Surface Transportation Committee (STC) Meeting

Tuesday, August 4, 2020 at 9:00 a.m.

Google Meet Information: Meeting ID: meet.google.com/dwz-ggyz-nge

Dial in: (530) 428-6268

PIN: 638 017 917#

Annotated Agenda

1.0 Call to Order by Chairman and Pledge of Allegiance

2.0 Minutes of February 4, 2020

Action Requested: Approval

6100 Southport Road

Portage, Indiana 46368

(219) 763-6060

www.nirpc.org

3.0 Discussion: Upcoming Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) (Charles Bradsky) (pp. 2-9) Staff will lead a discussion of the plans for the upcoming Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA), the next open opportunity for eligible applicants to apply for federal funds for surface transportation projects.

4.0 Presentation: Draft of MOVE NWI (Scott Weber) (pp. 10-58)

5.0 Fiscal Years 2021-2022 Unified Planning Work Program Updates (Staff)

Staff will discuss progress on the surface transportation-related tasks in the Fiscal Years 2021-2022 Unified Planning Work Program, the program that aligns the Commission’s projects and resources to tasks fitting the NWI 2050 Plan and other Commission priorities.

6.0 Other Informational Discussion (Chair)

7.0 Adjournment. The next STC meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, November 3, 2020 at 9:00

a.m. in the Lake Michigan Room at the NIRPC office.

The Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission (NIRPC) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, marital status, familial status, parental status, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

NIRPC Lake Michigan Room February 4, 2020

Minutes

Jeff Huet called the meeting to order at 9:07 a.m. with the Pledge of Allegiance and s-elf introductions. In attendance were Dean Button, City of Hammond, Jeff Huet, Town of Schererville and Acting Chair. Sandy Kolb, City of Portage, and A.J. Monroey, CofitPortage, George Topoll, Union Township, and Kevin Breitzke, Porter County.

NIRPC staf present were Scott Weber, Kevin Polette, Mitch Barloga, Candice Eklund, Peter Kimball, and Flor Baum.

There were no public comments.

The minutes of the October 1, 2019 meeting were approved on a motion by Dean Button as concurred by Jeff Huet.

Mitch Barloga presented on the Living Streets Resolution draft policy that is merging both Complete and Green Streets elements into one policy. The draft policy will be pretseednand

reviewed by each topical committee, including TPC, before being recommended to the Commission meeting for final approval on March 19, 2020. All comments need to be submitted to Mitch

Barloga at mbarloga@nirpc.org or 21-9254 -2518 by the end of Febur ary. If approved, the policy will be used at the next Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA).

Scott Weber presented on F-Y2021 -2022 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP). This is one of the four core planning documents that, as an agency, NIRPC is requdirteo adopt, and will be adopted annually. The UPWP is NIRPC’s strategic planning on how funds will be allocated. The goal is to formally adopt the next UPWP by March of 2020. Currently there is a working draft that includes a Data Planning Program anda Spatial Analysis, which Peter Kimball is prominently

working on. The working draft of the UPWP will continue to include Congestion Management, Travel Demand Modeling, and Air Quality Conformity. The working draft for the UPWP will include a new addition of a more integrated Surface Transportation Planning Task, with an emphasis on corridor management, which was requested by INDOT. The draft is not yet viewable to the public.

Scott Weber presented on the Congestion Management Process (CMP). NIRPCediserFally

required to administer a CMP for northwest Indiana since it is a region greater than 200,00 people. A CMP is a framework for managing congestion in a way that suits users’ expectations. The draft will be presented to the Technical planning commttiee. The final draft of the CMP will be presented to the Commission in May to officially adopt the document.

Scott conducted an anonymous polling, with present members, with a focus on objectives and strategies of the CMP. The objectives were categzoerid into four areas: 1. Travel time reduction 2. Mode shift 3. Improve access 4. Maximize efficiency of resources. These objectives will enable NIRPC to stretch Federal dollars and encompass more projects. The strategies of the CMP were also categorizedinto four areas: 1. Travel demand management 2. Improving operations 3.

Addressing land use 4. Adding capacity. The committee discussed adjusting the wording, “adding capacity,” to either, “strategic capacity,” or, “responsible capacity.”

Peter Kimball ga ve an update on the Designation of Critica l Urba n Freight Corridors (CUFC). The FHWA is finalizing the application now. A sub-comm ittee was formed, and had their first meeting, to figure out the allotted mileage. The sub-com mittee talked about presenting corridors to the MPO Council on a case by case basis.

Scott Weber gave an update on the Congestion Management Process (CMP). A survey was

distributed last fall and it is being tabulated. The CMP will formally be adopted by the Comm ission in May. The draft will be released by the end of March. Feedback will be accepted in April.

Scott Weber gave an update on the Annua l Performance Dashboard. This is a project in the current work program to create an interactive dashboard on the NIRPC website. Members of the public

can view all the performance measures connected to the NWI 2050 Plan. The dashboard is expected to go live in December of 2020.

Scott Weber gave an update on the Connected and Autom ated Vehicles (CV/ AV) Project. A brochure is being created, and it will be distributed in June of 2020 to inform the public of best practices for the deployment of connected and automated vehicles.

Scott Weber gave an update on the 2018 Household Tra vel Survey Data. NIRPC is partnering with Va lpa raiso University for the Household Tra vel Survey to address geographical differences within our region and mode choices. Results are expected by the end of April.

There was no other business.

The next Surface Tra nsportation Com mittee meeting is scheduled for May 5, 2020 at NIRPC.

On a motion by George Topoll and a second by Kevin Breitzke, Jeff Huet adjourned the meeting at 10:00 a.m.

Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission Application for funding in the 2020 - 2024 Transportation Improvement Program

Step

1

cost (Please use CY 2021 dollars; How much do you propose contributing to the construction costs? ▲ we will inflate the cost.) Does this amount include CE? (y/n)

According to your match entry you are over/under matched by ►

2 How much do you propose requesting in PE/ROW? ▲

Add'l overmatch ▲

If you elect to pay for PE/ROW with local funds that amount will be considered overmatch for scoring purposes.

conditional format this percentage in cell I50 to the total amount available in cell T4

2

Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission Application for funding in the 2020 - 2024 Transportation Improvement Program

please provide concurrance documentation. (y/n) ►

If yes, what percentage ►

Railroad Impacted?

If Yes, are Improvements being made?

Asset Management (weighted 25%) Self NIRPC FINAL

How does the project contribute to roadway asset management? Please contact sweber@nirpc.org if you need assistance with this question. Maximum 5 pts given.

Q1 Roadway’s pavement PASER rating is less than 5 – 6 pts 6

Roadway’s pavement PASER rating is 5 or greater – 0 pts

What is the functional classification of the route? Please consult the functional classification map. Please contact sweber@nirpc.org if you need assistance with this question. Maximum 8 pts given.

Q2 Principal arterial – 5 pts Minor collector – 0 pts 5

Minor arterial – 3 pts Major collector – 3 pts

Local road – 0 pts

If this is a bridge project, give the appropiate score from the Bridges! tab. Maximum 5 pts given.

Q3

Q3

0-3 - 0 pts 6

4-7 - 3 pts

8-10 - 6 pts

What is the ADT for this road / bridge?

Q4 ≤ 8,000 - 0 pts ≤ 12,000 - 5 pts 8,000 < > 12,000 - 3 pts

5 22

21%

Safety Self NIRPC FINAL

What is the mororized and non-mororized crash rate in the project area? Please reference crash severity map. Please contact pkimball@nirpc.org for further information on the map. In case of different rates, use the higher rate. Maximum 5 pts given.

Q5 High location - 5 pts Lower location - 1 pts

Medium location - 3 pts Other location - 0 pts

Motorized

Non-Motorized

5 5 5%

Access & Connections (Weighted 15%) Self NIRPC FINAL

What is the residential density within one mile of the new roadway? Please contact eibrahim@nirpc.org if you need assistance with this question. Maximum 5 pts given.

Add walk score and bike score take average

Q6 5 or more/acre – 3 pts 2-4.99 – 2 pts

1-1.99 – 1 pts

Less than 1 – 0 pts

3 use hperlink

What is the average of the walk score and the bike score for the project location? Please visit www.walkscore.com and input an address nearby the location. If the project is linear in scope, please take the average score of three pts along the project which would include the endpts and middle. Take the average of all scores and show work Please contact mbarloga@nirpc.org if you need assistance with this question. Maximum 5 pts given.

Q7 Below 50 – 5 pts

50-74 – 3 pts

75-100 – 0 pts

Walk score location 1 Bike score location 1 Average

55 Walk score location 2

65 Bike score location 2

60 Average

25 Walk score location 3

35 Bike score location 3

30 Average

15 Final Average 5

25 36.66666667

20

What is the transit access within ½ mile of the project area, including bus stops, commuter rail stations? Please contact jwinters@nirpc.org if you need assistance with this question.

Q8

Q8

Maximum 2 pts given.

More than 1 - 2 pts 2

1 stop - 1 pt

How will the project enhance network connectivity? Please consult the functional classification map. Please contact sweber@nirpc.org if you need assistance with this question. Maximum 5 pts given.

