![](media/image1.jpeg){width="6.583333333333333in"
height="3.7402777777777776in"}**CHAPTER FIVE**

**EVENT OPERATIONS PLANNING**

Figure 5-1

Event Planning Team Meeting

![](media/image2.wmf){width="0.25972222222222224in"
height="0.2965277777777778in"}

**PURPOSE**

This chapter presents advance planning and stakeholder coordination
activities conducted for a specific planned special event. It represents
the first of three successive chapters on the event operations planning
phase. The primary, interrelated products of the event operations
planning phase include: (1) feasibility study, (2) traffic management
plan, and (3) travel demand management initiatives. This chapter
describes *initial planning activities*, summarizes *feasibility study*
analysis steps specific to a planned special event, and highlights
*external factors*

affecting the scope of event impact on transportation system operations.

Practitioners can use this chapter as a tool to: (1) establish an event
operations planning framework for guiding stakeholder activities
throughout the phase, (2) assist in deciding whether to grant or deny
preliminary approval to schedule a proposed planned special event based
on predicted transportation system impacts and (3) determine traffic and
parking demand, roadway capacity deficiencies, and unplanned scenarios
that define that scope of traffic management plan required (Chapter 6)
in addition to the need for developing travel demand management
initiatives (Chapter 7).

**INTRODUCTION**

![](media/image3.wmf){width="0.2902777777777778in"
height="0.30069444444444443in"}

This chapter helps practitioners to *hit the ground running* on advance
planning for a specific planned special event. Compared to Chapters 6
and 7 which detail strategies and tactics for mitigating the impact of
planned special events on transportation system operations, this chapter
emphasizes, with supporting example case studies, the importance of
facilitating a planning structure, stakeholder coordination, and
comprehensive event assessment in generating event planning phase
products that completely and accurately guide operations activities on
the day-of-event.

A section on initial planning activities describes input data
requirements for analyzing the event impact and discusses scenarios
linked to particular events that may require the development of a
contingency plan(s). The section lists transportation system performance
objectives, and associated facility-specific measures of effectiveness
(MOEs), that satisfy the customer service requirements of event patrons
and other road user classes. It presents an event operations planning
schedule and lists various products of the event operations planning
phase. The section concludes by examining situations necessitating
public involvement, summarizing the feasibility study and traffic
management plan review process, and identifying successful policies and
agreements for managing and operating a planned special event.

The event feasibility study section presents travel forecast process
strategies and considerations for estimating modal split,
event-generated traffic demand, and vehicle occupancy factors. It
reviews techniques for identifying a market area and directional
distribution of event-generated traffic. The section reviews
methodologies for identifying and evaluating the sufficiency of
available venue parking supply based on event parking demand and
existing conditions. It specifies traffic demand analysis and roadway
capacity analysis strategies, including the application of various
traffic modeling and capacity analysis tools. To provide a lead-in to
the following two chapters on event operations planning, the section
describes a toolbox of mitigation strategies for adjusting event traffic
generation levels as well as increasing transportation system capacity.

This chapter concludes with an examination of external factors that may
create considerable impact on transportation system operations if
ignored. A feasibility study may not account for issues such as
available resources, weather, concurrent road construction activities,
and concurrent planned special events. These factors must be accounted
for early in the advance planning process as well as in traffic
management plans prepared for a planned special event. For example,
given a particular recurring event, event patrons and non-attendee
transportation system users may realize satisfactory system operations
during one event occurrence, then experience an unacceptable level of
service during the next event occurrence. Such incidents occur when
stakeholders do not account for various external factors, through
scenario-based response plans, early in the event traffic management
plan development process.

![](media/image5.wmf){width="0.25984251968503935in"
height="0.29645669291338583in"}![](media/image6.wmf){width="0.29015748031496064in"
height="0.30078740157480316in"}![](media/image7.wmf){width="0.3598425196850394in"
height="0.3047244094488189in"}**INITIAL PLANNING**

**ACTIVITIES**

### Overview

This section examines key planning initiatives and special
considerations in order to help guide the user through the first steps
of the event operations planning phase. The event operations planning
phase begins with stakeholders establishing a planning framework and
schedule. The framework includes forming an event planning team,
creating agreements, identifying performance goals and objectives, and
deciding on mitigation assessment and approval protocol.

Special considerations evolve from reviewing the event operations
characteristics of a particular special event (e.g., risk assessment) in
addition to past successes and lessons learned. These considerations
weigh heavy on traffic management plan requirements, and stakeholders
must address issues affecting community residents and businesses through
public outreach efforts early in the planning phase in order to ensure
proper mitigation and non-conflict with traffic management plan
specifications.

**Stakeholder Roles and**

**Coordination**

The event planning team handles tasks associated with *event-specific
operations planning* and *traffic management plan implementation*. Table
5-1 lists the primary responsibilities of the event planning team under
the event operations planning phase. The event planning team consists of
a diverse group of stakeholders with either event operations or
community interest as their primary concern. The success of the event
planning team depends on achieving strong coordination among
participating team stakeholders.

Table 5-1

Event Planning Team Responsibilities

During the Event Operations Planning Phase

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| # RESPONSIBILITY                                                      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| -   Perform feasibility study.                                        |
|                                                                       |
| -   Develop traffic management plan.                                  |
|                                                                       |
| -   Evaluate travel demand management initiatives.                    |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

[Event Planning Team Establishment]{.underline}

An event planning team forms as a result of either: (1) coordination
among traffic operations agencies, transit agencies, law enforcement
agencies, and event organizers that represent the core event planning
team stakeholders or (2) designation by a committee on special events
within a regional transportation management organization, such as a
traffic incident management program.

-   The former typically describes event planning teams formed in
    response to local planned special events affecting few
    jurisdictions, such as events occurring in rural or urban areas.

-   The latter may occur in metropolitan areas where planned special
    events happen frequently, thus warranting an *on-call* event
    planning team.

A *regional transportation committee on special events* features
stakeholders that have achieved interagency coordination through past,
cooperative travel management efforts.

-   Stakeholder representatives have firsthand knowledge of the roles,
    resources, and capabilities of each committee participant.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Stakeholders commonly include traffic operations agencies, law
    enforcement, transit agencies, event organizers or venue operators,
    and the media.

-   Committees in metropolitan areas may create task forces for specific
    planned special event venues or recurring planned special events
    (e.g., annual fairs, fireworks displays, parades, etc.). The
    committee or task force generally meets and performs event
    operations planning tasks on an as-needed basis. The group may also
    convene regularly (e.g., weekly, monthly, or quarterly) to review
    program planning efforts for future planned special events.

Prior to initiating the event operations planning process, the core
event planning team should adopt a mission, or purpose, and solicit
buy-in from public agency stakeholders, the community, and other event
support stakeholders. In identifying pertinent jurisdictions, the event
planning team may consider contacting stakeholders within a certain
distance (e.g., five miles) of the event venue. The event planning team
can obtain buy-in from community interest stakeholders more easily when
a core group of stakeholders already exists, including public agencies.
Elected officials and the public can serve as advocates for the event
planning team; therefore, participation from these stakeholders should
occur early in the event operations planning phase.

Table 5-2 indicates the typical function of each participating
stakeholder in generating the primary products of the event operations
planning phase. A list of stakeholders is referenced to the three
products produced: (1) feasibility study, (2) traffic management plan,
and (3) travel demand management. Stakeholders contribute data,
communicate needs, and/or furnish resources. Often, certain agencies
promote initiatives developed by the event planning team, such as travel
demand management strategies.

Table 5-2

Stakeholder Participation in Event Operations Planning

<table>
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 20%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td rowspan="3"><h1 id="stakeholder">STAKEHOLDER</h1></td>
<td colspan="10"><h1 id="products-of-the-event-planning-team">PRODUCTS
OF THE EVENT PLANNING TEAM</h1></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="3"><strong>Feasibility Study</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"><p><strong>Traffic</strong></p>
<p><strong>Management Plan</strong></p></td>
<td colspan="4"><strong>Travel Demand Management</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>Input</strong></td>
<td><strong>Develop</strong></td>
<td><strong>Review</strong></td>
<td><strong>Input</strong></td>
<td><strong>Develop</strong></td>
<td><strong>Review</strong></td>
<td><strong>Input</strong></td>
<td><strong>Develop</strong></td>
<td><strong>Review</strong></td>
<td><strong>Promote</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Traffic Operations Agency</td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>Law Enforcement</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Event Organizer</td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>Fire and EMS</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Elected Official</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>Transit Agency</td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Public</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>Private Transportation Consultant</td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><p>Private Traffic</p>
<p>Control Contractor</p></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>Media</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Office on Special Events</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><p>Emergency</p>
<p>Management Agency</p></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><p>Regional</p>
<p>Organization</p></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
<td>•</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

##### [Interagency Coordination]{.underline}

In establishing an event planning team, the core stakeholders must
develop a working trust with each other. This trust results when
stakeholders realize that a planned special event necessitates the same
relationships cultivated in daily traffic and incident management.

A joint operations policy or other memoranda of understanding
strengthens the cooperative bond among core stakeholders. These
agreements identify common goals and responsibilities of the partnering
agencies.

*Consensus* among stakeholders builds interagency coordination and an
understanding of each agency's responsibility. Key elements to consider
include:

-   Participating stakeholders must recognize that the motivations of
    individual agencies may differ from the event planning team's
    concerns as a result of their day-to-day responsibilities.

