Evaluating Alternative Operations Strategies to Improve Travel Time ...

SHRP 2 L11: Final Report
order to meet freeway performance goals. However, this operations strategy resulted in long
ramp queues which generated motorist complaints. Then public officials began questioning this
operations policy. The result was a widely publicized shut-off of the ramp meters and a study of
their effectiveness. Ultimately the meters were restored to operation but a new operating strategy
was implemented that balanced freeway performance with ramp-queue delays and impacts to
adjacent streets. A legally mandated maximum approach queue setting of four minutes was a
performance standard imposed on the operating agency by elected officials. (9)
In 1990, the California Air Resource Board (CRB) implemented regulations that required that
two percent of vehicles for sale in California in 1998 be zero-emission vehicles. The percentage
of zero-emission vehicles was required to increase by 2003 to ten percent of vehicles for sale. In
1996 and 2001, CRB had to change these regulations due to the difficulty in implementation and
the slow development of appropriate technology. (10)
“Stretch” Goal
The one exception to not setting “unreachable” goals is when the intent is obviously not to reach
the goal but to change the entire concept of what is possible. For example, several states have
adopted “Target Zero” goals of no fatal accidents as part of their safety management systems.
The real objective of these goals is not necessarily to achieve that outcome (although such an
outcome would certainly be welcome) but to inspire a change in attitude about what is possible
and to change the level of resources spent, producing more dramatic reductions in the number of
fatal accidents. These agreed upon, but acknowledged to be unreachable, goals comprise the
second category of performance goals, are called “stretch goals.” These goals serve very useful
purposes, primarily as rallying points around which resources and programs can be based. The
key is that all parties understand that “success” is not obtained by meeting (or even approaching)
these goals but in dramatically changing the status quo, with the intent (and eventual outcome) of
achieving a significant change in the performance measured, even if the absolute “goal” is never
reached.
Improvement Goal
The third category of performance goals is often adopted when the “desired” outcome (e.g., no
congestion) is not financially feasible and when “stretch goals” are not appropriate, but when
agencies do want to use the information they obtain from a performance monitoring effort to
improve their activities. The process generally involves initially measuring performance (setting
a baseline), and then setting goals to improve that baseline.
Selecting the Type of Goal
Service industries and most government agencies, which are in reality part of the service sector,
have a difficult time setting quantitative performance standards. Manufacturers, in contrast,
which have control over the supply of raw materials and produce an easily-quantifiable product,
can set quantitative performance standards. Transportation agencies, which provide an essential
service, may be the industry that has the least control over the inputs and operating parameters.
Agencies responsible for transportation management have little or no control over the scheduling
of both planned special events and unplanned events like natural disasters. They have no
accurate or reliable method to estimate latent demand for transportation facilities. They have no
way of controlling what land-use changes will take place. And they have little or no control over
the changes in travel demand that those changes will impose on the transportation system. For
GOALS AND PERFORMANCE TARGETS Page 34