Q9

Q9

Connects to other principal arterials or higher classification roadways on both sides of the new road – 3 pts

Connects to another principal arterial or higher classification roadway on one side – 2 pts 3

Connects to a minor arterial – 1 point

Connects roads classified as collectors or lower – 0 pts

Q10

Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission Application for funding in the 2020 - 2024 Transportation Improvement Program

Not in area - 0 pts

Environmental Benefits (Weighted 10%) Self NIRPC FINAL

Does the project reduce emissions? Please use FHWA CMAQ calculator located here: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/air_quality/cmaq/toolkit/index.cfm Please contact sweber@nirpc.org if you need assistance with this question. Maximum 5 pts given.

Q11 Cost per ton is less than $1,000,000 – 5 pts 5

Cost per ton is between $1,000,001 and $2,000,000 – 3 pts Cost per ton is greater than $2,000,000 – 0 pts

Does the project include green infrastructure elements? Elements may include: Living or Complete Streets; stormwater management or rain garden; biodiversity; land conservation; bio- swales; native vegetation in the road rights-of-way; permeable pavement in rights-of-ways; bio-retention curb extension; infiltration trench; or wildlife crossing. Maximum 3 pts given.

Q12 3

1 or 2 - 1 point

3 or more - 3 pts

8 8%

Economic Generation (Weighted 0%) Self NIRPC FINAL

Q13 Not applicable

0 0 0%

Local/Regional Plans + Policy Support (Weighted 20%) Self NIRPC FINAL

Is this currently a legacy project? A legacy project is defined to be a stand alone project or a phase of a project that has an approved NEPA document, or the project or phase has already

Q14 received federal funding through NIRPC. If so, give the INDOT des number. 5

Yes - 5 pts

No - 0 pts

Des #

How does the project advance local plans or policies? Project may be cited in local comprehensive plan, thoroughfare plan, capital improvements program, traffic impact fee plan, or other local plan/study. Please describe plans and policies. Maximum 10 pts given.

Q15

Q15

2 or more policy/plans - 5 pts

1 policy/plans - 2 pts 5

No policy/plans - 0 pts

How does the project advance region plans or policies? Please describe how the project achieves objectives in regional plans or policies and cite those plans and policies. Please contact eibrahim@nirpc.org if you need assistance with this question. Maximum 5 pts given.

Project is cited in current long-range plan (NWI 2050), located in a Creating Livable Communities “Main Center” (see Main Center map), Living Streets,

Q16

Q16

or other published plan for the region that includes at least all of Lake, Porter, and LaPorte Counties – 5 pts

Project is one of the 22 segments identified in the Regional Corridors Study (please reference the Regional Corridors Study) – 5 pts 5

Project is not cited in any of the above – 0 pts

How does the project adhere to the MPO’s Congestion Management Process? Please reference Congested Corridors Map. Please contact sweber@nirpc.org if you need assistance with this question. Maximum 5 pts given.

The project location is within 0.5 mile of a section of road or intersection with a Level of Service (LOS) E or F – 5 pts

Q17 The project location is within 0.5 mile of a section of road or intersection with a Level of Service D – 3 pts

The project location is within 0.5 mile of a section of road or intersection with Level of Service C or better – 0 pts

5 20

19%

Partnerships / Collaborations (Weighted 15%) Self NIRPC FINAL

Do the project limits cross and/or benefit municipal/county boundries? If yes please list all LPAs. Maximum 5 pts given.

Partnerships involving 3 or more LPAs- 5 pts List partners here:

Q18 Partnership with two LPAs - 3 pts 5

No partnerships - 0 pts

Are there any funding agreements committed to with other partners? Please describe the partnerships. Please contact mbarloga@nirpc.org if you need assistance with this question. 4

Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission Application for funding in the 2020 - 2024 Transportation Improvement Program

Q23

Q23

Does the project impact any railroads? (If yes, please explain.) No interaction with any railroads are necessary – 5 pts

Only a flagging agreement is necessary – 2 pts

Project involves construction of a crossing or crossing equiment within the railroad(s)' Right of Way – 0 pts

Social Equity (Weighted 5%) Self NIRPC FINAL

Is the project location in an Environmental Justice area? Please consult the Environmental Justice map. Please contact sweber@nirpc.org for further information on the map. Maximum 5

Q24 pts given.

50% or more of a project is within EJ area – 3 pts

Less than 50% of a project is in EJ area – 2 pts

3

Project is not in an EJ area – 0 pts

Does the project advance progress on the municipality's ADA transition plan? Please describe. Maximum 5 pts given.

Q25

Q25

Yes - 3 pts No - 0 pts

3 6 6%

Local's Preference (for information only)

Q26

Q26

If the LPA is submitting more than one project; please rank this project (to the other projects submitted) in the order of importance by the LPA (1 - Highest priority; 2 - 2nd highest; 3 - 3rd highest; ect.) Please contact Charles Bradsky for clarification.

Would a smaller federal funding amount than requested be acceptable while maintaining the original intent of the project? If yes, please define smaller meaningful limits, size, service level, phases, or scopes along with the cost for each. ▼ Please continue on a seperate document if you need more space

(y/n)

Q27

SUM 105 1

Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission Application for funding in the 2020 - 2024 Transportation Improvement Program

conditional format this percentage to the total amount available in cell T4?

conditional format this percentage to the total amount available in cell T4

Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission Application for funding in the 2020 - 2024 Transportation Improvement Program

Asset Management

What will be the functional classification of the new route? Please consult the functional classification map. Please contact sweber@nirpc.org if you need assistance with this question. Maximum 8 pt given.

Self NIRPC FINAL

Q1 Principal arterial – 8 pts Minor arterial – 6 pts

Major collector – 4 pts

What is the expected ADT for this road / bridge?

Q2 ≤ 8,000 - 0 pts ≤ 12,000 - 5 pts

8,000 < > 12,000 - 3 pts

Minor collector – 2 pts Local road – 0 pts

8

5 13 12%

Access & Connections

What is the residential density within one mile of the new roadway? Please contact eibrahim@nirpc.org if you need assistance with this question. Maximum 5 pts given.

Self NIRPC FINAL

Q3 5 or more/acre – 5 pts 2-4.99 – 3 pts

1-1.99 – 1 pts 5

Less than 1 – 0 pts

Q4

Q4

What is the transit access within ½ mile of the project area, including bus stops, commuter rail or Amtrak stations? Please contact jwinters@nirpc.org if you need assistance with this question. Maximum 2 pts given.

More than 1 - 2 pts

1 stop - 1 point

How will the project enhance network connectivity? Please consult the functional classification map. Please contact sweber@nirpc.org if you need assistance with this question. Maximum 5 pts given.

Q5

Q5

Connects to other principal arterials or higher classification roadways on both sides of the new road – 5 pts

Connects to another principal arterial or higher classification roadway on one side – 3 pts Connects to a minor arterial – 1 point

Connects roads classified as collectors or lower – 0 pts

2

5 12

11%

Economic Generation

How does the project assist with access for job commuters? Please reference Major Employment Center map. Please contact eibrahim@nirpc.org if you need assistance with this question. Maximum 15 pts given.

Self NIRPC FINAL

Q6 Major area – 10 pts Moderate - 15 pts

Not in area - 0 pts

10 10 9%

Environmental Benefits

Will the project reduce Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT) as compared to a no-build option? Please contact the NIRPC Travel Demand Model or sweber@nirpc.org if you need assistance with this question. Maximum 5 pts given.

Self NIRPC FINAL

Q7 1,000 daily VHT or more is reduced – 5 pts 500-999 daily VHT reduced – 3 pts

Less than 499 daily VHT reduced – 0 pts

Q8

Q8

Does the project include green infrastructure elements? Elements may include: Complete Streets; stormwater management or rain garden; biodiversity; land conservation; bio-swales; native vegetation in the road rights-of-way; permeable pavement in rights-of-ways; bio-retention curb extension; infiltration trench; or wildlife crossing. Maximum 5 pts given.

3 or more - 3 pts

1 or 2 - 1 point

5

3 8 7%

Local / Regional Plans & Policy Support

Is this currently a legacy project? A legacy project is defined to be a stand alone project or a phase of a project that has an approved NEPA document, or the project or phase has already received

Self NIRPC FINAL

Q9 federal funding through NIRPC. Maximum 6 pts given. 6

Yes - 6 points No - 0 points

How does the project advance local plans or policies? Project may be cited in local comprehensive plan, thoroughfare plan, capital improvements program, traffic impact fee plan, or other local plan/study. Please describe plans and policies. Maximum 10 pts given.

Q10 2 or more policy/plans - 5 pts 5

1 policy/plans - 3 pts No policy/plans - 0 pts

How does the project advance region plans or policies? Please describe how the project achieves objectives in regional plans or policies and cite those plans and policies. Please contact 7

Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission Application for funding in the 2020 - 2024 Transportation Improvement Program

Partnerships / Collaborations

Do the project limits cross municipal/county boundries? If yes please list all LPAs. Maximum 5 pts given.

Partnerships with 3 or more LPA - 5 points List partners here:

Q16 Partnership with two LPAs - 3 points No partnerships - 0 points

Self NIRPC FINAL

5

Are there any funding agreements committed to with partners? Please describe the partnerships. Please contact mbarloga@nirpc.org if you need assistance with this question. Partners may include:

a. Indiana Department of Transportation; b. Another municipality or County; c. Advocacy groups; d. Foundations; e. Private sector; f. School districts; g. other regional entities. Maximum 10 pts given.