-   Although the event planning team does not have authority over
    individual stakeholders, the planning team must realize that
    possible conflicts may exist between the team's objectives and a
    stakeholder's primary responsibility. Understanding this is key to
    overcoming such a problem; yet, the team can foster a cooperative
    spirit among stakeholders by emphasizing that participants *own* a
    part of the event planning team's common goals. In turn, team goals
    and objectives create incentives for individual stakeholders.

-   Stakeholders must remain focused on the goals and objectives of the
    event planning team in order to effectively support and contribute
    in the event operations planning process. This includes
    concentrating on tasks that can be successfully accomplished
    collectively.

Common barriers to the event planning team's progress include *resource
constraints* and *jurisdictional barriers*.

-   Resource or funding constraints surface when stakeholders assign a
    lower priority to the planned special event. In satisfying
    individual and team goals, stakeholders may have to make temporary
    project and program sacrifices, in terms of personnel and equipment
    reassignment, to provide adequate benefits to the event operations
    planning effort.

-   Jurisdictional barriers arise when two or more stakeholders are
    unclear on their duties and responsibilities. Do not allow
    participating agencies to feel left out. At the time of buy-in, the
    event planning team must indicate which stakeholders are required on
    an as-needed basis. The team must have the ability to communicate
    effectively with stakeholders having a peripheral involvement in the
    overall planning effort.

**Risk Assessment**

Based on the type and purpose of a planned special event, there exists
potential scenarios where event patron or non-attendee behavior may
cause overcrowded conditions in the vicinity of an event venue and/or
create unplanned road closures. The event planning team must assess the
nature of a proposed event and determine the need to incorporate special
contingency plans in response to potentially dangerous situations that
will interfere with the planned travel management on the day-of-event.

Table 5-3 lists four notable event-oriented risk scenarios associated
with some planned special events. This section further

Table 5-3

Summary of Event-Oriented Risk Scenarios

+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| **EVENT-ORIENTED  | **EXAMPLE SCENARIO**                             |
| RISK**            |                                                  |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| Demonstration or  | -   Any event that is political in nature or     |
| protest           |     invokes social concern.                      |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Political conventions and parades            |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| Ticketless event  | -   Sold-out sports championship games           |
| patrons           |                                                  |
|                   | -   Sold-out concerts involving select           |
| causing           |     performers                                   |
| overcrowding      |                                                  |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| Fan celebration   | -   Response to city or school sports team       |
|                   |     winning a championship.                      |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| Event patron      | -   Motorcycle rally violence between patrons    |
| violence          |     and/or participants.                         |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+

describes these scenarios and highlights example case studies that
illustrate resulting impacts on advance planning and/or day-of-event
operations. Chapter 6 provides detailed guidance on contingency planning
in addition to the development of specific strategies (e.g., alternate
route plans) needed to effectively respond to certain unplanned
scenarios.

##### [Demonstration or Protest]{.underline}

Certain political or socially controversial planned special events may
provoke a demonstration or protest. Those attending the demonstration
represent non-attendees, and the event planning team often has little or
no advance information regarding the demonstration's specific location
and time of occurrence. The event planning team should obtain access to
relevant law enforcement intelligence reports regarding potential
demonstrations to develop an effective travel management contingency
plan. The threat of an unplanned road closure should prompt the event
planning team to consider developing an alternate route contingency plan
detailing the personnel and equipment resources necessary to effect an
immediate diversion of traffic.

Appendix B contains a contingency diversion routing plan prepared in
response to the potential for demonstrations during the 2000 Republican
National Convention in Philadelphia, PA.

##### [Overcrowding]{.underline}

The occurrence of sports championship games or major concerts at venues
having a defined *sell-out* capacity may attract *ticketless* event
patrons not accounted for in event travel forecasts and impact
mitigation strategies. Events such as the Super Bowl or National
Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Final Four cause an increase in
area visitors beyond the actual event participants and patrons. Sold-out
music festivals may attract persons wanting to tailgate in venue parking
areas despite not having a ticket.

For instance, event planners originally anticipated 200,000 people to
attend a two-day *Grateful Dead* reunion concert at a 35,000 seat
amphitheater in rural East Troy, WI, located approximately 30 miles
southeast of Milwaukee. The Walworth County Highway Committee initially
denied the event organizer a permit to hold the two concerts. After the
event organizer unveiled a comprehensive security and traffic management
plan that included using advance checkpoints to turn away any vehicle
that contained a ticketless occupant, county executives overturned their
decision and issued a permit.^(1)^ Appendix B contains a list of
restrictions imposed by the event organizer and event planning team to
prevent ticketless event patrons from gaining access to the venue
parking areas.

##### [Fan Celebration]{.underline}

Another severe impact risk associated with sports championship games
involves fan celebrations that occur when a city sports team wins a
championship at home. In this case, the traffic management team charged
with managing travel during event egress must also mitigate traffic
impacts caused by non-attendees converging on the venue site and unruly
fans disrupting traffic and pedestrian flow.

For instance, the Detroit Red Wings won the 2002 Stanley Cup in Detroit.
Operating from past experience, the Michigan State Police began closing
portions of Interstate 75 and the Lodge Freeway (State Route 10) leading
to downtown Detroit and the event venue. This contingency plan went into
effect at the start of the final period of play with Detroit leading the
championship clinching game.^(2)^ Contingency plan details were even
posted in advance on Red Wings' fan websites. Located approximately 16
miles north of the event venue, Royal Oak police and city officials
maintained road closure contingency plans to accommodate the thousands
of fans that went to the popular clubs and bars to celebrate the home
team win.^(3)^

##### [Event Patron Violence]{.underline}

An outbreak of violence among event patrons warrants special security
precautions to contain and capture potential suspects. Law enforcement
may initiate a road closure as a first response to discourage people
from entering and leaving the region where the violence took place.

During the 2002 Laughlin, NV River Run motorcycle rally, attended by
tens of thousands of motorcycle enthusiasts, a multiple homicide
occurred after a clash between rival motorcycle gangs. In an effort to
capture the homicide suspects, Nevada officials closed all highways and
arterials serving Laughlin, including Nevada State Route 163 at the
Nevada/Arizona border as shown in Figure 5-2. Trucks traveling U.S. 93,
a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) designated trucking
corridor, traverse State Route 163 because of prohibitions on crossing
the Hoover Dam. Law enforcement maintained the road closures for a few
hours.^(4)^ A possible traffic management contingency plan prepared in
advance of the described security incident would specify a regional
alternate route plan coupled with regional traveler information.

![](media/image8.jpeg){width="3.0in"
height="1.8291666666666666in"}Figure 5-2

Nevada State Route 168 Closure During Motorcycle Rally *(Photo courtesy
of the Laughlin Free Press)*

**Performance Goals and Objectives**

The goals of managing travel for planned special events include
*achieving predictability*, *ensuring safety*, and *maximizing
efficiency*. Table 5-4 states performance objectives, for the previously
defined classes of transportation system users, applicable to satisfying
the overall goal of operations efficiency and safety. In meeting these
performance objectives, the event planning team must target the goal of
achieving predictability during the event operations planning phase.
Table 5-5 presents common, easy-to-measure measures of effectiveness for
assessing the performance

Table 5-4

Transportation System Operations Performance Objectives for Planned
Special Events

+--------------+-------------------------------------------------------+
| **USER       | **PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE**                             |
| CLASS**      |                                                       |
+--------------+-------------------------------------------------------+
| Event patron | -   Minimize travel delay to/from the event.          |
|              |                                                       |
|              | -   Minimize conflicts between pedestrians and        |
|              |     vehicles.                                         |
|              |                                                       |
|              | -   Minimize travel safety hazards.                   |
|              |                                                       |
|              | -   Minimize impact of traffic incidents.             |
|              |                                                       |
|              | -   Disseminate accurate, timely, and consistent      |
|              |     traveler information.                             |
|              |                                                       |
|              | -   Increase automation of traffic control.           |
|              |                                                       |
|              | -   Maximize site access service flow rates.          |
+--------------+-------------------------------------------------------+
| Non-attendee | -   Minimize travel delay on major thoroughfares,     |
| road user    |     freeways and major arterials.                     |
|              |                                                       |
|              | -   Minimize impact on commuter and trucker travel    |
|              |     time reliability.                                 |
|              |                                                       |
|              | -   Maintain required parking and access for local    |
|              |     residents and businesses.                         |
|              |                                                       |
|              | -   Maintain unimpeded access for emergency vehicles. |
+--------------+-------------------------------------------------------+
| Transit user | -   Maintain scheduled travel times.                  |
|              |                                                       |
|              | -   Minimize transit bus dwell times.                 |
|              |                                                       |
|              | -   Maintain required transit station parking for     |
|              |     non-attendee transit users.                       |
+--------------+-------------------------------------------------------+

objectives that describe traffic operations. The event planning team
should consider field studies to quantify existing MOEs at key roadways
and intersections to calibrate capacity analysis software and computer
simulation models applied during traffic management plan development.
The identified MOEs represent day-of-event performance evaluation data,
useful for: (1) making real-time adjustments to the traffic management
plan on the day-of-event, (2) conducting a post-event evaluation of
transportation system performance, and (3) referencing during advance
planning for future event occurrences.

NCHRP Synthesis 311, *Performance Measures of Operational Effectiveness
for Highway Segments and Systems*, reports on the state-of-the-practice
of using performance measures for the monitoring and operational
management of highway segments and systems.^(5)^ It assesses the
relative strengths and weaknesses of various performance measures. Based
on a survey of current agency practice, the synthesis reports that
performance measures associated with planned special event management
are similar to traffic and incident management, but may also include
performance measures related to clearance times (e.g., time for vehicles
to clear a venue site area) and parking management measures.

