMT, Population, Size, Speed & Travel Time - 2005 Urban Mobility Report; Transit Boardings - TriMet
(Figure 2-3)
Portland Area VMT Per Capita and Transit Boardings Per Capita
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
1.25
1.30
1.35
1.40
1.45
1987 1992 1997 2002Year
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f 19
87 V
alu
e
VMT Per Capita
TriMet Boardings Per Capita
25Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Portland Daily Freeway and Arterial VMT and Lane Miles
Daily VMT on freeways more than doubled between 1982 and 2003, and has doubled on arterials. Lane miles on arterials have been added at a rate greater than the increase in VMT. However, lane miles on freeways have increased by only 25 percent over the past 20 years. The gap of VMT and lane miles on freeways may explain the declining speeds on Portland freeways.
Data Sources: DVMT and Lane Miles - 2005 Urban Mobility Report
(Figure 2-4)
Portland Freeway and PAS VMT and Lane Miles, 1982-2003
100%
120%
140%
160%
180%
200%
220%
240%
1982 1987 1992 1997 2002Year
Pe
rce
nt
of
19
82
Va
lue
Freeway DVMT (1000)
Arterial DVMT (1000)
Freeway Lane Miles
Arterial Lane Miles
26Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Portland Growth in Person Travel by Mode
This shows how daily person miles traveled increased between 1990-2000 by mode.
Data Sources: Table B-2 on page B-36 in the Statewide Congestion Overview; U.S. Census; 2004 Urban Mobility Report
Portland Daily Travel Growth by Mode
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
1990 2000
Year
Per
son
Mil
es T
rave
led
(10
00)
Other Road
Arterial
Freew ay
LRT
Bus
(Figure 2-5)
27Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Portland Delay Reduction Strategies
This chart shows the annual delay savings due to operational strategies, delay due to incidents and recurring delay. As shown, the delay experienced by motorists would be much greater without these strategies in place.
Caution: data are only available for the past four years, thus it is difficult to draw conclusions from any trends that may be visible.
Data Source: 2005 Urban Mobility Report
(Figure 2-6)
Portland Annual Delay Reduction Strategies
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
50,000
2000 2001 2002 2003Year
An
nu
al H
ou
rs o
f D
ela
y (
x1
00
0)
Total Delay Saved by Operations
Total Delay Due To Incidents
Total Recurring Delay
28Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Comparing Portland to Other Large Urban Areas
Using methods suggested by the 2004 Statewide Congestion Overview, this section compares Portland to other Large urban areas.
29Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Population Trends
This is a comparison of population growth among Large urbanized areas with population between 1 and 3 million. The Portland-Vancouver area has a lower population than average. Populations in most cities have increasing trends with about same rates. Only Phoenix (and Atlanta) show very rapid population increases.
Data Sources: Population - 2005 Urban Mobility Report
(Figure 3-1)
Population, 1982-2003
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
1982 1987 1992 1997 2002
Year
Po
pu
lati
on
(10
00s)
Phoenix
Portland
Sacramento
San Diego
San Jose
Seattle
Other
Average
30Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Road Usage Trends
This shows the number of vehicles per lane mile per hour during the peak period. Assuming that the average freeway lane has enough capacity to carry about 2,200 vehicles per hour under ideal conditions, the usage on Portland freeways and major arterials is equivalent to four hours of average capacity. Average usage among Large urbanized areas is about 3.5 times the capacity. This conclusion was drawn from the Statewide Congestion Overview (2004, p. A-16)
Data Sources: System Lane Miles, System DVMT % Percentage of Congested Time on System - 2005 Urban Mobility Report (Figure 3-3)
Peak Period Major Road System Usage1982-2003
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
1982 1987 1992 1997 2002Year
Pe
ak
Pe
rio
d V
eh
icle
s P
er
La
ne
Phoenix
Portland
Sacramento
San Diego
San Jose
Seattle
Other
Average
31Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Travel Distance Trends
This shows average travel distances per peak period traveler on the major road system. Peak period travelers in Portland drive shorter distances than average. Compared with vehicles per lane and the travel time index which are higher than average, this shows a different picture.