Q11 Two or more partnerships - 5 pts One partnership - 3 pts

No partnerships - 0 pts

List partners here: List amount here:

5 10 9%

Project Readiness

What is the overmatch associated with this project application? Please reference "Step 3" under the "Financial information about this project" above. Maximum 5 pts given.

Q18 Greater than 30% - 5 points 20.1% - 24.9% - 1 point

25-29.9% - 3 points Minimum match - 0 points

Q19

Q19

At the present time; what is the status of the Right of Way for the proposed project? Please contact mbarloga@nirpc.org if you need assistance with this question. Maximum 5 pts given. Right of Ways are secured or owned completely by the LPA – 5 points

Right of Ways will be secured or owned completely by the LPA within one year – 3 points Right of Ways need to be secured – 0 points

What is the status of the design/engineering for the proposed project? Please contact mbarloga@nirpc.org if you need assistance with this question. Maximum 5 pts given.

Q19 Design/engineering has started with an LPA contract and NEPA document completed. – 5 points Design/engineering has not been started – 0 points

Does the project impact any railroads? (If yes, please explain.)

Self NIRPC FINAL

5

5

5

Q20

Q20

No interaction with any railroads are necessary – 5 points Only a flagging agreement is necessary – 2 points

Project involves construction of a crossing or crossing equiment within the railroad(s)' Right of Way – 0 points

5 20 18%

Social Equity

Is the project location in an Environmental Justice area? Please consult the Environmental Justice map. Please contact sweber@nirpc.org for further information on the map. Maximum 5 pts given

Self NIRPC FINAL

Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission Application for funding in the 2020 - 2024 Transportation Improvement Program

wordsmith

Table of Contents

Federal Requirements 1

Background of NIRPC Congestion Management Processes (CMPs) 3

Connection to NWI 2050 Strategies 4

Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission’s (NIRPC’s) Role in MOVE NWI 9

United States Department of Transportation’s (USDOT’s) Role in MOVE NWI 10

Indiana Department of Transportation’s (INDOT’s) Role in MOVE NWI 11

Local Public Agencies’ (LPAs’) Role in MOVE NWI 12

Indiana Toll Road’s Role in MOVE NWI 13

United Bridge Partners’s Role in MOVE NWI 14

Members of the Public’s Role in MOVE NWI 15

Congestion: What is it and What can be Done About it? 16

How does MOVE NWI Work? 18

Congestion Objectives in the Northwestern Indiana Region 19

MOVE NWI Network 27

Performance Measures 28

Data Sources 29

Existing Conditions 32

Strategies 37

Evaluating Projects 41

MOVE NWI Administration 45

Proposed Project Worksheet to Determine MOVE NWI adherence 46

List of Tables and Figures

Tables:

Table 1: NWI 2050 Strategies Pertaining to Congestion, organized by broader initiative 4

Table 2: NWI 2050 Strategies that Would Likely Increase Congestion, organized by broader initiative 8

Table 3: NIRPC’s Roles in Administering MOVE NWI 9

Table 4: USDOT’s Roles in MOVE NWI 10

Table 5: INDOT’s Roles in MOVE NWI 11

Table 6: LPAs Roles in MOVE NWI 12

Table 7: Indiana Toll Road’s Roles in MOVE NWI 13

Table 8: United Bridge Partners’s Roles in MOVE NWI 14

Table 9: Members of the Public’s Roles in MOVE NWI 15

Table 10: Congestion Objectives Derived From NWI 2050 Organized by Critical Path 19

Table 11: Additional MOVE NWI Congestion Objectives Organized by MOVE NWI Network Typology 25

Table 12: Overall Measures of Existing Conditions of Congestion in the Northwestern Indiana Region 32

Table 13: Minor Road Corridor Measures of Existing Conditions of Congestion (Typical Weekday) 33

Table 14: Transit Measures of Existing Conditions of Congestion (only fixed-route portions noted) 36

Table 15: MOVE NWI Travel Demand Management (TDM) Strategies – Tier 1 37

Table 16: Move NWI Land Use (LU) Strategies – Tier 1 38

Table 17: MOVE NWI Operational Management (OM) Strategies – Tier 2 38

Table 18: MOVE NWI Capacity-Adding (CAP) Strategies – Tier 3 39

Table 19: Steps to Demonstrate MOVE NWI Adherence for New Roadways Program 41

Table 20: Steps to Demonstrate MOVE NWI Adherence for Roadway Improvements Program 43

Table 21: Steps to Demonstrate MOVE NWI Adherence for Quality of Place Program 44

Figures:

Figure 1: FHWA-recommended Steps that a CMP Follow 2

Figure 2: Map of MOVE NWI Network (to be included in full layout version)

Figure 3: Map of I-80/94 from IL-IN Stateline to Lake-Porter County Line (to be included) Figure 4: Map of I-90 from IL-IN Stateline to Lake-Porter County Line (to be included) Figure 5: Map of I-65 from US-12/20 to Lake-Newton County Line (to be included) Figure 6: Map of I-94 from Lake-Porter County Line to IN-MI State Line (to be included)

Figure 7: Map of I-80/90 from Lake-Porter County Line to LaPorte-St. Joseph County Line (to be included) Figure 8: Map of US 30 from IL-IN State Line to LaPorte-Starke County Line (to be included)

Figure 9: Map of US 41 from IL-IN State Line to Lake-Newton County Line (to be included) Figure 10: Map of SR 912 from I-90 to Ridge Rd (to be included)

Figure 11: Map of US 12 from Indianapolis Blvd to IN-MI State Line (to be included) Figure 12: Map of US 20 from Indianapolis Blvd to I-94 (Exit 40) (to be included) Figure 13: Map of SR 51 from I-80/94 to US 6 (to be included)

Figure 14: Map of US 6 from SR 51 to SR 49 (to be included) Figure 15: Map of SR 49 from US 12 to US 30 (to be included)

Figure 16: Map of US 6 from SR 49 to LaPorte-St. Joseph County Line (to be included) Figure 17: Map of US 421 from US 20 to LaPorte-Starke County Line (to be included) Figure 18: Map of US 20 from I-94 (Exit 40) to US 20/SR 2 Interchange (to be included) Figure 19: Map of US 35 from US 20 to LaPorte-Starke County Line (to be included)

Figure 20: Screenshot of the Proposed Project Worksheet to Determine MOVE NWI Adherence (to be included)

Federal Requirements

As a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) administering transportation planning and programming activities for a region with over 200,000 people, the Northwestern Indiana Planning Organization (NIRPC) is a Transportation Management Area (TMA) and thus subject to additional federal requirements, chief among them a Congestion Management Process (CMP).1 Essentially, the CMP is a framework for how the region seeks to manage congestion in a performance-based, multimodal way. At a minimum, the CMP must include the following components:

• Methods to monitor and evaluate the performance of the multimodal transportation system

• Identification of the underlying causes of recurring and non-recurring congestion

• Identification and evaluation of alternative strategies

• Information on the implementation of actions, and evaluation of the effectiveness of implemented actions

• Definition of congestion management objectives

• Identification of performance measures to assess the extent of congestion and support the evaluation of the effectiveness of congestion reduction and mobility enhancement strategies for the movement of people and goods

• Establishment of a coordinated program for data collection and system performance monitoring to define the extent and duration of congestion, to contribute in determining the causes of congestion, and evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of implemented actions

• Identification and evaluation of the anticipated performance and expected benefits of appropriate congestion management strategies that will contribute to the more effective use and improved safety of existing and future transportation systems based on the established performance measures (examples of categories of strategies include demand management measures such as growth management and congestion pricing, traffic operational improvements, public transportation improvements, Intelligent Transportation System technologies as related to the regional ITS architecture, and additional system capacity where necessary)

• Identification of an implementation schedule, implementation responsibilities, and possible funding sources for each strategy (or combination of strategies) proposed for implementation

• Implementation of a process for periodic assessment of the effectiveness of implemented strategies, in terms of the area's established performance measures, that will be provided to decision makers and the public to provide guidance on selection of effective strategies for future implementation

  Since the NIRPC planning area of Lake, Porter, and LaPorte Counties also includes a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) designated non-attainment area for Ozone, NIRPC must administer a CMP that meets the following additional federal requirements:

• For any federally funded project that would add significant capacity, demonstration that the project either primarily addresses a safety concern or relieves a bottleneck, or in the absence of either, a demonstration that the project adheres to the CMP

• For any federally funded project that would add significant capacity, identification of travel demand reduction and operational management strategies determined by the CMP that would be appropriate for the project itself and the corridor of the project and a demonstration that these strategies alone could not manage congestion as well as the project. There must be a commitment to implement any reasonable strategies identified.