######### 

Table 5-5

Measures of Effectiveness for Assessing Performance Objectives

+--------------------+-------------------------------------------------+
| # LOCATION         | **MEASURE OF**                                  |
|                    |                                                 |
|                    | **EFFECTIVENESS**                               |
+--------------------+-------------------------------------------------+
| Venue              | -   Occupancy and turnover rate                 |
|                    |                                                 |
| parking areas      | -   Arrival and departure service rate          |
|                    |                                                 |
|                    | -   Time to clear parking lots                  |
+--------------------+-------------------------------------------------+
| Intersections      | -   Vehicle delay                               |
|                    |                                                 |
|                    | -   Queue length                                |
+--------------------+-------------------------------------------------+
| Freeways and       | -   Travel time and delay                       |
|                    |                                                 |
| streets            | -   Traffic volume to capacity ratio            |
|                    |                                                 |
|                    | -   Traffic speed                               |
|                    |                                                 |
|                    | -   Number and location of crashes and other    |
|                    |     incidents                                   |
|                    |                                                 |
|                    | -   Traffic incident clearance time             |
+--------------------+-------------------------------------------------+

######### Planning Schedule and Deliverables

Two deliverables, produced by the event planning team during the event
operations planning phase, include the *feasibility study* and the
*traffic management plan*, designed to mitigate impacts identified in
the feasibility study. *Travel demand management* represents a key
component of the overall process when forecasted traffic demand levels
approach or exceed available roadway capacity.

The previous chapter outlined a detailed special event permit process
and identified advance planning deadlines applicable to the event
organizer. In turn, Figure 5-3 illustrates a high-level event operations
planning schedule for an event planning stakeholder group. The figure
lists advance planning activities and potential stakeholder meetings and
public hearings in a timeline relative to the planning deliverables. The
schedule indicates other stakeholder planning initiatives, such as the
development of a specialized transit plan to reduce event traffic
demand.

The event planning team should:

-   Obtain a completed special event permit application and commence
    work on the event feasibility study no later than 60 days prior to
    the event.

-   Start developing the event traffic management plan and obtain all
    initial public input and recommendations no later than 30 days
    before the event.

-   Set aside the final 14 days prior to the event for implementation
    activities in addition to event information dissemination.

![](media/image1.wmf)

Figure 5-3

Event Operations Planning Schedule

The planning schedule provides a generic timeline, recognizing that
actual event operations planning schedules vary considerably. For
instance, some major, roving planned special events, such as the U.S.
Golf Open, require an event operations planning phase spanning more than
one year.

**Public Outreach**

Planned special events that may impact adjacent neighborhoods and
businesses usually require public involvement to address related
concerns. The public represents individual residents, businesses, and
associated community groups. Public outreach activities initiated early
in the event operations planning phase can reveal important issues that
local residents and businesses may have. Soliciting these concerns
through public involvement, and addressing the issues in the planning
process, can improve relations and day-of-event operations.

Street use events or other planned special events that take place at
venues located adjacent to residential and/or commercial districts may
significantly impact non-attendee mobility and community quality of
life. Specific neighborhood impact issues include heavy traffic demand
on local streets and event patron use of available local on-street
parking. These issues arise because, in some instances, event patrons
may find on-street parking in residential neighborhoods and business
districts affords more convenient ingress and egress. In addition,
illegal parking fines may not exceed, or significantly exceed, the fee
charged at designated venue parking areas.

Initiation of public outreach efforts includes stakeholders, such as a
traffic operations agency or law enforcement, holding initial

and regular meetings with community groups and local elected officials.
At these meetings, the event planning team should present the scope of
the event in enough detail to solicit quality input and buy-in from
public stakeholders. Concerns revealed in this process should be
addressed, and feasible solutions presented, so that the public
stakeholders feel assured that impacts will be mitigated to their
satisfaction.

The event planning team and public stakeholders should identify
potential problems prior to the development of the traffic management
plan. These problems can be identified by first understanding the event
scope with consideration given to current neighborhood traffic and
parking restrictions, traffic management plans deployed during past
planned special events, and identified problems experienced during past
events. With this information, the public stakeholders can make informed
decisions and provide valuable input to the event planning team.

##### [Example Case Studies]{.underline}

Innovative strategies developed by the cities of Seattle and Chicago to
minimize neighborhood traffic and parking impacts during
discrete/recurring events at a permanent venue are highlighted in three
case studies summarized below. It should be recognized that an event
planning team can implement these strategies on a temporary basis for
less frequent continuous events and street use events.

*Case Study One: University of Washington.* Due to the construction of a
new football stadium, the Seattle Seahawks moved their scheduled 2000
and 2001 home games to the University of Washington's Husky Stadium.
Recognizing the Seahawks represented a

new and different stadium user with unique characteristics, the City of
Seattle required development of a Seahawk Football Transportation
Management Program.^(6)^

Key strategies included:

-   The City of Seattle DOT, Seahawks organization, University of
    Washington, neighboring residents, and other City of Seattle
    officials conducted formal meetings prior to and during the Seahawks
    football season to listen to community concerns, report on
    operations, develop plan modifications, and review performance goal
    achievement.

-   A hotline was established for local residents to voice concerns and
    to communicate day-of-event observations.

-   Stakeholders responded by developing carpool parking pricing
    incentives and establishing new *restricted parking zones (RPZ)* in
    residential neighborhoods adjacent to Husky Stadium.

-   The number of parking enforcement officers assigned to patrol the
    RPZs on the day-of-event increased from 6 to 13, and the Seattle
    Municipal Court approved an RPZ violation fine increase from \$28 to
    \$44 (although a \$71 fine was initially proposed).

-   Table 5-6 notes specific performance goals established by the event
    planning team to evaluate roadway system performance objectives for
    the 2000 Seattle Seahawks football season.

*Case Study Two: Safeco Field in Seattle, WA.* Safeco Field, home to
baseball's Seattle Mariners, was constructed in 1999 and borders three
neighborhoods. Recognizing the residential and business needs of these
neighborhoods, the City of Seattle developed an Inaugural Season
Transportation Management Program (TMP) for events at the stadium
venue.^(7)^

Key strategies included:

-   Participating stakeholders set the following TMP goal: *The primary
    goal, first and foremost, is reducing the number of vehicles,
    drive-alone and otherwise, associated with game attendance, thereby
    deflecting the traffic and parking impacts from the adjacent
    destination neighborhoods and the regional transportation system as
    a whole. The goals, which are stepped according to the kinds of and
    anticipated attendance, are expressed in vehicles per thousand
    attendees.*

-   The Mariners organization, City staff, and the public formed the
    event planning team charged with developing the TMP.

Table 5-6

Seahawk Football Transportation Management Program Goals and
Objectives^(6)^

+----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| # GOAL         | # MEASURE       | **MEASURED      | # GOAL MET?     |
|                |                 | PERFORMANCE**   |                 |
+----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Travel         | No more than    | 182 cars/1000   | Yes             |
| reduction      | 195 cars/1000   | attendees       |                 |
|                | attendees       |                 |                 |
+----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Travel time    | Within 5% of    | -0.1% to 4.7%   | Yes             |
|                | Husky game      | different than  |                 |
|                | travel times    | for Husky games |                 |
+----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Duration of    | Equal to or     | 35 minutes less | Yes             |
| post-game      | less than after |                 |                 |
| traffic        | Husky games     |                 |                 |
+----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+

-   The stakeholders focused on meeting numerous performance-based
    traffic demand mitigation requirements, varying by type of event and
    attendance levels, set by the Seattle City Council upon issuing a
    stadium master use permit.

-   First year operation performance goals for Mariner's baseball games
    ranged from 330 (sell-out) to 345 vehicles per 1000 attendees. The
    permit specified third year operation and beyond performance goals
    ranging from 275 (sell-out) to 325 vehicles per 1000 attendees.

-   A top priority for the TMP concerned deflecting special event
    parking impacts on the surrounding neighborhoods to the Seattle
    Central Business District.

-   Table 5-7 lists specific measures considered by City officials to
    minimize on-street parking by event patrons in adjacent
    neighborhoods.

*Case Study Three: U.S. Cellular Field in Chicago, IL.* The City of
Chicago DOT maintains a *Resident Parking Permit Program* to preserve
legal on-street parking for residents of neighborhoods surrounding U.S.
Cellular Field during all Chicago White Sox baseball games.^(8)^

Key elements of the Resident Parking Permit Program include:

-   For residents living within the program area, the City issues one
    resident parking permit per registered vehicle in addition to one
    guest permit per resident.

Table 5-7

Measures Considered in Developing a Neighborhood Parking Management Plan

for Seattle's Safeco Field^(7)^

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| # PARKING MANAGEMENT OPTION                                           |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| -   Extend parking meter enforcement hours (until at least 10 p.m.    |
|     and on Sundays).                                                  |
|                                                                       |
| -   Replace existing meters with smart meters (programmable by        |
|     season, allowing extended hours during baseball season, for       |
|     instance).                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| -   Impose time limits on parking after 6 p.m. with signs (rather     |
|     than extend meter hours, place 2 hour limits on metered spaces    |
|     after 6 p.m. and on Sundays).                                     |
|                                                                       |
| -   Impose time limits on parking after 6 p.m. with meter hoods.      |
|                                                                       |
| -   Enforce parking restrictions 7 days per week (8 a.m. to 6 p.m. on |
|     Sundays).                                                         |
|                                                                       |
| -   Add new parking meters.                                           |
|                                                                       |
| -   Reduce parking meter duration limits (change some 2 hour meters   |
|     to 1 hour or less).                                               |
|                                                                       |
| -   Replace 4 hour and unrestricted spaces with 2-hour spaces.        |
|                                                                       |
| -   Refine role of City's enforcement officers (add community/public  |
|     relations function).                                              |
|                                                                       |
| -   Assess higher fines for parking infractions in the ballpark       |
|     neighborhoods.                                                    |
|                                                                       |
| -   Increase enforcement (additional parking enforcement officers on  |
|     game days; multiple ticketing).                                   |
|                                                                       |
| -   Create residential parking zones.                                 |
|                                                                       |
| -   Increase number and/or size of loading zones.                     |
|                                                                       |
| -   Create business parking zones.                                    |
|                                                                       |
| -   Discontinue access restrictions that temporarily remove on-street |
|     parking (before and after events).                                |
|                                                                       |
| -   Discontinue parking prohibitions for stadium access (before,      |
|     during, and after events).                                        |
|                                                                       |
| -   Parking space delineation in non-metered areas.                   |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

-   The City also makes available guest parking permits for area
    businesses and churches to allow customers and congregation members
    to park in legal on-street parking spaces and gain access to
    off-street business/church parking within the program area.