Data Sources: Freeway DVMT & Peak Travelers - 2005 Urban Mobility Report
(Figure 3-4)
Peak Period Vehicle Travel Distances on Congested Major Roads, 1982-2003
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
1982 1987 1992 1997 2002Year
Dai
ly M
iles
Per
Pea
k P
erio
d T
rave
ler
Phoenix PortlandSacramento San DiegoSan Jose SeattleOther Average
32Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Highway VMT Trends
This shows that daily VMT is increasing over time, but that Portland remains below average and is also growing at a rate slightly lower than average.
Data Sources: Freeway DVMT - 2005 Urban Mobility Report
(Figure 3-5)
Highway Daily VMT 1982-2003
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
1982 1987 1992 1997 2002Year
Hig
hw
ay
Da
ily V
eh
icle
Mile
s o
f T
rav
el
Phoenix Portland
Sacramento San DiegoSan Jose Seattle
Other Average
33Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Number of Peak Period Travelers
The number of peak period travelers in the Portland-Vancouver urbanized area is also lower than average, compared to other Large urban areas.
Data Sources: Freeway DVMT & Peak Travelers - 2005 Urban Mobility Report
(Figure 3-6)
Peak Period Travelers 1982-2003
0
300
600
900
1,200
1,500
1,800
1982 1987 1992 1997 2002Year
Pe
ak
Tra
ve
lers
(1
00
0s
)
Phoenix
Portland
Sacramento
San Diego
San Jose
Seattle
Other
Average
34Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Annual Congestion Trends
Annual congestion delay for peak period travelers in Portland has increased from 7 hours per year in 1982 to 39 hours per year in 2003, and has been close to the Large area average. It had been below the average before 1992, and exceeded the average after that. Shorter-than-average travel distance coupled with lower-than-average travel speed has leveled off the delay actually experienced by travelers.
Data Source: 2005 Urban Mobility Report
(Figure 3-7)
Major Road Congestion Delay, 1982-2003
0
20
40
60
80
100
1982 1987 1992 1997 2002Year
An
nu
al H
ou
rs o
f D
ela
y P
er
Pe
ak
Pe
rio
d T
rav
ele
r Phoenix PortlandSacramento San DiegoSan Jose SeattleOther Average
35Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Travel Time Trends
Portland annual travel time per peak period traveler has remained below average. Despite increases in congestion delay, travel time has not changed noticeably in the Portland-Vancouver urbanized area. Again, shorter-than-average travel distance has eased the impact of congestion on travel time.
Data Sources: Annual Travel Time & Peak Period Traveler - 2005 Urban Mobility Report
(Figure 3-8)
Trends in Travel Time, 1982-2003
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
1982 1987 1992 1997 2002
Year
An
nu
al H
ou
rs o
f T
rave
l T
ime
Per
Pea
k P
erio
d
Tra
vele
r
Phoenix PortlandSacramento San DiegoSan Jose SeattleOther Average
36Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Portland-Vancouver Area Population “Density” Trends
The Portland-Vancouver urbanized area (as defined on p. 7) has consistently exhibited a higher population “density” (population/area) than average Large urban areas, and it has been increasing slightly. The land area and population data used here indicates that among the Large urban areas, Las Vegas, San Jose and San Diego are the three densest cities. There are other ways to define the boundaries of urban areas, with different populations that would reveal different results.
Data Sources: Population & Land Area - 2005 Urban Mobility Report
(Figure 3-9)
Population Density, 1982-2003
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
1982 1987 1992 1997 2002Year
Per
son
s P
er S
qu
are
Mil
e
Phoenix PortlandSacramento San DiegoSan Jose SeattleOther Average
37Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Travel Time Index
Travel Time Index (TTI) is an estimate of how much longer it takes on average to travel on the major road system during peak times vs. off-peak times considering the effects of everyday recurring congestion and the effects of congestion due to incidents. The TTI is the ratio of travel time in the peak period to the travel time at free-flow conditions. A value of 1.35 indicates a 20-minute free-flow trip takes 27 minutes in the peak
Data Source: 2005 Urban Mobility Report
(Figure 3-10)
Travel Time Index, 1982-2003
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1982 1987 1992 1997 2002Year
Tra
vel T
ime
Ind
ex
PhoenixPortlandSacramentoSan DiegoSan JoseSeattleOtherAverage
38Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Travel Time and Population
Portland’s population is 13th out of the 27 Large areas (25th out of all 85 cities), and the amount of travel per peak period traveler is 21st out of the 27 Large areas.
