Building a Better Plan: Costs and Benefits of Transportation Alternatives

Abstract

The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) in Washington State has developed a set of procedures and methods for project and program evaluation that generally fall into the category of transportation benefit–cost analysis. The purpose of these methods is to be able to produce information about project or program performance relative to performance under a baseline set of conditions in which the project or program has not been implemented. PSRC used these benefit–cost analysis methods to develop and evaluate regional transportation planning alternatives during its most recent planning process. The creation of alternative regional transportation plans for analysis is not entirely unlike the development of investment portfolios. Acceptance of the findings of a comprehensive benefit–cost analysis as the appropriate analytical framework solves many, but not all, of the problems of practical implementation of a framework for evaluation of a scenario. Performance of a truly comprehensive benefit–cost analysis in a complex practical setting, however, introduces some empirical and policy challenges. PSRC has taken practical steps toward a more systematic approach to an alternative method of analysis. Incorporation of user benefit analysis into the process of evaluation of a scenario produces a natural shift toward consideration of development and selection of a scenario as an investment optimization problem. The paper explores additional approaches that might further advance the state of the practice in regional transportation planning.