Presented to the Illinois Department of Transportation on Dec. 7, 2005, on behalf of MPC and Chicago Metropolis 2020.
December 7, 2005
To: Illinois Department of Transportation
Re: IDOT State Transportation Plan
Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony today. I am Kit Hodge, an associate with the Metropolitan Planning Council, and I am pleased to comment on the agency’s State Transportation Plan draft on behalf of the Metropolitan Planning Council and Chicago Metropolis 2020.
Our organizations have been encouraged by Secretary Martin’s recent remarks about emphasizing evaluation and accountability at IDOT. We agree that the agency and public need to have a clear understanding of the policies and principles that will guide state transportation investments, what those investments are expected to achieve, and how results will be measured. But the current planning process and draft document raise more questions than they answer. So, I would like to begin by posing a number of questions for the Department, and offering one general recommendation for your planning process.
First, the questions:
1. Why has IDOT begun the public outreach process in late November 2005 if it has to submit a finalized plan to the Legislature by January 1, 2006?
2. How does this document relate to any capital plan that might come out in Spring 2006? Does IDOT intend to use it to create criteria to identify and prioritize projects? If the agency doesn’t intend to use this document to craft its capital program recommendations, then when will it create such a policy document?
3. How does this plan relate to the 2030 regional transportation plan and the plans of other MPOs in Illinois ? Is the agency committed to following a regional transportation plan where metropolitan planning organizations exist in the state?
If the agency does intend to use this document as a tool for identifying and prioritizing projects for a capital program, then the Metropolitan Planning Council and Chicago Metropolis 2020 strongly recommend that it fully embraces Secretary Martin’s themes of accountability and evaluation by setting output-based, numeric goals, and developing a system of quantifiable measures to determine whether the agency has met its goals. For example, IDOT’s goals for highway safety include “to reduce the statewide fatality rate … from the 2003 level of 1.37 to 1.0 by Jan. 1, 2008.” This is an output-based, quantifiable goal that provides the agency—and the public—a benchmark against which to measure its work. IDOT should use this same type of goal setting for as many other sections of this plan as possible. For example, “reduce car congestion on interstates by X% by 200Y” or “convert Z% of personal car trips on arterials to public transportation trips by 200Y.” IDOT’s plan should articulate numerical goals for reducing travel time and increasing public transit trips as a percentage of all commuter trips.
Outcome-based goals are becoming the industry standard in world-class cities and countries because factual assessments strategies to meet an agency’s—and the public’s—goals allows the agency to continually refine its toolbox of solutions to transportation problems.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak.
Respectfully submitted by
Kit Hodge
Associate