Figure 3-11: Travel Time and Population 2003
BaltimoreTampa
Seattle
San Diego
Minneapolis
PhoenixSt. Louis
Indianapolis
San Antonio
Cincinnati
San Jose
AtlantaRiverside
Orlando
Columbus
Denver
PORTLAND
Virginia Beach Sacramento
Kansas City
Oklahoma City
Pittsburgh
Cleveland
Buffalo
New Orleans
Milwaukee
Las Vegas100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Population
Ann
ual H
ours
of T
rave
l Per
Pea
k P
erio
d Tr
avel
er
(Figure 3-11)
Travel Time and Population 2003
39Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Travel Time and Travel Time Index
The annual amount of travel per peak period traveler in Portland is among the 7 lowest when compared to other Large cities, while the Travel Time Index for Portland is among the top 6 out of the 27 Large cities.
Figure 3-12: Travel Time and Travel Time Index 2003
BaltimoreTampa
SeattleSan Diego
Minneapolis
PhoenixSt. Louis
Indianapolis
San Antonio
Cincinnati
San Jose
AtlantaRiverside
Orlando
Columbus Denver
PORTLANDVirginia Beach Sacramento
Kansas City
Oklahoma City
Pittsburgh
Cleveland
Buffalo
New Orleans
Milwaukee
Las Vegas100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
Travel Time Index
Ann
ual H
ours
of T
rave
l Per
P
eak
Per
iod
Trav
eler
(Figure 3-12)
Travel Time and Travel Time Index 2003
40Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Commute Time Trends
This shows travel time to work for workers who work outside their homes from Census data. Travel time to work has been increasing in all Large urbanized areas including Portland. Travel time to work in Portland area remains below average. The longest commute time to work in the Large urban areas is in Atlanta (31.2 minutes).
Caution: data are only available at 10 year intervals, thus it is difficult to draw conclusions from any trends that may be visible.
Data Sources: FWHA, Census Transportation Planning Package (Figure 3-13)
Census Commute to Work Travel Time, 1980-2000
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
1980 1990 2000Year
Co
mm
ute
Tim
e (
min
)
Phoenix PortlandSacramento San DiegoSan Jose SeattleOther Average
41Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Share of “Drive Alone” Commuters
The percentage of commuters who drove alone to work (out of all modes) has been increasing in most cities. But the percentage has dropped in Portland and some other urbanized areas. Portland and Seattle have the lowest fractions of commuters who drove alone among Large urban areas.
Caution: data are only available at 10 year intervals, thus it is difficult to draw conclusions from any trends that may be visible.
Data Sources: FWHA, Census Transportation Planning Package (Figure 3-14)
Percentage of "Drove Alone" Commuters, 1980-2000
60
65
70
75
80
85
1980 1990 2000Year
Per
cen
tag
e o
f D
rove
Alo
ne
Portland
Sacramento
San Diego
Seattle
Other
Average
42Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Percentage of "Transit" Commuters, 1980-2000
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
1980 1990 2000
Year
Per
cen
tag
e o
f T
ran
sit
PortlandSacramentoSan DiegoSeattleOtherAverage
Transit Commute Share Trends
Census data show that the percent of commuters who used transit in both Portland and Seattle has increased since 1990, in contrast to most of their Large urban regions where the share has decreased.