In addition to the minimum federal requirements, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) highly recommends that a CMP follow an 8-step process that meets the above requirements in a logical manner as shown in Figure 1.2

Figure 1: FHWA-recommended Steps that a CMP Follow

By following the 8-step process as shown in Figure 1, a TMA like NIRPC will be able to meet the CMP Federal Requirements. MOVE NWI generally follows the 8 steps, but adds a little more detail as shown below:

1. Develop Congestion Objectives in the Northwestern Indiana Region

2. Define the CMP Network

3. Develop multimodal performance measures

4. Identify and describe the data sources that will be used to measure the performance measures

5. Analyze the existing conditions of congestion in the Northwestern Indiana Region using the performance measures, noting problems and needs

6. Identify and assess strategies

7. Evaluate projects that either already are or could be programmed and implemented to address the strategies

8. Periodically evaluate project and strategy effectiveness of the projects and strategies vetted through the CMP

Background of NIRPC Congestion Management Processes (CMPs)

MOVE NWI is not the first CMP that NIRPC has administered. Federal requirements for what was then called the Congestion Management System date back to the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991. USDOT codified the Congestion Management System requirements in 1996.3 Therefore, NIRPC complied with its first Congestion Management System included as part of the Vision 2020 plan adopted by the NIRPC Full Commission in February 1999. This first Congestion Management System was predominately highway focused, and even then relied only on peak Volume to Capacity (V/C) Ratio as the performance measure for the highway mode. This Congestion Management System also considered transit, using load factor as the only reliable performance measure of congestion. Despite its simplicity, FHWA and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) commended NIRPC for its Congestion Management System in the 1999 Federal Planning Certification Review. This was largely due to the newly updated Travel Demand Model which supplied then state-of-the art “data” on traffic volumes used to calculate V/C Ratio and allowed NIRPC to analyze spatial locations of congestion.

However, NIRPC’s 1999 Congestion Management System eventually became outdated. In 2005, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) changed the name of the Congestion Management System to the CMP and added additional requirements.4 FHWA and FTA issued NIRPC a corrective action in their 2009 Federal Planning Certification Review requiring NIRPC to update its CMP as part of its 2040 Comprehensive Regional Plan adopted in June 2011, with substantial progress required to be shown by October 2010. NIRPC responded with a much more comprehensive CMP than the former Congestion Management System, adopted in June 2011 as part of the 2040 Comprehensive Regional Plan. The 2011 CMP thoroughly satisfied the new federal requirements, exhaustively detailing travel demand management and operational management strategies on a corridor-by-corridor basis, and it did so by actively involving participation from a congestion management subcommittee comprised of INDOT, several Local Public Agencies, and transit operators. As a result of NIRPC’s effort in adopting the new CMP, FHWA and FTA lifted the corrective action.

While much more comprehensive than any congestion management framework put forth previously by NIRPC, the 2011 CMP still faces some shortcomings that warrant adopting a new CMP. First, there have been a lot of technological advances, particularly in data gathering and analysis, since 2011. Whereas the 2011 CMP still relies heavily on the travel demand model for data even on existing conditions of congestion, NIRPC now has access to “big data” sources such as the National Performance Measure Research Data Set (NPMRDS) and Google Maps API, shedding light on a much more accurate and robust existing condition profile of congestion. Second, while the 2011 CMP is prescriptive in terms of how to demonstrate CMP approval for a proposed project, the 2011 CMP is not sufficiently tied to the planning and programming processes that are the heartbeat of what NIRPC does as an agency. The result is that while in theory and according to the CMP document itself there is a robust way of identifying congestion and screening projects, in practice a project progresses through many of the early selection and planning stages before it is found to require CMP adherence, by which point there is little appetite for the CMP being the difference in whether the project can continue to be advanced or not. For these reasons, MOVE NWI makes use of more sophisticated congestion data and helps transportation owner/operators know how to use the CMP to self-screen and prepare their projects before they even apply for federal funding. The result is a CMP that is more advanced and user-friendly than the 2011 CMP.

Connection to NWI 2050 Strategies

As mentioned in the previous section, one of the reasons why NIRPC and its stakeholders deem the MOVE NWI necessary to replace the 2011 CMP is to be clearer and more compatible with the broader planning process goals and objectives. Since NWI 2050 is the Northwestern Indiana Region’s Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) and contains numerous strategies related to congestion, MOVE NWI establishes clear linkages to the strategies so as to directly address the NWI 2050 Plan. Table 1 lists the strategies from NWI 2050 that pertain to congestion organized by broader initiative and whether they are travel demand management (TDM) strategies, land use (LU) strategies, operational management (OM) strategies, or capacity-adding (CAP) strategies.

Table 1: NWI 2050 Strategies Pertaining to Congestion, organized by broader initiative (in bold)

Each of the strategies in Table 1 pertain to addressing congestion in some way, either as a TDM strategy, a LU strategy, an OM strategy, or a CAP strategy. The 32 NWI 2050 TDM strategies seek to reduce congestion by disincentivizing Single Occupancy Vehicle (SOV) travel – either encouraging would-be drivers to avoid SOV travel altogether or shortening the distances of SOV trips. That is, the TDM strategies tackle congestion before a transportation system user has even decided how and where to travel, and as a result these strategies actually reduce the number of SOV trips. The 18 NWI 2050 LU strategies also seek to reduce congestion before a transportation system user has even decided how and where to travel by enabling the user to access more destinations in closer proximity, reducing the length of trips. The 13 NWI 2050 OM strategies seek to reduce congestion by improving the operational environment of the vehicle after a transportation system user has decided his or her travel choice and is already en-route and do not directly reduce the number of SOV trips, but rather ensure that those trips experience less congestion. Finally, the 4 NWI 2050 CAP strategies follow the traditional approach to attempting to mitigate congestion by adding more capacity to the transportation system, theoretically allowing more SOV throughput.

Even though as Table 1 shows there are 67 strategies from NWI 2050 that if implemented would seek to reduce congestion, it is important to acknowledge that there are also some strategies from NWI 2050 that would likely increase congestion, emphasizing the point that reducing congestion is not necessarily a desirable goal from all perspectives. Table 2 lists the NWI 2050 strategies that would likely increase congestion.

Table 2: NWI 2050 Strategies that Would Likely Increase Congestion, organized by broader initiative (in bold)

8 out of the 9 NWI 2050 strategies in Table 2 would likely increase congestion due to promoting a growing population and economy. Strategy number 6 in Table 2 would likely increase congestion because as Connected and Automated Vehicles (CAVs) become deployed, they will have to comingle in the traffic stream with non-CAV vehicles, reducing their early congestion-reducing potential.

Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission’s (NIRPC’s) Role in MOVE NWI

As the federally designated MPO for Northwestern Indiana, NIRPC is required to play the lead role in administering MOVE NWI. NIRPC administers MOVE NWI is to ensure that the Northwestern Indiana traveling public has realistic expectations that the region is addressing traffic congestion, not simply for the sake of meeting federal requirements. In order to offer the traveling public confidence that region leadership is adequately managing traffic congestion, NIRPC is committed to following roles in administering MOVE NWI as shown in Table 3.

Table 3: NIRPC’s Roles in Administering MOVE NWI

United States Department of Transportation’s (USDOT’s) Role in MOVE NWI

Since USDOT issues and administers the federal requirements necessitating MOVE NWI, USDOT has the lead regulatory role in overseeing MOVE NWI. Every four years, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) conduct a federal planning certification review of NIRPC’s entire planning process including how NIRPC administers MOVE NWI. NIRPC is committed to its roles enumerated in Table 3 above, and in turn expects USDOT to commit to the following roles in Table 4 below.

Table 4: USDOT’s Roles in MOVE NWI

Indiana Department of Transportation’s (INDOT’s) Role in MOVE NWI

INDOT is a strategically critical partner with NIRPC when it comes to fulfilling the federal requirements of MOVE NWI. INDOT not only joins in on and comments to USDOT during the federal planning certification review, but is itself a major owner/operator of the transportation system in Northwestern Indiana. To that end, any objectives, strategies, and actions in MOVE NWI will factor into how INDOT conducts business. In order to ensure that INDOT is able to incorporate the objectives, strategies, and actions in MOVE NWI in the most efficient and effective manner, INDOT will commit to the following roles in Table 5.

Table 5: INDOT’s Roles in MOVE NWI

Local Public Agencies’ (LPAs’) Role in MOVE NWI

Local Public Agencies (LPAs), otherwise known as city, town, and county governments, are the core of Northwestern Indiana. The places they represent are the places where Northwestern Indiana’s residents, workers, and visitors gather and conduct life every day. As such, LPAs own and operate transportation facilities that are crucial to ensuring that the life and economy of Northwestern Indiana continues in a thriving and sustainable way. Effectively managing congestion in accordance with MOVE NWI is essential in order to ensure the region’s residents, workers, and visitors continue to enjoy the opportunities Northwestern Indiana offers without worrying that congestion will disrupt access to those opportunities. Table 6 lists the roles NIRPC expects LPAs to play in stewarding MOVE NWI.

Table 6: LPAs Roles in MOVE NWI

Indiana Toll Road’s Role in MOVE NWI

The Indiana Toll Road Concession Company (Indiana Toll Road) is a private sector operator of the Indiana Toll Road, a 156-mile east-west tolled Interstate Highway across northern Indiana, 62 miles of which traverses Northwestern Indiana. As the operator of this major transportation facility, Indiana Toll Road is an essential stakeholder in MOVE NWI with the ability to greatly contribute to its effectiveness in managing congestion. In order to ensure that Indiana Toll Road most efficiently and effectively contributes to MOVE NWI, NIRPC proposes that it abide by the following roles in Table 7.