-   Figure 5-4 shows a sign enforcing the Resident Parking Permit
    Program.

-   The City has a similar permit program in place for neighborhoods
    surrounding Wrigley Field, home to baseball's Chicago Cubs.

Figure 5-4

Chicago Resident Permit Parking Program Enforcement

**Stakeholder Review of Planning Products**

The previous chapter summarized various criteria for planned special
event permit approval. However, as indicated in Figure 5-3, the event
operations planning phase includes intermediate and final review periods
for the event feasibility study and traffic management plan.

Stakeholder review concentrates on the identification and proposed
mitigation of event travel impacts. Effective and rapid stakeholder
review of event operations planning products requires: (1) an annotated
planning timeline, (2) a review process, and (3) performance standards.

##### ![](media/image2.jpeg){width="3.0in" height="2.4569444444444444in"}[Annotated Planning Timeline]{.underline}

In cases where an event planning team collectively develops a
feasibility study, traffic management plan, and associated mitigation
strategies, an annotated planning timeline proves effective for
monitoring team progress.

The Wisconsin DOT found such a tool useful for tracking specific traffic
management planning and infrastructure deployment activities required to
prepare for the opening of Miller Park in Milwaukee. The agency
maintained a responsibility matrix listing each action item, the
stakeholder responsible, the due date, and the present deployment
status. An event planning team should establish an annotated planning
timeline early in the event operations planning phase and use the tool
to guide subsequent team meeting agendas as stakeholders develop event
impact mitigation strategies and tactics.

##### [Review Process]{.underline}

Adopting a formal review process reduces unnecessary delay in producing
event operations planning deliverables required to stage a planned
special event. Key aspects to be considered include:

-   The review process should feature the oversight team monitoring and
    reviewing plans developed by the event planning team.

-   The oversight team typically consists of mid-to-upper level
    representatives of transportation agencies and law enforcement in
    addition to elected officials and ranking officials of other public
    agencies.

-   A regional organization may assume the duties of an oversight team.

-   Under a formal review process, an event planning team may seek
    oversight team approval of a feasibility study scope or conceptual
    traffic management plan prior to commencing work on the final
    deliverable. Both stakeholder groups interact again to review
    feasibility study results and final traffic management operations
    plans.

-   Some jurisdictions have a *champion* charged with resolving
    institutional and operations issues affecting travel management for
    planned special events. These champions have the position to
    mitigate issues hampering the event operations planning process.
    Therefore, they should administer the review process.

-   Jurisdictions should have an alternate official ready to replace the
    current champion should that person resign from present duty.

##### [Performance Standards]{.underline}

This chapter included a review of various transportation system
operations performance objectives and associated measures of
effectiveness that stakeholders may use to monitor system performance on
the day-of-event and, in turn, evaluate travel management efforts.
During the event operations planning phase, stakeholders must set and
agree to performance standards used to assess traffic impact mitigation
proposals. These performance standards typically represent level of
service (LOS) measures applicable to freeway and street segments,
freeway junctions, and roadway intersections. Stakeholders assigned to
develop mitigation strategies or review planned special event impacts on
traffic should reference jurisdiction Traffic Impact Study guidelines
defining accepted LOS thresholds. The LOS thresholds likely vary by
roadway classification. In urban and metropolitan areas, jurisdictions
may deem an LOS D, describing *high-density stable flow*, acceptable for
freeways, arterials, and major intersections. Similarly, an LOS C,
describing *stable flow*, may represent the allowable threshold for
local streets and intersections. Small urban and rural areas may have
more stringent requirements. Jurisdictions may relax their performance
standards and allow LOS E operation, describing *unstable capacity
flow*, on major roadway facilities for infrequent planned special
events.

**Policies and Agreements**

The establishment of special policies and agreements to support planning
and day-of-event management of planned special events facilitates
efficient stakeholder collaboration and defines important event support
stakeholder services that may be incorporated into a traffic management
plan for a particular planned special event. These initiatives improve
interagency relationships, clarify decision-making responsibilities and
expectations, and secure on-call services and agency actions. For
instance, a particular policy or agreement may intuitively support a
contingency response plan to mitigate unanticipated congestion delay on
the day-of-event. Stakeholders may develop policies and agreements
specific to a particular planned special event or for all planned
special events in a region. Because of the potential significant time to
develop and approve a particular policy or agreement, stakeholders
should establish these initiatives early in the event operations
planning phase or during the program planning phase.

##### Table 5-8 summarizes four types of policies and agreements involving stakeholders responsible for event operations planning and/or day-of-event operations. 

##### [Interagency Agreement]{.underline}

Interagency agreements include a joint operations policy, memorandum of
understanding, or mutual-aid agreement between two or more stakeholders.
Table 5-9 lists components of interagency agreements. Appendix C
contains an Illinois and Washington State joint operations policy,
between state DOT and state police, that covers special event
planning.^(9,10)^ Stakeholders may also strike an interagency agreement,
during the event operations planning phase, applicable to a specific
planned special event.

##### [Standard Street Use Event Routes]{.underline}

The development and use of standard street use event routes reduces the
level and complexity of event operations planning tasks and overall
planning time. In establishing such standard routes for parades and/or
street races, stakeholders simplify planning tasks, thus creating a more
efficient event operations planning process. The routes specify
appropriate event starting and ending points coupled with staging areas
for participant assembly and disbanding.

Use of a standard street use event route offers the following
advantages:

-   Allows reuse of traffic management and operations plans, with minor
    modifications as necessary.

-   Realizes a cost savings for stakeholders.

-   Allows for the development of standard signs, specific to the event
    route and associated alternate routes for background traffic, that
    may be reused for future street use events.

-   Allows event patrons and non-attendee road users to become familiar
    with traffic patterns during recurring street use events, thus
    minimizing potential traffic problems on the day-of-event.

##### [Toll Facility Congestion Policy]{.underline}

Suspension of toll collections on turnpikes and other toll facilities
during periods of heavy congestion represents a new policy concept aimed
at reducing congestion and the occurrence of traffic incidents at toll
plazas. A toll facility congestion policy represents a congestion
mitigation strategy applicable to planned special events. Both West
Virginia and Maryland have experience with this policy:

Table 5-8

Summary of Policies and Agreements Applicable to Managing Planned
Special Events

+--------------------+-------------------------------------------------+
| **ITEM**           | **EXAMPLE APPLICATION**                         |
+--------------------+-------------------------------------------------+
| Interagency        | -   Joint operations policy between             |
| agreement          |     stakeholders that establishes a shared role |
|                    |     regarding event operations planning and     |
|                    |     day-of-event travel management.             |
|                    |                                                 |
|                    | -   Memorandum of understanding defining        |
|                    |     stakeholder roles and responsibilities.     |
|                    |                                                 |
|                    | -   Mutual-aid agreement facilitating resource  |
|                    |     sharing and/or reimbursement for services.  |
+--------------------+-------------------------------------------------+
| Standard street    | -   Routes established under the program        |
| use event routes   |     planning phase for recurring street use     |
|                    |     events such as parades and races.           |
+--------------------+-------------------------------------------------+
| Toll facility      | -   Suspension of tolls during periods of heavy |
| congestion policy  |     congestion.                                 |
+--------------------+-------------------------------------------------+
| Public-private     | -   On-call towing and recovery services during |
| towing agreement   |     a special event.                            |
+--------------------+-------------------------------------------------+

Table 5-9

Components of Interagency Agreements

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| # COMPONENT                                                           |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| -   Advance planning duties and responsibilities                      |
|                                                                       |
| -   Day-of-event duties and responsibilities                          |
|                                                                       |
| -   Organization                                                      |
|                                                                       |
| -   Resource sharing                                                  |
|                                                                       |
| -   Funding reimbursement mechanisms                                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

-   A West Virginia Turnpike policy, enacted in December 2002, allows
    Turnpike officials to open toll plazas for 15 minutes any time
    vehicle queues extend at least three miles upstream of the plaza.
    After the 15-minute period ends, officials can determine whether the
    queue dispersed or if another 15-minute period is required. Under
    normal operations, Turnpike officials estimate that a vehicle
    joining a three-mile queue takes approximately 15 minutes to pass
    through a toll plaza. Officials noted 15 minor crashes occurred on
    the Sunday after Thanksgiving in 2002, the Turnpike's busiest day of
    the year.^(11)^

-   State legislators in Maryland debated a proposed bill in 2003 to
    create a similar policy for the Chesapeake Bay Bridge.^(12)^ The
    bill specifies suspending tolls if a traffic queue extends more than
    five miles upstream of the toll plaza and is moving at less than 30
    miles per hour. The increasing deployment of electronic tolling may
    obviate the need for these strategies in the future.