Caution: data are only available at 10 year intervals, thus it is difficult to draw conclusions from any trends that may be visible.Data Sources: FWHA, Census Transportation Planning Package
(Figure 3-15)
43Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Delay Reduction Due to Operational Strategies
For the past three years, the Urban Mobility Report has estimated the percent delay reduction due to operational strategies such as incident management, freeway ramp metering and arterial traffic signal coordination. As shown, the percent reduction in Portland is above average when compared to other regions that have operational strategies in place.
Caution: data are only available for the past three years, thus it is difficult to draw conclusions from any trends that may be visible.Data Source: 2005Urban Mobility Report
(Figure 3-16)
Delay Reduction Due to Operational Strategies, 2000-2003
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
2000 2001 2002 2003Year
Pe
rce
nt
Re
du
cti
on
Portland
San Jose
Seattle
San Diego
Phoenix
Sacramento
Average
44Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Safety Trends
Using methods suggested by the 2004 Statewide Congestion Overview, this section examines recent transportation safety trends.
45Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Oregon Motor Vehicle Crash Trends
Despite increasing travel on Oregon highways, both total and fatal crashes numbers have declined as a proportion of 1980 values. Improvements in vehicle design, highway design, and social behaviors such as increased seat belt use and less tolerance for impaired driving have contributed to the improvement.
Data Source: Oregon Department of Transportation (Figure 4-1)
Minimum property damage requirements for crash reporting has changed over the time shown
Total and Fatal Crashes in Oregon
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000Year
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f 1
98
0 V
alu
e
Total Crashes
Fatal Crashes
VMT
46Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Motor Vehicle Fatality Rates, 1994-2003
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
1994 1996 1998 2000 2002Year
Mo
tor
Ve
hic
le F
ata
liti
es
pe
r 1
00
,00
0,0
00
VM
T
CaliforniaIdahoMontanaOregonWashingtonOtherUSA
National Motor Vehicle Crash Trends
This figure shows a comparison of motor vehicle fatality rates per 100 million vehicle miles traveled for all 50 US states. Although fatal crashes represent only a portion of the total safety performance they provide a useful benchmark for comparison. Oregon rates have generally been below the national average.
Data Source: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis and Reporting System (FARS)
(Figure 4-2)
47Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Motor Vehicle Fatality Rates, 1994-2003
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
1994 1996 1998 2000 2002Year
Mo
tor
Ve
hic
le F
ata
litie
s p
er
10
0,0
00
,00
0 V
MT
P hoenix P ortland
Sacramento San Diego
San J ose Seattle
Other Average
Motor Vehicle Safety
This figure shows a comparison of motor vehicle fatality rates expressed per 100 million VMT. The Portland urbanized area is below average with a slight downward trend. Note that all cities are below the national rate (approximately 1.75).
Data Source: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis and Reporting System (FARS), System DVMT estimates from Urban Mobility Report, 2005
(Figure 4-3)
Only fatal crashes that occurred in the principal cities of each metropolitan statistical area (MSA) as defined by the US Census are included in this analysis.
48Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Pedestrian Safety
This figure shows the “Pedestrian Danger Index” for the 27 Large urbanized areas. The index is calculated by dividing the average yearly pedestrian fatality rate per 100,000 population by the percentage of commuters walking to work and the normalizing that figure to 100. Lower indices are desirable. The index may not reflect the exposure of the total number of people walking since it only includes adjustment for work trips.
Data Source: Surface Transportation Policy Project. “Mean Streets 2004” using NHSTA FARS data, US Census Journey to Work
Note: The complete index includes a ranking of 49 metropolitan areas. MSA and CMSA names have been shortened in figure.
(Figure 4-4)
2003 Pedestrian Safety Comparison
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Orla
ndo,
FL
Tam
pa, F
L
Atla
nta,
GA
Pho
enix
, AZ
Las
Veg
as, N
V
Kan
sas
City
, MO
-KS
Sac
ram
ento
, CA
St.
Loui
s, M
O-I
L
Okl
ahom
a C
ity, O
K
New
Orle
ans,
LA
San
Ant
onio
, TX
Indi
anap
olis
, IN
San
Die
go, C
A
Den
ver,
CO
Was
hing
ton,
DC
-MD
-VA
Buf
falo
, NY
San
Fra
ncis
co, C
A
Por
tland
, OR
-WA
Sea
ttle,
WA
Col
umbu
s, O
H
Nor
folk
, VA
Min
neap
olis
-St.