Table 7: Indiana Toll Road’s Roles in MOVE NWI

United Bridge Partners’s Role in MOVE NWI

United Bridge Partners is the company that operates and is providing funding for the soon-to-be- completed (as of May 2020) Cline Avenue Bridge project, the $150 million project to replace the Cline Avenue Bridge over the Indiana Harbor Canal in East Chicago. Once completed and open-to- traffic, the bridge will the final missing link in a regionally significant expressway traversing Hammond, Whiting, East Chicago, and Gary. The bridge itself will be tolled at a variable rate depending on vehicle class (trucks paying more than cars). Since United Bridge Partners will be the operator of this major transportation facility, it is crucial that it abide by the following roles in MOVE NWI enumerated in Table 8.

Table 8: United Bridge Partners’s Roles in MOVE NWI

Members of the Public’s Role in MOVE NWI

At the end of the day, it is how members’ of the public lives will be affected based on MOVE NWI that will determine its effectiveness. As such, members of the public are the most important stakeholders. MOVE NWI strives to ensure that even if members of the public will continue to experience congestion, they will at least know that region leaders have factored in questions like how much congestion is acceptable and what strategies are being pursued into decisions about future transportation and growth investments. It is important that members of the public adhere to their roles in Table 9 to the best of their abilities in order for MOVE NWI to be most effective in easing the burdens of congestion.

Table 9: Members of the Public’s Roles in MOVE NWI

Congestion: What is it and What can be Done About it?

Congestion is a term that many people are familiar with, but few can pinpoint precisely how to define. To state the obvious, there are many contexts where the term congestion has meaning (transportation and bodily health, just to name a couple), and it is important to note that in the context of MOVE NWI, it is the transportation context being described.

According to the Federal Highway Administration’s Office of Operations, “congestion usually relates to an excess of vehicles on a portion of roadway at a particular time resulting in speeds that are slower—sometimes much slower—than normal or "free flow" speeds. Congestion often means stopped or stop-and-go traffic.”5 But even after defining congestion, there are a few issues that need to be clarified.

First, people often automatically assume that congestion in the transportation context refers to traffic congestion—that is congestion experienced by cars, trucks, buses, and on-road vehicles. It is true that, especially in Northwestern Indiana, this is the vast majority of congestion experienced, but it is also important to consider that congestion in the transportation context may also refer to congestion on the transit system (overcrowded buses and trains as well as these transit vehicles not arriving on-time) and even the non-motorized system (sidewalk and other pedestrian/bicyclist facility bottlenecks and delays). The federal requirements for MOVE NWI require that it examine congestion from a multimodal perspective, meaning that it considers objectives and strategies for managing congestion not just for traffic, but also other modes like transit and non-motorized means. Therefore, MOVE NWI examines data and includes objectives and strategies for managing congestion across these different modes.

Second, congestion can be diagnosed in two fundamentally different types—recurring congestion and non-recurring congestion. Recurring congestion refers to congestion that can reasonably be expected to occur on an ongoing basis following predictable patterns. There are only two forms of recurring congestion—work commute peak congestion and bottleneck congestion. Work commute peak congestion is the twice-a-day congestion that occurs in the morning (roughly 6 AM – 9AM) and afternoon (roughly 3 PM – 6 PM) peaks because of the surge in volume during these times.

Bottleneck congestion is the congestion that occurs because of bottlenecks on the road or highway network, resulting in congestion at relatively lower traffic volume levels than would cause congestion to appear at nearby portions of the network. Usually such bottlenecks are caused by geometric elements of the network (i.e. interchange designs), but bottlenecks can also be caused by high- demand clusters of development around the network, causing queuing of vehicles on the network servicing this demand (i.e. large intermodal facilities and ports). Non-recurring congestion, by contrast, is congestion that unpredictably occurs at any time or location on the network. Crashes, work zones, weather, and special events are all common causes of non-recurring congestion. MOVE NWI includes objectives and strategies to address both recurring and non-recurring congestion.

Third, congestion is often characterized as a cause of a perceived burden on society, but it is important to recognize that congestion can also be characterized as a symptom of a thriving society, since it implies that a lot of people and goods are accessing their destinations. MOVE NWI does not make a value judgment about which of these characterizations are correct, but it acknowledges that the overarching goal is not to completely eliminate congestion, but rather to strategize about how to effectively manage it.

While acknowledging these common misconceptions and oversimplifications about congestion, congestion for the purposes of MOVE NWI can be defined as, a worse than reasonably expected performance in movement for people and goods reaching their destinations. Such a definition

implies that there is a reasonable level of congestion that travelers in Northwestern Indiana should be expected to tolerate. Also, such a definition avoids automatically implying that it is only the highway mode that contributes to and experiences congestion. Finally, such a definition signifies that it is both passenger and freight movement that experiences congestion and for which a congestion management process must address.

After defining congestion, it is necessary to define and describe the management piece. Defining management may seem obvious and for the purposes of MOVE NWI is simply, coordinating stakeholders to plan for better navigating through a systemic issue (in this case congestion) and martialing resources to the implementation of such a plan. Planners certainly have a role as one of the key stakeholders in better managing congestion. Afterall, a better quality of life for residents, workers, and visitors in Northwestern Indiana as well as a thriving economy depends on effective congestion management.

Finally, MOVE NWI is a Congestion Management Process, so it is important to define how MOVE NWI is a process that strives to manage congestion. It should be noted that when the federal requirements for Transportation Management Areas (TMAs), metropolitan areas with a population of 200,000 or more, first introduced congestion management, the requirements named a Congestion Management System, not a Congestion Management Process, which only appeared in 2005 in SAFETEA-LU, the then-federal transportation authorization bill. The intent in changing the nomenclature from system to process was so that the CMP would not be considered a standalone document but rather a framework integrated into the broader metropolitan transportation planning process.6 MOVE NWI fully aims to integrate congestion management into NIRPC’s core planning processes with continual opportunities for evaluation and improvement and as such is a process.

Planners have been striving to effectively manage congestion for decades, and the fact that congestion continues to burden quality of life and (as viewed from some angles) to restrict economic growth is testament to a disappointing track record. Clearly, either planners have been pursuing the wrong mix of strategies, stakeholders (including planners) have not done their part to implement those strategies, or some combination of both. MOVE NWI is not an investigative document to determine which is true, but it does acknowledge that past congestion management processes have not fully realized their potential. The hope is that MOVE NWI will simplify and streamline stakeholders’ and the public’s roles and expectations in the process in order to be more effective at actually managing congestion.

How does MOVE NWI Work?

MOVE NWI seeks to manage congestion holistically in the Northwestern Indiana Region by following the (slightly modified) FHWA-prescribed 8-step process, as mentioned earlier:

1. Develop Congestion Objectives in the Northwestern Indiana Region

2. Define the CMP Network

3. Develop multimodal performance measures

4. Identify and describe the data sources that will be used to measure the performance measures

5. Analyze the existing conditions of congestion in the Northwestern Indiana Region using the performance measures, noting problems and needs

6. Identify and assess strategies

7. Evaluate projects that either already are or could be programmed and implemented to address the strategies

8. Periodically evaluate project and strategy effectiveness of the projects and strategies vetted through the CMP

The following 8 sections of MOVE NWI go into more detail about how each of these steps work in the broader context of preparing MOVE NWI to be an effective process for managing congestion.

Congestion Objectives in the Northwestern Indiana Region

Objectives are SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound) statements of aspiration. Thus, congestion objectives in the Northwestern Indiana Region are grounded aspirational statements that regional stakeholders want to achieve in terms of managing congestion and which lend themselves to periodic measurement of progress. There are two categories of congestion objectives in MOVE NWI: objectives from NWI 2050 that relate to congestion and additional stakeholder-added objectives.

First, objectives in MOVE NWI link the vision and critical paths from NWI 2050 into SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound) statements that MOVE NWI aspires to. Thus, the objectives start with the 16 critical paths (formed by 4 vision areas and 4 plan focus areas) undergirding NWI 2050. Then, since each of the 16 critical paths are associated with performance- based planning (PbP) measures as part of the Action Plan section in NWI 2050, MOVE NWI selects the performance measures and targets that are most relevant to congestion management. Table 10 below lists the congestion objectives derived from NWI 2050, categorized by critical path (note that some critical paths are not associated with any congestion objectives).

Table 10: Congestion Objectives Derived From NWI 2050 Organized by Critical Path (in bold)

Second, additional congestion objectives not expressly derived from NWI 2050 are added because they more narrowly pertain to conditions on the MOVE NWI network (explained in the next section) and/or lend themselves to available and ongoing data collected. Table 11 lists the additional MOVE NWI congestion objectives organized by MOVE NWI network typology (explained in the next section).