##### [Public-Private Towing Agreement]{.underline}

Private towing companies perform a specific functional activity in
traffic incident management, that is, removal of disabled or wrecked
vehicles, spilled cargo, and debris from an incident site. Law
enforcement and traffic operations agencies alike have recognized the
indispensable role private towing companies have in effecting incident
removal and restoring the affected road section back to normal
operation. Public agencies commonly enter into agreements with one or
more commercial towing companies to secure on-call traffic incident
clearance services, or at a minimum, the agencies maintain a contact
list of local private towing companies.

Traffic incident management represents a key consideration in event
operations planning. Event planning team stakeholders may establish
event-specific public-private towing agreements to secure *on-site*
towing and recovery services. For instance, the City of Cincinnati has
established, under the City rules and regulations for police rotation
wreckers, a *special event tow* category.^(13)^ The City defines a
special event tow as "when tow operator remains with police officer for
a specified period of time towing or moving vehicles as need arises."
The City regulation specifies a special event tow rate of \$20.00 per
tow or \$35.00 per hour, whichever is greater.

![](media/image3.wmf){width="0.2902777777777778in"
height="0.30069444444444443in"}

# FEASIBILITY STUDY

**Overview**

The structure and approach of a planned special event feasibility study
resembles a *Traffic Impact Study* required for planned developments, as
illustrated in Figure 5-5. The figure shows the sequential steps in
preparing a feasibility study for a planned special event.

Table 5-10 provides an overview of the first five feasibility study
components. The accuracy of one analysis influences that of another.
*Achieving predictability*, a goal of managing travel for planned
special events, represents the focus of a feasibility study effort.

![](media/image1.wmf)

Figure 5-5

Feasibility Study Analysis Steps

Table 5-10

Feasibility Study Analysis Summary

+----------+-----------------+---------------------+------------------+
| # C      | # ANALYSIS      | # RESULT            | # APPLICATION    |
| OMPONENT |                 |                     |                  |
+----------+-----------------+---------------------+------------------+
| Travel   | -   Modal split | -   Number of trips | -   Input into   |
| forecast |                 |     by mode of      |     parking      |
|          |                 |     travel          |     demand       |
|          |                 |                     |     analysis.    |
|          |                 |                     |                  |
|          |                 |                     | -   Input into   |
|          |                 |                     |     traffic      |
|          |                 |                     |     demand       |
|          |                 |                     |     analysis.    |
+----------+-----------------+---------------------+------------------+
|          | -   Event       | -   Number of       |                  |
|          |     traffic     |     vehicle trips   |                  |
|          |     generation  |     by personal     |                  |
|          |                 |     automobile      |                  |
+----------+-----------------+---------------------+------------------+
|          | -   Traffic     | -   Number of trips |                  |
|          |     arrival     |     per unit of     |                  |
|          |     rate        |     time            |                  |
+----------+-----------------+---------------------+------------------+
| Market   | -   Event trip  | -   Geographic      | -   Input into   |
| area     |     origin      |     location of     |     traffic      |
| analysis |                 |     event trip      |     demand       |
|          |                 |     origins and     |     analysis.    |
|          |                 |     percent split   |                  |
+----------+-----------------+---------------------+------------------+
| Parking  | -   Background  | -   Number of       | -   Input into   |
| demand   |     parking     |     non-attendee    |     event        |
| analysis |     occupancy   |     vehicles per    |     parking      |
|          |                 |     parking area    |     occupancy.   |
|          |                 |     and unit of     |                  |
|          |                 |     time            |                  |
+----------+-----------------+---------------------+------------------+
|          | -   Event       | -   Number of       | -   Input into   |
|          |     parking     |     event-generated |     traffic      |
|          |     demand      |     vehicles per    |     demand       |
|          |                 |     parking area    |     analysis.    |
|          |                 |     and unit of     |                  |
|          |                 |     time            |                  |
+----------+-----------------+---------------------+------------------+
| Traffic  | -   Background  | -   Background      | -   Input into   |
| demand   |     traffic     |     traffic demand  |     roadway      |
| analysis |     flow        |     rate, adjusted  |     capacity     |
|          |                 |     for             |     analysis.    |
|          |                 |     event-required  |                  |
|          |                 |     road closures   |                  |
+----------+-----------------+---------------------+------------------+
|          | -   Event       | -   Event traffic   |                  |
|          |     traffic     |     demand rate per |                  |
|          |     assignment  |     assigned route  |                  |
+----------+-----------------+---------------------+------------------+
| Roadway  | -   Section and | -   Identification  | -   Input into   |
| capacity |     point       |     of capacity     |     traffic      |
| analysis |     capacity    |     constraints and |     management   |
|          |                 |     level of        |     plan.        |
|          |                 |     service         |                  |
|          |                 |                     | -   Input into   |
|          |                 |                     |     travel       |
|          |                 |                     |     demand       |
|          |                 |                     |     management   |
|          |                 |                     |     assessment.  |
+----------+-----------------+---------------------+------------------+
|          | -   Network     | -   Identification  |                  |
|          |     operations  |     of bottleneck   |                  |
|          |                 |     locations and   |                  |
|          |                 |     saturation flow |                  |
|          |                 |     rates           |                  |
+----------+-----------------+---------------------+------------------+

The feasibility study gauges the impact a proposed event has on traffic
and parking operations in the vicinity of the venue. It determines if a
particular planned special event will cause travel problems, where and
when the problems will occur, and the magnitude of each identified
problem using various MOEs. Initially, the study is conducted *without*
roadway capacity improvements or initiatives to reduce travel demand.
Once the feasibility study identifies event travel problems,
practitioners can take steps to mitigate transportation system
deficiencies. These results define the scope of the traffic management
plan required to successfully manage travel for a planned special event.

**Data Requirements**

Feasibility study input data requirements reflect measures of the three
core factors that determine the impact of the event: *travel demand*,
*road/site capacity*, and *event operation*. Table 5-11 summarizes
various types of input data to consider in a feasibility study. This
includes *transportation system infrastructure*, *background traffic*,
and *area* data and information. With the assistance of other event
planning team stakeholders most data types are accessible.

Travel demand data is used to develop the event travel forecast and to
determine the event area of impact. Background traffic data describes
the scope of available roadway and parking capacity for event patron
traffic. Information regarding the venue area assists in identifying
possible event patron trip origins. For example, a venue located in a
downtown area may attract a significant number of patrons arriving from
work, thus possibly reducing the number of transit or vehicular trips
generated. Events having a regional or greater scope may involve a
significant number of patrons staying at area hotels. To increase travel
forecast accuracy and meet the goal of *achieving predictability*,
practitioners should research appropriate historical data.

The identification and quantification of site and transportation system
capacity involves performing a full inventory of the transportation
system infrastructure serving the event venue. This includes obtaining
data on roadway geometrics and associated regulations (e.g., speed
limits and travel restrictions). An inventory of freeway facilities
should include the capacity of such freeway components as ramp junctions
and weaving sections. In addition, street traffic control devices and
signal timing plans must be identified and saturation flow rates
determined.

Event operation characteristics impact both travel *demand* and
available *capacity*. The knowledge of certain event logistics, combined
with available historical data, can help predict the rate of event
patron arrivals and departures over time. Practitioners, in tandem with
the event organizer, must also identify the scope of road closures and
parking area needed just to stage the event (e.g., parade/race route,
hospitality areas, etc.). This does not include the roadway capacity and
parking needed to accommodate event patron traffic.

**Travel Forecast**

Travel forecast analysis involves estimating: (1) modal split, (2) event
traffic generation, and (3) traffic arrival rate. Event planning team
stakeholders that typically collaborate on this analysis include a
traffic operations agency, traffic engineering consultant, transit
agency, and event organizer. The event organizer supplies key input data
regarding event operation. The transit agency assists