Pau
l, M
N
Milw
auke
e-R
acin
e, W
I
Cin
cinn
ati,
OH
Cle
vela
nd, O
H
Pitt
sbur
gh, P
A
Ped
estr
ian
Dan
ger
Ind
ex
49Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Freight Trends
Using methods suggested by the 2004 Statewide Congestion Overview, this section examines recent freight transportation trends.
50Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
National Freight Trends
This shows the national trends in ton-miles of freight related to gross domestic product. The ton-miles moved per capita has remained relatively flat, while the total ton miles continues to grow, yet at a lower rate than the overall GDP.
Data Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Shipments in America
(Figure 5-1)
Freight Ton-Miles and U.S. Real Gross Domestic Product
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000Year
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f 1
97
0 V
alu
e
Ton-miles
Ton-miles per Dollar of Real GDP
Ton-Miles per Capita
Overall Real GDP
51Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
U.S. Freight Mode Trends
This shows U.S. Commodity Flow statistics for the past ten years, for both value and weight by mode. As shown, truck movements dominate both value and weight. The impact of air freight in high value movements is also visible.
Data Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Shipments in America
(Figure 5-2)
Freight Value by Mode in the US
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
Truck Rail Water Air MultipleModes
Other andUnknow n
ModesMode
Va
lue
(b
illi
on
do
lla
rs)
1993
1997
2002
Freight Tons by Mode in the US
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
Truck Rail Water Air MultipleModes
Other andUnknow n
ModesMode
We
igh
t (m
illi
on
to
ns
)1993
1997
2002
52Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Freight Value by Mode in Oregon
0
20
40
60
80
Truck Rail Water Air Multiple Modes Other andUnknow n
ModesMode
Va
lue
(b
illio
n d
olla
rs)
1993
1997
2002
Freight Tons by Mode in Oregon
0
40
80
120
160
Truck Rail Water Air Multiple Modes Other andUnknow n
ModesMode
We
igh
t (m
illio
n t
on
s)
1993
1997
2002
Oregon Freight Mode Trends
This shows Oregon Commodity Flow statistics for the past ten years, for both value and weight by mode. As shown, truck movements dominate both value and weight.
Data Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Shipments in America
(Figure 5-3)
53Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
U.S. Freight Mode Trends
This shows U.S. Commodity Flow statistics for the past ten years, for both value and weight by mode. As shown, truck movements dominate both value and weight. The impact of air freight in high value movements is also visible.
Data Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Shipments in America
(Figure 5-4)
Freight Value by Mode in the US
0
20
40
60
80
Truck Rail Water Air MultipleModes
Other andUnknown
ModesMode
Va
lue
(p
erc
en
t)
1993
1997
2002
Freight Tons by Mode in the US
0
20
40
60
80
Truck Rail Water Air MultipleModes
Other andUnknown
ModesMode
We
igh
t (p
erc
en
t o
f to
tal) 1993
1997
2002
54Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Oregon Freight Mode Trends
This shows Oregon Commodity Flow statistics for the past ten years, for both value and weight by mode. As shown, truck movements dominate both value and weight.
Data Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Shipments in America
(Figure 5-5)
Freight Value by Mode in Oregon
0
20
40
60
80
Truck Rail Water Air MultipleModes
Other andUnknown
ModesMode
Va
lue
(p
erc
en
t)
1993
1997
2002
Freight Tons by Mode in Oregon
0
20
40
60
80
Truck Rail Water Air MultipleModes
Other andUnknown
ModesMode
We
igh
t (p
erc
en
t o
f to
tal) 1993
1997
2002
55Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Portland Region Transit and Non-Motorized Transportation Trends
Using methods suggested by the 2004 Statewide Congestion Overview, this section examines recent trends in transit ridership and non-motorized transportation in the Portland region.
56Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Transit Market Share
Portland appears in the top ten CMSAs in the nation with more than 5% work trip transit market share.