Table 11: Additional MOVE NWI Congestion Objectives Organized by MOVE NWI Network Typology

The combination of Tables 10 and 11 collectively form the congestion objectives in MOVE NWI. Note that the objectives are not assigned to any individual stakeholder or champion. Rather, every transportation-related agency collectively works to advance these 46 congestion objectives in the Northwestern Indiana Region. Each of these objectives is also matched with a performance measure that NIRPC staff will take the lead in monitoring over time, noting the existing condition of the performance measure in the rightmost column. The rightmost columns of Tables 10 and 11 contain the source(s) and year(s) used to calculate the existing conditions of the performance measures. For more information about the sources, consult NWI 2050, specifically the Action Plan: Progress to Measure section.9

MOVE NWI Network

One of the federal requirements of a CMP is to define the transportation network on which the CMP applies. This means that for portions of the Northwestern Indiana network that are not defined as being part of the MOVE NWI network, MOVE NWI does not apply to these portions. Here it is important to define “network” because it is one of those terms that transportation professionals too often casually use without considering that many outside the profession may not understand. Like congestion, network is word that has other contexts outside of transportation, so it is important to note that in the context of MOVE NWI, only the transportation context applies. Network is defined as the system of transportation facilities—highways, roads, rail lines, bus routes, nonmotorized trails/paths—that collectively form the transportation system on which people and freight travel every day. However, the MOVE NWI network is defined as a subset of the network. The reasons why the MOVE NWI network is only a subset of the entire network are many, but the principle ones are as follows. First, it would be unrealistic to expect enough quality data for every portion of the network, and since MOVE NWI is fundamentally a data-driven process to manage congestion, it follows that the MOVE NWI network should only be comprised of transportation facilities for which transportation professionals can collect quality data. Second, there are many portions of the network that either do not experience congestion because of their localized nature (i.e. a rural local road) or experience constant congestion for the same reason (i.e. an entrance road to a port) such that a holistic process to manage congestion like MOVE NWI would not be singularly effective at managing congestion anyway.

For these reasons, the MOVE NWI network is comprised of all roads and highways functionally classified as Major Collectors or higher, all fixed-route transit lines, and all at-grade railroad crossings.10 The MOVE NWI network does not include exclusively highway-based freight facilities because these vehicles by-and-large use highways open to all traffic. The MOVE NWI network excludes nonmotorized facilities because either these facilities are not subject to congestion or “congestion” on these facilities is not always considered problematic (i.e. slowing to take in sights, pacing appropriate to one’s health, etc.). Moreover, the MOVE NWI network does not include roads and highways functionally classified as minor collectors or local roads because these facilities are sufficiently localized so not to register as significant congestion for the entire Northwestern Indiana Region. Finally, the MOVE NWI network excludes demand response-only transit services because these services utilize roads and highways already subject to the MOVE NWI network. Figure 2 below shows the map of the MOVE NWI network.

Figure 2: Map of MOVE NWI network [Insert map here]

It therefore follows that any project proposed to be programmed into a future NIRPC Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) that is not on the MOVE NWI network does not have to be screened for MOVE NWI adherence. However, any project proposed to be programmed that is on the MOVE NWI network may have to be screened for adherence depending on the project’s characteristics as explained later in the Evaluating Projects and Proposed Project worksheet sections.

Performance Measures

NWI 2050 is a pioneering metropolitan transportation plan for the Northwestern Indiana Region in large part because of how it emphasizes performance measures. As explained in NWI 2050, there are of course federally required performance measures, some of which directly pertain to congestion, that NIRPC must address and periodically set and update targets for.11 But there are also performance measures that NIRPC optionally has chosen to monitor and, to the extent data and other resources permit, set targets for. This general principle also applies to MOVE NWI. MOVE NWI includes performance measures that are federally required but it also includes performance measures that are not federally required but still specifically tied to the congestion objectives as explained earlier.

The MOVE NWI performance measures can be found in the third columns of Tables 10 and 11 in the Congestion Objectives in the Northwestern Indiana Region section earlier in the document. Note that the performance measures are organized by congestion objective. This means that MOVE NWI does not contain any performance measures not clearly tied to a congestion objective; this would result in wasted time and resources measuring something that would not be used and evaluated for assessing congestion. Moreover, performance measures are carefully chosen to ensure that they can be monitored by reliable, quality data sources at regular intervals. If the data sources required for a performance measure are unreliable or unpredictable, that would not result in a useful performance measure because it would make it difficult to assess the measure in an ongoing manner. There will of course inevitably be changes to the methodologies used in collecting or synthesizing particular data sources that may make comparing some performance measures across long periods of time problematic, but this is an unavoidable caveat that will just have to be managed.

Data Sources

Clearly, in order to calculate the MOVE NWI performance measures, quality data from quality sources are needed. NIRPC is fortunate to have access to a number of high-quality data sources that are not necessarily available to members of the public, and therefore we have an obligation to not violate any data licensing agreements that we are privy to while still managing to objectively present the data in a way that is meaningful for our stakeholders and the general public. All the data sources used in MOVE NWI are found in the rightmost columns in Tables 10 and 11, but further description is provided here for eight sources of data in particular. The first three sources described are motor vehicle mode travel time data, the next source is safety data, the following three sources described are multimodal including transit performance data, and the final source described is arguably not data but rather a forecasting tool.

First, the National Performance Measure Research Data Set (NPMRDS) is a probe-based travel time data set that passively collects travel time data at 5-minute intervals for both passenger cars and commercial trucks on the National Highway System. NIRPC only has access to the NPMRDS because we are a federal public transportation agency (in this case a Metropolitan Planning Organization, but State Departments of Transportation and other RITIS-approved agencies are allowed access).

Several of the USDOT-required transportation performance measures require using the NPMRDS, so this is considered a reliable and peer-benchmarked data source. The NPMRDS receives its data via in-vehicle probes such as GPS units and cellular phone location data.12 While NPMRDS is unquestionably one of the most reliable travel time data sources, its main drawback is that its network coverage is limited to only the National Highway System, which consists of Interstate Highways and Arterials that serve a national, or at least larger than just a regionwide, purpose. This means that the vast majority of facilities on the MOVE NWI network are not covered by the NPMRDS. Moreover, the NPMRDS does not cover the transit nor any other alternative mode.

Second, the Google Maps API effectively taps into the enormity of Google’s passively collected “big data” and delivers travel time estimates for any given day of the year and time of day for any specified road corridor. Specifically, NIRPC uses the Google Maps Directions API and feeds in “directions” for the corridor of interest with a given future day and time of day, and the API returns both a congested and free-flow travel time for that corridor based on a machine learning algorithm applied to recently observed travel time data for a comparable day-of-week and time-of-day on that corridor. In theory, any member of the public has access to a broad resolution view of this data by inputting directions between two points on Google Maps for some future day and time, and the algorithm will return a time range for how long a person should reasonably expect that trip to take. However, NIRPC has paid for an Google API key, which lets us access the backend of that query, returning us a more precise decimal number for the travel time instead of a range. This is a great way to tap into probe-based travel time data on all of the MOVE NWI road corridors, but it does not work for alternative modes.13

Third, NIRPC still possesses and occasionally deploys handheld GPS units that utilize the “floating car” method to manually collect GPS traces of driving a route that are then later processed and converted into travel times. While this method is the most labor intensive and cost ineffective, it has supplied a lot of historic baseline data for NIRPC to draw on and can be effective for occasionally ground-truthing the probe-based travel time data sources. Additionally, this method can be used on transit routes in addition to road corridors, so as NIRPC looks to incorporate transit travel-time data into MOVE NWI, this will likely be the initial method of choice while big data sources are evaluated.

Fourth, the Automated Reporting Information Exchange System (ARIES) portal contains law enforcement-supplied crash reports for every reportable crash in which a motor vehicle is at least

one of the users involved in the crash. INDOT uses the ARIES crash data to set USDOT-required safety performance measure targets, so there is broad consistency in using this data source for crashes throughout the State of Indiana. The ARIES crash data contains several attributes about crashes including for example the severity (fatal, injury, or property damage only), number of persons killed, number of persons injured, number of vehicles involved, and perhaps most importantly a precise location of the crash that NIRPC staff is able to geocode. Any user who wants access to the ARIES portal with respect to Indiana crash data has to submit an online form requesting use of the date and be approved; NIRPC has already been approved and is a frequent user of the ARIES crash data.

Fifth, the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) offers a glimpse of travel time and journey-to-work data for the region. Specifically, Table S0801 contains several relevant variables such as percentage of workers who use each major mode and mean travel time to work. The Census Bureau is a highly reputable source used by virtually all planning peers, but of course its main drawback is that it lacks specificity for any particular corridor or transit route. Still, it is an invaluable data source to record and track over time because of how widely used it is in the field and how consistently it is updated every year. It is also the required data source for one of the key USDOT- required performance measures, the percent of non-Single Occupancy Vehicle (non-SOV) travel in the Chicago, IL-IN Urbanized Area.

Sixth, the National Transit Database (NTD) highlights passenger miles and unlinked trips for the fixed-route transit operators in the region. These metrics are extremely useful in gathering broad- based information about ridership and trip length (as well as financial information which is not as useful in the context of MOVE NWI), but unfortunately data from the NTD cannot be distilled down to information about individual transit routes since the reporting is aggregated to an agency-wide level. That said, in the case of highest ridership transit operator in the region-the Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District’s (NICTD’s) South Shore Line, there is currently only one route, so it is possible to obtain ridership and trip length data from this route.

Seventh, NIRPC will begin to work with fixed-route transit operators to collect (at least a random sample of) on-time performance (OTP) data for transit routes/operators using GPS traces.