Table 5-11

Feasibility Study Data Requirements

+-------+------------+-------------------------------------------------+
| **FAC | **INPUT    | **DESCRIPTION**                                 |
| TOR** | DATA**     |                                                 |
+-------+------------+-------------------------------------------------+
| T     | -   Event  | -   Daily attendance                            |
| ravel |     patron |                                                 |
| D     |            | -   Event patron demographics (e.g.,            |
| emand |    traffic |     advance/season ticket holder place of       |
|       |            |     residence or zip code)                      |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Admission (general/reserved seating and     |
|       |            |     free/cost)                                  |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Venue attendance capacity                   |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Acceptable walking times (e.g., to          |
|       |            |     determine available parking areas and       |
|       |            |     percent walking trips)                      |
+-------+------------+-------------------------------------------------+
|       | -          | -   Hourly traffic volumes                      |
|       | Background |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Existing parking occupancy                  |
|       |    traffic |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Vehicle classification                      |
+-------+------------+-------------------------------------------------+
|       | -   Venue  | -   Employment centers in venue vicinity (e.g., |
|       |     area   |     number of jobs)                             |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Hotels in venue vicinity                    |
+-------+------------+-------------------------------------------------+
|       | -          | -   Attendance (e.g., trip generation rate)     |
|       | Historical |                                                 |
|       |     data   | -   Hourly traffic volumes                      |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |   (similar | -   Parking demand (e.g., parking demand rate)  |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |    events) | -   Vehicle occupancy                           |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Hourly/sub-hourly event patron arrival and  |
|       |            |     departure distribution                      |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Modal spilt                                 |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Patron survey (e.g., demographics and       |
|       |            |     travel)                                     |
+-------+------------+-------------------------------------------------+
| Road  | -          | -   Existing, areawide roadway network          |
| /Site |    Roadway |                                                 |
| Cap   |            |     -   Freeway and arterial corridors          |
| acity | facilities |                                                 |
|       |            |     -   Local street facilities connecting      |
|       |            |         corridors and the venue site            |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Location and capacity of site access points |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Pedestrian (e.g., sidewalks and crossings)  |
|       |            |     and bicycle accommodation                   |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Geometrics, regulations, and lane           |
|       |            |     assignments                                 |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Traffic control devices and traffic signal  |
|       |            |     programming data                            |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Toll plazas (freeway or bridge/tunnel) in   |
|       |            |     venue vicinity                              |
+-------+------------+-------------------------------------------------+
|       | -          | -   Location and capacity of site access points |
|       |    Parking |                                                 |
|       |     av     | -   Location and capacity of off-street venue   |
|       | ailability |     parking areas (free and paid)               |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Location and capacity of permitted          |
|       |            |     on-street parking areas                     |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Location and capacity of overflow parking   |
|       |            |     areas                                       |
+-------+------------+-------------------------------------------------+
|       | -          | -   Number and location of transit stations     |
|       |    Transit |     serving venue (e.g., public transportation  |
|       |     av     |     -- bus and rail)                            |
|       | ailability |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Scope of transit services at identified     |
|       |            |     stations (e.g., schedule and capacity)      |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Origin and scope of established express and |
|       |            |     charter bus service to venue (e.g.,         |
|       |            |     scheduled bus service from park and ride    |
|       |            |     lots for special events only)               |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Base transit spilt (e.g., without incentive |
|       |            |     or promotion)                               |
+-------+------------+-------------------------------------------------+
| Event | -   Event  | -   Venue location                              |
|       |            |                                                 |
| Oper  |  logistics | -   Event hours of operation                    |
| ation |            |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Site opening and closing times              |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Participant accommodation (e.g., arrive by  |
|       |            |     bus, stay at hotel near venue, etc.)        |
|       |            |                                                 |
|       |            | -   Event personnel and volunteer travel demand |
+-------+------------+-------------------------------------------------+
|       | -   Site   | -   Required road closures to stage event       |
+-------+------------+-------------------------------------------------+
|       | -          | -   Number of parking spaces lost in order to   |
|       |    Parking |     stage event (e.g., parking for event        |
|       |            |     participants, hospitality tents, etc.)      |
+-------+------------+-------------------------------------------------+

in estimating modal split. The traffic operations agency or traffic
engineering consultant performs the analysis, and either stakeholder may
research historical traffic and parking data or maintain a data archive
related to operations for similar planned special events.

[Modal Split]{.underline}

![](media/image2.jpeg){width="3.0in" height="3.84375in"}Under the scope
of a feasibility study, modal split concerns identifying the existing
modes of travel event patrons will use to access the event venue site.
Common travel modes include personal automobile, public transit, and
walking. Public transit refers to scheduled bus transit or commuter
rail. Transit agencies may assist in determining a base transit split,
without service incentives or promotion, for patrons traveling to/from
the event.

Illustrated in Figure 5-6, some patrons of the 1986 and 1995 U.S. Golf
Open in rural Southampton, NY found the Long Island Rail Road commuter
rail service an efficient and convenient mode of travel to/from
Shinnecock Hills Country Club. To assure consideration of appropriate
roadway mitigation, transportation operations planners analyzed a range
of modal split percentages in the feasibility study to account for
various scenarios. Commuter rail or other people mover systems exist in
several metropolitan areas across the Nation and usually provide regular
service to city stadium and arena venues. Transit availability includes
scheduled express and charter bus service operating from other cities,
suburban park and ride lots, and city neighborhoods.

Table 5-12 lists surveyed modal splits for discrete/recurring events at
a permanent venue in San Francisco, New York, and San Diego. The
baseball stadium venues in San Francisco and New York, located within a
metropolitan area, have excellent scheduled transit service, including
commuter rail. Stadiums located in suburban areas, such as Qualcomm
Stadium in San Diego, and rural areas generally have a high percentage
of automobile trips.

Travel time, travel convenience, parking accessibility and cost weighs
significantly on an event patron's decision to drive or utilize an
alternate mode of travel. This likely represents another contributor to
the high transit split in the San Francisco example, where Pacific Bell
Park resides adjacent to the downtown area. Other modes of travel
include bicycle and taxi.

Figure 5-6

Commuter Rail Modal Split

Walking trips deserve consideration in modal split estimates for planned
special events occurring at downtown venues. Practitioners must consider
the proximity of

Table 5-12

Example Modal Split for Discrete/Recurring Events at a Permanent Venue

+-----------------+-----------+--------+--------+--------+---------+
| ## **EVENT**    | # A       | ##     |        |        |         |
|                 | TTENDANCE | **MODE |        |        |         |
|                 |           |  OF TR |        |        |         |
|                 |           | AVEL** |        |        |         |
+-----------------+-----------+--------+--------+--------+---------+
|                 |           | ## **  | ##     | ##     | ## **   |
|                 |           | AUTO** |  **TRA |  **WAL | OTHER** |
|                 |           |        | NSIT** | KING** |         |
+-----------------+-----------+--------+--------+--------+---------+
| San Francisco   | 38,000 -- | 48%    | 41%    | 8%     | 3%      |
| Giants          | 41,000    |        |        |        |         |
| [weekd          |           |        |        |        |         |
| ay]{.underline} | (capacity |        |        |        |         |
| baseball game   | 41,000)   |        |        |        |         |
| -- August       |           |        |        |        |         |
| 2000^(14)^      |           |        |        |        |         |
+-----------------+-----------+--------+--------+--------+---------+
| San Francisco   | 38,000 -- | 50%    | 37%    | 7%     | 6%      |
| Giants          | 41,000    |        |        |        |         |
| [weeknig        |           |        |        |        |         |
| ht]{.underline} | (capacity |        |        |        |         |
| baseball game   | 41,000)   |        |        |        |         |
| -- August       |           |        |        |        |         |
| 2000^(14)^      |           |        |        |        |         |
+-----------------+-----------+--------+--------+--------+---------+
| San Francisco   | 38,000 -- | 58%    | 34%    | 5%     | 4%      |
| Giants          | 41,000    |        |        |        |         |
| [weeke          |           |        |        |        |         |
| nd]{.underline} | (capacity |        |        |        |         |
| baseball game   | 41,000)   |        |        |        |         |
| -- August       |           |        |        |        |         |
| 2000^(14)^      |           |        |        |        |         |
+-----------------+-----------+--------+--------+--------+---------+
| New York Mets   | 18,000    | 59%    | 41%    | \--    | \--     |
| weeknight       |           |        |        |        |         |
| baseball game   | (capacity |        |        |        |         |
| --              | 56,500)   |        |        |        |         |
|                 |           |        |        |        |         |
| June 1997^(15)^ |           |        |        |        |         |
+-----------------+-----------+--------+--------+--------+---------+
| San Diego       | Unknown   | 85%    | 12%    | \--    | 3%      |
| Padres          |           |        |        |        |         |
| [weekd          |           |        |        |        |         |
| ay]{.underline} |           |        |        |        |         |
| baseball game   |           |        |        |        |         |
| -- April/May    |           |        |        |        |         |
| 1998^(16)^      |           |        |        |        |         |
+-----------------+-----------+--------+--------+--------+---------+
| San Diego       | Unknown   | 95%    | 5%     | \--    | \--     |
| Padres          |           |        |        |        |         |
|                 |           |        |        |        |         |
| [weeknig        |           |        |        |        |         |
| ht]{.underline} |           |        |        |        |         |
| baseball game   |           |        |        |        |         |
| -- April/May    |           |        |        |        |         |
| 1998^(16)^      |           |        |        |        |         |
+-----------------+-----------+--------+--------+--------+---------+
| San Diego       | Unknown   | 85%    | 12%    | \--    | 3%      |
| Padres [weekend |           |        |        |        |         |
| eveni           |           |        |        |        |         |
| ng]{.underline} |           |        |        |        |         |
| baseball game   |           |        |        |        |         |
| -- April/May    |           |        |        |        |         |
| 1998^(16)^      |           |        |        |        |         |
+-----------------+-----------+--------+--------+--------+---------+

employment centers, residential developments, and hotels to a planned
special event venue before dismissing walking as a viable travel mode.
Venues located on university campuses typically draw a measurable
percentage of walking trips. Surveys for college football games have
reported as many as 10 to 25 percent of event patrons arriving by
foot.^(17)^

Practitioners can best obtain measured data on planned special event
modal split through conducting a survey of event patrons. Appendix D
contains an Internet-based event patron evaluation survey for those
attending the 2003 Fair Saint Louis festival. In addition to querying
event patrons on mode of travel, obtaining origin location information
(e.g., zip code) assists event planning team stakeholders configure
transit schedules or express and charter bus services for future similar
events.

[Event Traffic Generation]{.underline}

Unlike other traffic generators such as commercial developments, planned
special event practitioners typically have advance knowledge of event
attendance and, in turn, can develop traffic generation estimates via
vehicle occupancy factors. On the other hand, traffic generation rates,
based on event traffic volume or parking occupancy data, may not be
appropriate for transfer and application from one special event to
another. Too many variables exist with regard to event category, event
logistics, event popularity, weather, and parking characteristics. Event
operations and other external variables affect any application of
historical data to future events.