Data Source: U.S. Census Journey to Work, includes taxicabs.
Top Ten U.S. 2000 Transit Market Share
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
New
Yor
k
Chi
cago
San
Fra
ncis
co
Was
hing
ton
DC
Bos
ton
Phi
lade
lphi
a
Sea
ttle
Pitt
sbur
gh
Por
tland
New
Orle
ans
CMSA
Tra
nsi
t M
arke
t S
har
e (P
erce
nt)
(Figure 6-1)
57Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Change in Transit Ridership
Portland appears fifth in the top ten CMSAs in terms of the number of work trip transit riders added between 1990-2000. Portland added nearly 25,000 riders. The New York CMSA (which by itself accounted for 36% of all transit work trips in 1990) added approximately the same number. This was a period during which Portland’s capital transit investment in the Westside MAX came online.
Data Source: U.S. Census Journey to Work.
Change in Number of Workers Using Transit: 1990-2000
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
Se
attl
e
Sa
nF
ran
cisc
o
Bo
sto
n
Ne
w Y
ork
Po
rtla
nd
CMSA
Ad
ded
Tra
nsi
t R
ider
s (1
990-
2000
)
(Figure 6-2)
58Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Increase in Transit Share
Portland led the nation in the percent increase in workers using transit, 1990-2000.
Data Source: U.S. Census
Percent Increase in Workers Using Transit 1990-2000
54%
31%
10% 9%
1%0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Po
rtla
nd
Se
attl
e
Bo
sto
n
Sa
nF
ran
cisc
o
Ne
w Y
ork
CMSA
Pe
rce
nt
Inc
rea
se
(Figure 6-3)
59Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Lane Equivalents Saved By Transit Ridership
This shows an estimate of the magnitude of the impact of transit ridership into downtown Portland during weekday peak periods. For example, this indicates that an equivalent of 1.5 freeway lanes are “saved” by the presence of transit capacity along the I-5 corridor.
Data Source: TriMet
2002 Transit Ridership in Lane EquivalentsAverage Weekday - A.M. peak hour direction
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
I-5
fro
m N
ort
h
Bro
ad
wa
y B
rid
ge
Ste
el B
rid
ge
Bu
rnsi
de
Bri
dg
e
Mo
rris
on
Bri
dg
e
Ha
wth
orn
e B
rid
ge
Ro
ss I
sla
nd
Bri
dg
e
Ma
cad
am
Ave
Ba
rbu
r A
ve
Te
rwill
ige
r
Su
nse
t H
wy,
US
26
W.
Bu
rnsi
de
La
ne
Eq
uiv
ale
nts
(Figure 6-4)
60Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Bicycle Commuting
The percent of workers commuting by bicycle in Portland and in Portland/Vancouver has increased between 1990-2000, despite a decrease in the national average.
Data Sources: 1990 Summary Tape File 3 (SF 3) - Sample data, P049. Means of Transportation to Work - Universe: Workers 16 years and over; 2000 Summary File 3 (SF 3) - Sample data, P30. Means of Transportation to Work for Workers 16 Years and Over - Universe: Workers 16 years and over
Percent of Workers Commuting by Bicycle
0.67%
0.61%
0.41%
0.86%
0.77%
0.38%
0.00%
0.10%
0.20%
0.30%
0.40%
0.50%
0.60%
0.70%
0.80%
0.90%
1.00%
Portland Portland/Vancouver National Average
1990
2000
(Figure 6-5)
61Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Bicycle Commuting
This figure shows that in 2000 Portland and the combined Portland/Vancouver metropolitan area stood out nationally as exhibiting the second- and third-highest proportion of bicycle commuters among comparable cities.