Technically this is a subset of the “floating car” method as mentioned earlier but applied specifically to the fixed-route transit network. To the extent MOVE NWI relies upon this method, care will be taken to ensure that it is a random sample (i.e. NIRPC staff will obtain general consent with the operators to collect the data but will not notify the operators of the specific times and routes of the data collection and will blend in as normal riders). The goal will be to eventually explore big data collection methods on the fixed-route network to replace this method, but this is a method that can be immediately deployed.

Eighth, NIRPC will continue to use its travel demand model to screen for possible congestion impacts from future transportation facilities and to guide NIRPC staff to areas of the network that warrant monitoring with more precise and accurate data sources. Since all of the other sources can only measure the present conditions and can at-best make educated guesses about the future impacts of projects, the travel demand model is still the best tool available to predict future congestion impacts of major transportation projects. The most pertinent attributes that the travel demand model will be used for are vehicle hours traveled (VHT), Volume-to-Capacity Ratio (V/C Ratio), and percent below free-flow speed.

Above all, MOVE NWI does not rely on a single source of data, nor does it rank which source of data ought to be deemed most reliable, but it draws on all available sources of data as described above that are most applicable to any given assessment of existing conditions or project being evaluated. It

should also be noted that all sources of data have some degree of inaccuracy and relying on them to predict future outcomes should always warrant caution.

Existing Conditions

MOVE NWI organizes the existing conditions of the MOVE NWI network by network typology: overall conditions, road conditions, and transit conditions. The overall conditions describe the broad state of congestion in the Northwestern Indiana Region regardless of mode, the road conditions describe the state of congestion by particular road corridor on the MOVE NWI network, and the transit conditions describe the state of congestion particularly as it pertains to transit.

First, some overall metrics describe the state of congestion in the Northwestern Indiana Region. Table 12 lists the overall existing conditions of congestion in the Northwestern Indiana Region. While some of these appear in Tables 10 and 11 above in the Existing Conditions column, the overall measures of existing condition in Table 12 below are those that specifically apply to the MOVE NWI network.

Table 12: Overall Measures of Existing Conditions of Congestion in the Northwestern Indiana Region

Note that the first of the overall measures of the existing conditions, percent non-SOV travel, is represented as only for Lake, Porter, and LaPorte Counties, not the entire Chicago, IL-IN Urbanized Area as reported in NWI 2050, where the figure is 31.2% (2014-2018 ACS). It makes sense that since the three Northwestern Indiana Counties are at the periphery of the Chicago Area that the percent non-SOV travel would be lower because of lower population and employment densities as well as fewer convenient alternative modal options. So in the context of the USDOT-required percent non-SOV travel performance measure, a more accurate interpretation of the existing conditions would be that the Northwestern Indiana Region’s 16.0% non-SOV travel supports the Chicago, IL-IN Urbanized Area’s 31.2% non-SOV travel. The region’s 27.6 minutes mean travel time to work is below the Chicago, IL-IN Urbanized Area’s 32.0 minutes and above the national mean travel time to work of

26.6 minutes. Since the NIRPC Travel Demand Model is unique to the Northwestern Indiana Region, there is no easy comparison of daily vehicle hours of travel (VHT) to other regions, but the power of this metric will be in tracking it over time and in determining the effects certain proposed projects have on it. The last two crash-related measures are proxies for how much non-recurrent congestion the overall region faces (other causes such as inclement weather and work zones are not included as measures because the region either has no control over them such as for the former or deems them positive despite the impacts on congestion such as the latter).

Second, the road network measures of existing conditions of congestion in the Northwestern Indiana Region are divided into major road corridors and minor road corridors. The major road corridors are Interstate Highways and those major road corridors of which NIRPC submitted information and planning priorities to INDOT as part of the Statewide Corridor Planning Study in September 2018.

NIRPC’s Surface Transportation Committee (STC), which included INDOT representation, vetted and provided feedback of the comments on these corridors. The reason these road corridors are grouped together in this existing conditions section is because NIRPC has thoroughly profiled the conditions and priorities for these corridors and because the vast majority of them are on the National Highway System, covered by the National Performance Measure Research Data Set (NPMRDS). Thus, the existing conditions for these 17 major road corridors are profiled in far greater detail than the other road corridors in the MOVE NWI network. The following several pages of MOVE NWI show maps of these 17 major road corridors side-by-side with their existing conditions as vetted by the STC and supplemented by further analysis.

Next, there are 42 minor road corridors for which NIRPC staff has collected travel time data via the Google Maps API and “floating car” methods. Table 13 shows the free-flow travel time, peak-period travel time, and travel-time index calculated by both the Google Maps API and “floating car” methods. Note that some of these minor road corridors overlap with some of the major road corridors. In these cases, the major road corridor portions of these corridors is considered the primary best source of ongoing data collection, but NIRPC staff will continue to monitor the minor road corridor portions on an ongoing basis, consistent with the format of the data table below.

Table 13: Minor Road Corridor Measures of Existing Conditions of Congestion (Typical Weekday)

It is clear from Table 13 above that overall the Google Maps API method produces more consistent and reliable results for travel times than the “floating car” method. This is primarily attributed to two reasons. First, in performing the “floating car” method runs, NIRPC staff had the time and resource limitations of only being able to drive the corridor once per period (AM, PM, and Off-peak), whereas the Google Maps API harnesses “big data” patterns forged from several thousands if not millions of vehicles driving these corridors every day. Second, it appears that the primary area where the “floating car” method is weakest is in the free flow travel time column, significantly varying from the Google Maps API free flow travel time in many cases. This is likely due in large part to the same reason just mentioned that NIRPC staff were not able to drive the corridors enough times to generate a stable free flow time during the off-peak period, and any particular run free of obstacles is susceptible to a human driver being able to drive faster than would likely result from an average of many runs. Therefore, the Google Travel Time Index (TTI) column is the most reputable measure of the existing condition of congestion for these minor road corridors. By this measure, it is clear that the TTI of these minor road corridors is similar to the TTI of the major road corridors as shown earlier. This means that in the Northwestern Indiana Region, there is no major difference in travel time reliability (which is closely related to congestion, but is a more precisely a measure in the consistency in travel times between the peak and free-flow conditions) experienced on major road corridors and minor road corridors. However, traffic volumes are clearly higher on the major road corridors as evidenced by the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) data, so motorists in the Northwestern Indiana Region experience more congestion overall on the major road corridors than on the minor road corridors.

This is also clear from the Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT) data.

Third, the transit measures of existing conditions of congestion in the Northwestern Indiana Region currently only describe passenger miles, unlinked trips, and passenger miles per unlinked trip because of ongoing and reliable data limitations. These measures all come from the annually updated National Transit Database (NTD) as described in the Data Sources section. NIRPC will be committed to helping the transit operators track their on-time performance (OTP) data with consent from each fixed-route operator and through agreed upon means, but there is not enough OTP data so far to include in this section. Moreover, it is important to again note that only transit operators of the fixed-route transit network are subject to MOVE NWI and so only existing conditions of these 5 operators (Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District, East Chicago Transit, Gary Public Transportation Corporation, Valparaiso Transit, Michigan City Transit- who also reports for the Transit Triangle Service). Table 14 below lists the measures of existing conditions of congestion for the transit network.

Table 14: Transit Measures of Existing Conditions of Congestion (only fixed-route portions noted)

Source: National Transit Database (NTD), 2018 Annual Agency Profile

From Table 14 above, unfortunately only two transit operators report annual passenger miles traveled (NICTD and GPTC), but it is still possible to compare the transit operators by the sheer number of annual unlinked trips and by unlinked trips per vehicle revenue hour. In both of these metrics, a higher value indicates better performance in terms of shifting travelers from driving to an alternative mode. In the case of annual unlinked trips, a higher number simply indicates the transit operator serving more passengers or serving the same passengers multiple times because they find the service convenient or necessary. In the case of unlinked trips per vehicle revenue hour, a higher number indicates a more efficient service in terms of moving passengers with fewer vehicles and therefore drivers, thus being more cost-effective. It is clear in comparing the services across this metric that the commuter services (the South Shore Line and ChicagoDash) fare better, perhaps because they have a singular clear mission — getting riders from Northwestern Indiana to Chicago, largely to their jobs. The bus services on the other hand do not have as singular of a mission, but rather they serve both transit dependent (those lacking the means to drive or choose an alternative mode) and choice riders (those who could drive but choose to take transit because they find it most convenient) alike for a variety of destinations. In the future, NIRPC staff will work with transit operators to collect data on the on-time performance of their fixed-route services, so this will become another valuable metric in determining how “congested” a rider may perceive the service and, in the case of a would-be choice rider, how likely those services may be to shift trips from driving to taking transit.

Strategies

Table 1 in the earlier Connection to NWI 2050 Strategies section mentioned all of the strategies from NWI 2050 that relate to congestion management and organized those strategies into 4 categories: travel demand management (TDM), land use (LU), operational management (OM), and capacity (CAP). For a description of the strategy categories, consult the paragraph immediately following Table

1. The NWI 2050 strategies in Table 1 apply as strategies in MOVE NWI, but their phrasing mostly suggests that NIRPC is the lead agency for implementing them. Tables 15 through 18 below, organized by the 4 categories, rephrase the NWI 2050 Strategies to be more concise and applicable to what NIRPC’s stakeholders, partner agencies, and project sponsors can do to help better manage congestion. TDM and LU strategies are Tier 1 strategies in that they are the highest priority strategies in MOVE NWI because they directly decrease the number and/or distance of SOV trips. OM strategies are Tier 2 strategies because while they do not directly decrease the number and/or distance of trips, they more efficiently utilize existing capacity and are significantly more cost-effective than CAP strategies. CAP strategies are Tier 3 strategies in that while they do offer some help in managing congestion, at least in the short term, they are the most expensive and generally least effective in the long term.