Table 5-13 outlines a two-step process for forecasting event traffic
generation. Input data includes a modal split estimate since

Table 5-13

Traffic Generation Forecast Process

+----------+-----------------+--------------------+-------------------+
| # C      | # DETAIL        |                    |                   |
| OMPONENT |                 |                    |                   |
+----------+-----------------+--------------------+-------------------+
| Input    | -   Daily       | -   Percent        | -   Vehicle       |
| data     |     attendance  |     automobile     |     occupancy     |
|          |                 |     trips          |     factor        |
+----------+-----------------+--------------------+-------------------+
| Method   | ***Step 1.***   |                    |                   |
|          | (Daily          |                    |                   |
|          | Attendance) x   |                    |                   |
|          | (Percent        |                    |                   |
|          | Automobile      |                    |                   |
|          | Trips) = Person |                    |                   |
|          | Trips Via       |                    |                   |
|          | Automobile      |                    |                   |
|          |                 |                    |                   |
|          | ***Step 2.***   |                    |                   |
|          | (Person Trips)  |                    |                   |
|          | / (Vehicle      |                    |                   |
|          | Occupancy       |                    |                   |
|          | Factor) =       |                    |                   |
|          | Vehicle Trips   |                    |                   |
+----------+-----------------+--------------------+-------------------+
| Result   | -   Number of   |                    |                   |
|          |     vehicle     |                    |                   |
|          |     trips by    |                    |                   |
|          |     personal    |                    |                   |
|          |     automobile  |                    |                   |
|          |     both to and |                    |                   |
|          |     from the    |                    |                   |
|          |     event       |                    |                   |
+----------+-----------------+--------------------+-------------------+

the traffic generation forecast aims to estimate the number of
event-generated trips by personal automobile. In the absence of a daily
attendance estimate, practitioners can use percentage of venue capacity
as a base. However, many continuous events or street use events do not
have a pre-specified venue capacity. Continuous events, such as fairs
and festivals, often run for two or more days. Attendance generally
fluctuates greatly from day to day, with Saturday operations yielding
the highest daily attendance. A study of two-day (Saturday/Sunday)
festivals in West Virginia indicated 58 percent of the total festival
attendance was on Saturday.^(18)^ The same study noted the following
total event attendance distribution for three-day festivals: 20 percent
on Friday, 50 percent on Saturday, and 30 percent on Sunday. It should
be recognized that daily attendance reflects scheduled headline
entertainment or other main festival events.

Vehicle occupancy factors can serve as the basis for estimating
event-generated traffic. Table 5-14 lists average vehicle occupancy
factors for select discrete/recurring events at a permanent venue and
continuous events. A discrete/recurring event at a permanent venue that
occurs on the weekend will likely have a higher vehicle occupancy factor
due to families and groups of tailgaters. A vehicle occupancy factor of
2.5 persons per vehicle represents a common assumption, however for
forecasting purposes, practitioners should consider a range of factors
from 2.2 to 2.8 depending on local conditions.^(15)^

[Traffic Arrival and Departure Rate]{.underline}

In order to estimate peak traffic volumes generated by an event,
practitioners must estimate the time and scope of peak traffic flow
during event ingress and egress. Traffic arrival and departure rate
indicates the peak period (e.g., hour or 15 minute) of event-generated
traffic. The rate is used to determine the following key parameters for
input into the traffic demand analysis: (1) peak period time and (2)
percent of total event-generated traffic within the peak period. Event
operation characteristics that influence traffic arrival and departure
rates include:

-   Event time and duration -- e.g., specific start time, abrupt end
    time, continuous operation.

-   Event time of occurrence -- e.g., day/night, weekday/weekend.

-   Audience accommodation -- e.g., reserved seating, general admission.

-   Event type -- e.g., sports/concert, fair/festival, parade/race.

This section focuses on estimating the traffic arrival rate. The
temporal share of event patron arrivals vary considerably by event type
and requires prediction by practitioners. Traffic arriving to an event
can potentially cause greater impacts to background traffic mobility
than event departure traffic. This is attributed to arrival traffic
typically traveling from high-capacity roadway facilities (e.g.,
freeways and arterials) to low-capacity facilities (e.g., venue access
roads). Roadway

Table 5-14

Example Planned Special Event Vehicle Occupancy Factors

+--------------------------+---------------+---------------------------+
| # EVENT                  | # ATTENDANCE  | **AVERAGE VEHICLE         |
|                          |               | OCCUPANCY**               |
+--------------------------+---------------+---------------------------+
| ##                       |               |                           |
|  *Discrete/Recurring Eve |               |                           |
| nt at a Permanent Venue* |               |                           |
+--------------------------+---------------+---------------------------+
| San Francisco Giants     | 38,000 --     | 2.8 persons per           |
| baseball games --        | 41,000        | automobile                |
|                          |               |                           |
| August 2000^(14)^        | (capacity     |                           |
|                          | 41,000)       |                           |
+--------------------------+---------------+---------------------------+
| Anaheim Angels weeknight | 18,197        | 2.6 persons per           |
| baseball game -- July    |               | automobile                |
| 1997^(15)^               | (capacity     |                           |
|                          | 37,000)       |                           |
+--------------------------+---------------+---------------------------+
| Cleveland Indians        | 43,070        | 2.64 persons per          |
| Saturday baseball game   |               | automobile                |
| -- July 1997^(15)^       | (capacity     |                           |
|                          | 43,368)       |                           |
+--------------------------+---------------+---------------------------+
| New York Mets weeknight  | 18,000        | 2.31 persons per          |
| baseball game -- June    |               | automobile                |
| 1997^(15)^               | (capacity     |                           |
|                          | 56,500)       |                           |
+--------------------------+---------------+---------------------------+
| San Diego Padres         | Unknown       | 2.3 persons per           |
| [weekday]{.underline}    |               | automobile                |
| baseball game --         |               |                           |
| April/May 1998^(16)^     |               |                           |
+--------------------------+---------------+---------------------------+
| San Diego Padres         | Unknown       | 2.5 persons per           |
| [weeknight]{.underline}  |               | automobile                |
| baseball game --         |               |                           |
| April/May 1998^(16)^     |               |                           |
+--------------------------+---------------+---------------------------+
| San Diego Padres         | Unknown       | 3.0-3.1 persons per       |
| [weekend                 |               | automobile                |
| evening]{.underline}     |               |                           |
|                          |               |                           |
| baseball game --         |               |                           |
| April/May 1998^(16)^     |               |                           |
+--------------------------+---------------+---------------------------+
| Denver Broncos football  | 76,000        | 3.0 persons per           |
| games -- 1998/2001^(19)^ |               | automobile                |
|                          |               | [on-site]{.underline};    |
|                          |               |                           |
|                          |               | 2.3 persons per           |
|                          |               | automobile                |
|                          |               | [off-site]{.underline}    |
+--------------------------+---------------+---------------------------+
| ## *Continuous Event*    |               |                           |
+--------------------------+---------------+---------------------------+
| 1997 Stonewall Jackson   | 45,000 to     | 2.46 persons per          |
| Heritage Arts & Crafts   | 50,000        | automobile                |
| Jubilee - West           |               |                           |
| Virginia^(18)^           | (four-day     |                           |
|                          | total)        |                           |
+--------------------------+---------------+---------------------------+
| 1997 West Virginia Honey | 6,000         | 2.15 persons per          |
| Festival^(18)^           |               | automobile                |
|                          | (two-day      |                           |
|                          | total)        |                           |
+--------------------------+---------------+---------------------------+
| 1997 West Virginia Wine  | 3,500         | 2.42 persons per          |
| & Jazz                   |               | automobile                |
|                          | (two-day      |                           |
| Festival^(18)^           | total)        |                           |
+--------------------------+---------------+---------------------------+
| 22^nd^ Mountain Heritage | 25,000        | 2.30 persons per          |
| Arts & Crafts Festival   |               | automobile                |
| -- West Virginia^(18)^   | (three-day    |                           |
|                          | total)        |                           |
+--------------------------+---------------+---------------------------+

![](media/image3.jpeg){width="2.916535433070866in"
height="1.1271653543307087in"}![](media/image4.jpeg){width="2.916535433070866in"
height="1.1299212598425197in"}![](media/image5.jpeg){width="2.916535433070866in"
height="1.1307086614173227in"}

congestion that occurs during event ingress may create queue spillbacks
to freeways and major streets, thus impacting background traffic.

Drivers departing an event venue site generally have little or no choice
of exit routes. Roadway capacity constraints include freeway entrance
ramps and turning movements to arterials and other major collector
roadways. Departing traffic queues are usually constrained to the venue
access roadway and

spillback into the parking areas. Figure 5-7 shows traffic operations,
following a football game at Qualcomm Stadium in San Diego, CA, at: (1)
a freeway entrance ramp, (2) a venue access road upstream of a freeway,
and (3) an on-site venue parking area.

Figure 5-7

# Event Patron Departure from a Discrete/Recurring Event at a Permanent Venue 

Table 5-15 indicates traffic arrival rates and time of peak arrival for
select discrete/recurring events at a permanent venue and continuous
events. Time of arrival depends on audience accommodation (e.g., general
admission or reserved seating) and/or the nature of pre-event
activities. Such activities include tailgating or practices. Figure 5-8
illustrates NASCAR pre-race preparations that attract a significant
number of event patrons well before the event start.

As illustrated in Table 5-15, the traffic arrival rate for sporting
games and concerts peaks within one hour of the event start. Due to high
traffic arrival concentration, practitioners may consider estimating a
peak 15-minute traffic arrival rate and associated peak hour factor for
roadway capacity analysis. With regard to continuous events, peak
traffic arrival rate generally occurs

immediately prior to the event start. Since event patrons do not place a
high priority on meeting a continuous event start time, the
concentration of continuous event arrivals is relatively low compared to
other event categories. The peak level of event-generated traffic demand
may occur during the middle of a continuous event operating period when
both event arrival and departure traffic traverse the roadway system as
patrons come and go from the event.