Data Source: 2000 Summary File 3 (SF 3) - Sample data, P30. Means of Transportation to Work for Workers 16 Years and Over - Universe: Workers 16 years and over
2000 Urban Area Bicycle Commute Comparison
0.0%
0.2%
0.4%
0.6%
0.8%
1.0%
1.2%
1.4%
San
Jos
e
Por
tland
Por
tland
/Van
couv
er
Sac
ram
ento
Sea
ttle
Las
Veg
as
For
t La
uder
dale
Mia
mi
Orla
ndo
Den
ver
Nor
folk
Col
umbu
s
Milw
auke
e
Cle
vela
nd
Indi
anap
olis
New
ark
For
t W
orth
San
Ant
onio
Cin
cinn
ati
Pitt
sbur
gh
Kan
sas
City
Per
cen
t o
f W
ork
ers
Co
mm
uti
ng
by
Bic
ycle
(Figure 6-6)
62Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Walk Commuting
The percent of workers commuting on foot in Portland and in Portland/Vancouver has decreased between 1990-2000, similar to the decrease in the national average.
Data Sources: 1990 Summary Tape File 3 (SF 3) - Sample data, P049. Means of Transportation to Work - Universe: Workers 16 years and over; 2000 Summary File 3 (SF 3) - Sample data, P30. Means of Transportation to Work for Workers 16 Years and Over - Universe: Workers 16 years and over
Percent of Workers Commuting on Foot
3.51%3.27%
3.90%
3.27%
2.95% 2.93%
0.00%
0.50%
1.00%
1.50%
2.00%
2.50%
3.00%
3.50%
4.00%
4.50%
Portland Portland/Vancouver National Average
1990
2000
(Figure 6-7)
63Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Walk Commuting
This figure indicates that Portland stood out in 2000 as exhibiting the second-highest proportion of walk commuters among comparable cities, with more than 3% of commuters choosing to walk to work.
Data Source: 2000 Summary File 3 (SF 3) - Sample data, P30. Means of Transportation to Work for Workers 16 Years and Over - Universe: Workers 16 years and over
2000 Urban Area Walk Commute Comparison
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
3.5%
4.0%
Pitt
sbur
gh
Por
tland
Sea
ttle
New
ark
Por
tland
/Van
couv
er
Milw
auke
e
Nor
folk
Col
umbu
s
Las
Veg
as
San
Ant
onio
Cin
cinn
ati
Cle
vela
nd
Mia
mi
Den
ver
Sac
ram
ento
San
Jos
e
Indi
anap
olis
For
t W
orth
Kan
sas
City
For
t La
uder
dale
Orla
ndo
Per
cen
t o
f W
ork
ers
Co
mm
uti
ng
by
Fo
ot
(Figure 6-8)
64Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Future Data Sources
This section describes future data sources that will assist in preparation of future editions of this report. Portland State University is now the Portland region’s official data archive for intelligent transportation systems data. Since July 2004, PSU has been archiving data from the region’s freeways. This image shows the speed recorded on northbound I-5 on one day.
65Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Freeway Segment Travel Time
This figure shows average freeway segment travel time (for a portion of northbound I-5 near Delta Park) by hour of the day for the months of August-September 2005. The graph shows the mean values as well as one standard deviation above and below the average.
66Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Freeway Segment Travel Time Reliability
This figure shows the estimated travel time for Northbound I-5 during May 2005. The green line shows the mean travel time by time of day, while the red line shows the 95th percentile travel time. The blue bars show the percent of the time that each 5 minute time slice experienced congestion during the month.
67Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Freeway Segment Travel Time Reliability
This figure illustrates the reliability of travel time for Northbound I-5 during March 2005. This map uses line thickness to illustrate travel time reliability for the entire corridor between 5 and 6 pm.
68Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Freeway Traffic Volume Trends
These figures show actual traffic volume data for one location on eastbound I-84 (39th Ave). The upper figure shows 5-minute volumes measured on one day (September 1, 2004), while the lower figure shows the mean (and plus/minus one standard deviation) of the hourly volumes measured during the month of August 2004.
69Second Annual Portland Metropolitan Region Transportation System Performance Report
Portland State University Center for Transportation Studies 2005
Closure
In this report we have attempted to present a wide array of methods of assessing the performance of the transportation system, using analysis of available data. We hope that this has contributed to the important debate regarding the kind of transportation system, quality of life and region, that we want to have in the future.