Table 15: MOVE NWI Travel Demand Management (TDM) Strategies – Tier 1

Table 16: Move NWI Land Use (LU) Strategies – Tier 1

Table 17: MOVE NWI Operational Management (OM) Strategies – Tier 2

Table 18: MOVE NWI Capacity-Adding (CAP) Strategies – Tier 3

In assigning points in determining MOVE NWI adherence as explained in the following section, the following number of points will be awarded for each strategy selected. For Tier 1 strategies, 5 points will be awarded for each strategy selected for inclusion in the scope of the project and 3 points will be awarded for each strategy considered for inclusion in the scope of the project with sufficient explanation. For Tier 2 strategies, 3 points will be awarded for each strategy selected for inclusion in

the scope of the project and 1 point will be awarded for each strategy considered for inclusion in the scope of the project with sufficient explanation. For Tier 3 strategies, 1 point will be awarded for each strategy selected for inclusion in the scope of the project. For strategies in any Tiers 1-3, one- half point will be awarded for each strategy the project sponsor engages in as an agency within the Northwestern Indiana Region but outside of the scope of the project itself (and excluding strategies engaged in merely through direct NIRPC activities such as membership on a NIRPC committee) with sufficient explanation.

Evaluating Projects

For MOVE NWI to be effective in holding project sponsors accountable to advancing the congestion management objectives and strategies articulated in MOVE NWI, there needs to be a process for screening projects for adherence with the CMP. It should first be noted that there are a lot of projects that are already planned in NWI 2050 or programmed into the 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), so to remove such projects retroactively would be unfair to the project sponsors’ expectations and the transparent process that has already played out. More importantly, these projects have already been found to conform to NIRPC’s preexisting Congestion Management Process adopted in 2011. That said, MOVE NWI distinguishes projects that already have been incorporated in the 2020-2024 TIP (which are categorically exempt from additional adherence to MOVE NWI) versus projects that are in the fiscally constrained NWI 2050 but not yet in the 2020- 2024 TIP. Before projects in the latter category can be programmed into either the current or any subsequent TIP, those projects must demonstrate adherence to MOVE NWI in the same way that any new project seeking inclusion into NWI 2050 (or any subsequent Metropolitan Transportation Plan) or the 2020-2024 TIP (or any subsequent TIP) would be required to as described in the following paragraphs.

For a project to demonstrate adherence to MOVE NWI, there is a shared responsibility between the project sponsor and NIRPC staff. The process of demonstrating adherence begins with the Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA). Project sponsors have the responsibility for determining which program in the NOFA their proposed project falls into. MOVE NWI only applies to some projects in the Roadway Improvement, New Roadway, and Quality of Place programs of the NOFA. Thus, projects that fall into any of the other programs are categorically exempted from having to demonstrate MOVE NWI adherence. The Proposed Project worksheet to Determine MOVE NWI adherence in a later section will help guide project sponsors to further investigate whether their proposed project(s) may need to demonstrate MOVE NWI adherence. Even within these programs that may require MOVE NWI adherence, there are certain project types that are also categorically exempted from MOVE NWI adherence. The only project types that are required to demonstrate MOVE NWI adherence are: (1) Surface transport infrastructure to facilitate port "linkages", (2) New bridge / roadway / tunnel construction in the New Roadways program, (3) Intersection Congestion Improvements in the Roadway Improvement program, and (4) Roadway Expansion in the Quality of Place program. Even for those project types that are required to demonstrate MOVE NWI adherence, projects that are not on the MOVE NWI Network are categorically exempted from demonstrating MOVE NWI adherence.

The following Tables 19 through 21 are descriptions from the Proposed Project worksheet to Determine MOVE NWI adherence and break down the steps of demonstrating MOVE NWI adherence by project type and responsible party for completing each step. Note that even though INDOT does not have to submit project applications through the NIRPC NOFA process, it still must organize all of its projects proposed for inclusion in the Metropolitan Transportation Plan or TIP into the 4 project types mentioned above and follow the steps in Tables 19 through 21 below, assuming the role of “Project sponsor” as the responsible party.

Table 19: Steps to Demonstrate MOVE NWI Adherence for New Roadways Program (Surface transport infrastructure to facilitate port "linkages" and New bridge / roadway / tunnel construction Project Types)

Table 20: Steps to Demonstrate MOVE NWI Adherence for Roadway Improvements Program (Intersection Congestion Improvement Project Type)

Table 21: Steps to Demonstrate MOVE NWI Adherence for Quality of Place Program (Roadway Expansion Project Type)

MOVE NWI Administration

MOVE NWI is a living document that requires ongoing administration. NIRPC staff will be in charge of the day-to-day administration of MOVE NWI, overseen by the Surface Transportation Committee, Technical Planning Committee, and any other topical committees as requested. NIRPC will plan to update MOVE NWI beginning in 2030 as the performance measure data used in evaluating the objectives becomes available and MOVE NWI can be evaluated as a whole unless any intervening MTP calls for objectives, performance measures, or strategies that are substantially different enough to warrant a new CMP to replace MOVE NWI before 2030.

Proposed Project Worksheet to Determine MOVE NWI adherence

A worksheet will help applicants in the NOFA process determine whether MOVE NWI adherence will be required for their project(s) to be considered for selection and inclusion into the programming process. The worksheet itself will reside as a Microsoft Excel worksheet alongside the rest of the NOFA application. Project sponsors will be alerted that they will only have to fill out the worksheet if their project falls into one of the 3 programs that may require MOVE NWI adherence: New Roadway, Roadway Improvement, or Quality of Place. Depending on which of the 3 programs the project being considered falls into, project sponsors will be directed to the appropriate section of the worksheet to complete. The initial questions in each section will probe project sponsors about whether the project falls into one of the project types requiring MOVE NWI adherence: in the New Roadways program, surface transport infrastructure to facilitate port "linkages" or new bridge / roadway / tunnel construction; in the Roadway Improvements program, intersection congestion improvements; and in the Quality of Place program, roadway expansion. If it is clear that the project being applied for does not fall into one of these 4 project types, the project sponsor will be instructed that completing the rest of the worksheet is unnecessary because the project adheres to MOVE NWI.

Once the project sponsor completes the first part of the worksheet and finds the project will possibly need to demonstrate MOVE NWI adherence, the project sponsor will be instructed to provide the information as shown in Tables 19, 20, or 21, whichever applies.

Figure 20: Screenshot of the Proposed Project Worksheet to Determine MOVE NWI Adherence [Insert worksheet here after consulting with other NIRPC staff and TROC]

1 23 CFR § 450.322

2 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, “Congestion Management Process: A Guidebook,” April 2011, Accessed at https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/congestion_management_process/cmp_guidebook/cmpguidebk.pdf. 3 61 FR 67166, December 19, 1996

4 USDOT, FHWA Office of Operations, “An Interim Guidebook on the Congestion Management Process in Metropolitan Transportation Planning,” Accessed at https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/cmpguidebook/02intro.htm.

5 USDOT, FHWA Office of Operations, “Traffic Congestion and Reliability: Trends and Advanced Strategies for Congestion Mitigation,” Accessed at https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/congestion_report/chapter2.htm.

6 USDOT, FHWA Office of Operations, “Management & Operations in the Metropolitan Transportation Plan:

A Guidebook for Creating an Objectives-Driven, Performance-Based Approach,” November 2007, Accessed at https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/moguidebook/chap_1.htm#1_5.

7 Excludes US 12 (from Indianapolis Blvd to IN-MI State Line) and US 20 (from Indianapolis Blvd to I-94/Exit

40) these 2 corridors are not included in NPMRDS data and using Google Maps API to perform query during COVID-19 pandemic might skew results.

8 Excludes 450 W/475 W/500 W (from US 20 to 100 S) and Crisman Rd/Willow-creek Rd (US 20 to 700 N) because data on these corridors are not available from the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) 9 NWI 2050 Accessed at https://www.nirpc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/NWI-2050-FINAL-PLAN.pdf. 10 For a map of Functional Classification in NWI, see https://nirpcgis.carto.com/viz/647f47b8-ddfd-11e4- aa76-0e018d66dc29/public_map.

11 For a great explanation of the federally required performance measures, including the ones pertaining to congestion (PM3), consult https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/tpm/.

12 Note that not all GPS unit manufacturers and cellular providers are contracted to provide their locations for NPMRDS data. For more information about NPMRDS consult https://npmrds.ritis.org/analytics/.

13 Many thanks to Xinbo Mi of Evansville Metropolitan Planning Organization (EMPO) for alerting Indiana Metropolitan Planning Organizations including NIRPC to the ability to use the Google Maps Directions API for harnessing “big data” in an easy-to-use, cost-effective way.