Practitioners may use event patron travel surveys in addition to
historical event-generated traffic volume and/or parking occupancy
counts to estimate the traffic arrival rate and peak time of occurrence.
It should be noted that weather conditions, particularly for continuous
events and street use events, may significantly skew data. Thus,
practitioners must exercise great care when developing future event
estimates from historical data.

Table 5-15

Example Planned Special Event Traffic Arrival Rate Characteristics

+----------------------+-----------+-------+-------+-----------------+
| # EVENT              | # A       | # E   | #     | # PEAK TRAFFIC  |
|                      | TTENDANCE | VENT  |  SITE | FLOW OCCURRENCE |
|                      |           | START |  OPEN |                 |
+----------------------+-----------+-------+-------+-----------------+
| ## *Discre           |           |       |       |                 |
| te/Recurring Event a |           |       |       |                 |
| t a Permanent Venue* |           |       |       |                 |
+----------------------+-----------+-------+-------+-----------------+
| 2001 NASCAR Kansas   | 100,000+  | 12:00 | 6:00  | 8:00 A.M.       |
| 400^(20)^            |           | P.M.  | A.M.  |                 |
+----------------------+-----------+-------+-------+-----------------+
| Anaheim Angels       | 18,197    | Ev    | 2+    | 1 hour before   |
| weeknight            |           | ening | hours | first pitch     |
|                      | (capacity |       | b     | (82% of         |
| baseball game --     | 37,000)   |       | efore | arrivals -- 29% |
| July 1997^(15)^      |           |       | first | peak 15         |
|                      |           |       | pitch | minutes)        |
+----------------------+-----------+-------+-------+-----------------+
| Cleveland Indians    | 43,070    | Afte  | 2+    | 1 hour before   |
| Saturday             |           | rnoon | hours | first pitch     |
|                      | (capacity |       | b     | (67% of         |
| baseball game --     | 43,368)   |       | efore | arrivals -- 19% |
| July 1997^(15)^      |           |       | first | peak 15         |
|                      |           |       | pitch | minutes)        |
+----------------------+-----------+-------+-------+-----------------+
| New York Mets        | 18,000    | Ev    | 2+    | 1 hour before   |
| weeknight            |           | ening | hours | first pitch     |
|                      | (capacity |       | b     | (62% of         |
| baseball game --     | 56,500)   |       | efore | arrivals -- 16% |
| June 1997^(15)^      |           |       | first | peak 15         |
|                      |           |       | pitch | minutes)        |
+----------------------+-----------+-------+-------+-----------------+
| #                    |           |       |       |                 |
| # *Continuous Event* |           |       |       |                 |
+----------------------+-----------+-------+-------+-----------------+
| Louisiana World      | 35,700    | 10:00 | \--   | 31% of event    |
| Exposition in New    |           | A.M.  |       | patrons arrived |
| Orleans --           |           |       |       | by 11:00 A.M.   |
| [                    |           |       |       |                 |
| weekday]{.underline} |           |       |       |                 |
| August 1984^(21)^    |           |       |       |                 |
+----------------------+-----------+-------+-------+-----------------+
| Louisiana World      | Unknown   | 10:00 | \--   | 29% of event    |
| Exposition in New    |           | A.M.  |       | patrons arrived |
| Orleans --           |           |       |       | by 11:00 A.M.   |
| [S                   |           |       |       |                 |
| aturday]{.underline} |           |       |       |                 |
| in August 1984^(21)^ |           |       |       |                 |
+----------------------+-----------+-------+-------+-----------------+

Figure 5-8

Pre-Event Activity![](media/image6.jpeg){width="3.0in" height="2.25in"}

######### Market Area Analysis

A market area analysis identifies the origin and destination of trips to
and from a planned special event. The analysis focuses on developing a
regional directional distribution of event patron trips to/from an event
site via personal automobile. The site refers to the collective parking
areas serving the venue. A regional directional distribution specifies:
(1) the freeway and arterial corridors serving the venue site and (2)
the percent split and volume of event-generated automobile trips
traversing each corridor. Appendix E contains a regional directional
distribution prepared for the NASCAR Kansas 400 race.^(20)^

Table 5-16 summarizes three analysis methods used to define a planned
special event market area.

##### [Travel Time and Distance Analysis]{.underline}

Practitioners can apply a travel time analysis or distance analysis to
estimate the market area for any planned special event. Continuous
events or street use events that do

not offer advance ticket sales typically require a market analysis based
on travel time or distance and referencing area population distribution.

Figure 5-9 illustrates an example travel time analysis for a downtown
Chicago lakefront fireworks display. A geographic information system or
other mapping software tool can create travel time zones, as shown in
the figure, based on user-defined thresholds. Multiple travel time zones
allow users to perform a weighted analysis of population distribution.
Practitioners should categorize area population within each travel time
zone by zip code or, for a 15 minute threshold or less, by census tract.
Most geographic information systems and computer mapping tools generate
spreadsheets identifying all spatial population categories within each
travel time zone. Using the spreadsheet, practitioners can assign a
freeway or arterial corridor, serving the event venue site, to each
defined population category. The population distribution among roadway
system corridors constitutes the regional directional distribution for
the planned special event. Practitioners can also incorporate Census
socioeconomic data into an analysis as necessary.

The described travel time analysis methodology applies to a distance
analysis as well. Instead of travel time thresholds, users define
distance thresholds. Practitioners should exercise care in developing a
planned special event market area by travel time or absolute distance to
the event venue site:

-   In the case of continuous events or street use events, the market
    area must incorporate only the community or region the event is
    staged for.

Table 5-16

Market Area Analysis Methods

+---------------+------------------------------------------------------+
| # METHOD      | # DESCRIPTION                                        |
+---------------+------------------------------------------------------+
| Travel time   | -   Determine population distribution within travel  |
| analysis      |     time threshold of event venue.                   |
+---------------+------------------------------------------------------+
| Distance      | -   Determine population distribution within         |
| analysis      |     distance radius of event venue.                  |
+---------------+------------------------------------------------------+
| Origin        | -   Determine weighted distribution of known origins |
| location      |     by place or zip code.                            |
| analysis      |                                                      |
+---------------+------------------------------------------------------+

![](media/image7.png){width="3.0in"
height="2.659055118110236in"}![](media/image8.jpeg){width="0.17204724409448818in"
height="0.18740157480314962in"}Figure 5-9

Example Travel Time Analysis

-   Discrete/recurring events at a permanent venue, such as
    professional/major college sporting events or major concerts,
    warrant an expanded market area.

-   A travel time or distance analysis for these events should not
    reflect a sensitivity to travel time or distance at the city/suburb
    level. In other words, an event patron located in a city suburb
    typically does not factor travel time into a decision to attend a
    professional or major college sporting event at a downtown venue.

##### [Origin Location Analysis]{.underline}

An origin location analysis represents the most accurate method for
developing an event-specific regional directional distribution. This
analysis utilizes a statistically significant database of event patron
travel origins. Input data includes advance or season ticket holder
place of residence (e.g., place or zip code) or place of trip origin
obtained through a past/similar event travel survey. An event economic
impact study also indicates the cities or regions patrons will arrive
from. A discrete/recurring event at a permanent venue requires ticket
sales, and event organizers initiate ticket sales weeks and even months
in advance of the event. But, event organizers or ticket sales companies
may consider customer information confidential or proprietary.

An event patron travel survey (see Appendix D) proves effective in
determining the exact origin of a patron trip to a planned special
event. For instance, weekday events may attract a significant percentage
of non-home-based trips as event patrons arrive from work. A survey of
patrons attending weeknight baseball games at Pacific Bell Park in San
Francisco indicates 28 percent of patrons come from work.^(14)^ An event
patron travel survey captures this critical information. Event patron
departures from the event venue site typically involve home as a
destination.

Practitioners performing an origin location analysis determine a
geographical distribution of event patron origins. In turn, this
distribution defines the freeway and arterial corridors that event
patrons will use to access the event venue site in addition to a traffic
distribution. An origin location analysis applies to all planned special
events.

**Parking Demand Analysis**

A parking demand analysis functions to determine the amount of required
parking for event patrons in the vicinity of the event venue. A parking
occupancy study drives the overall analysis and determination of event
parking areas. This study indicates the level of parking spaces
occupied, relative to lot capacity, at intermittent time intervals. It
also specifies an estimate of peak parking demand, a figure particularly
useful for managing continuous events where parking space turnover
occurs throughout the event day.

Figure 5-10 presents a parking demand analysis process used to determine
the adequacy of event venue (on-site) parking and the identification of
appropriate off-site parking areas. The flowchart denotes an analysis
conducted for a one-time interval. Practitioners should perform an
iterative parking demand analysis, over hourly time periods as
necessary, if considering parking areas characterized by high background
parking turnover.

Examination of on-site parking areas must account for spaces lost to the
event sponsors, bus staging, limousine and taxi staging, media parking,
event employee parking, and event participant parking. Net parking
supply incorporates event staging needs and any background traffic that
can legally use the parking area during event hours of operation. In
order to conceptually measure parking supply within a non-striped area,
assume 150 cars per acre as a rule of thumb.^(22)^ The travel forecast
analysis yields an estimate of parking demand by quantifying the
anticipated number of event-generated automobile trips. Aside from
continuous events, practitioners should perform a parking demand
analysis that accounts for maximum event-generated parking demand.

In evaluating parking supply versus demand, consider as a rule of thumb
that 90 to 95 percent lot occupancy represents a full parking
area.^(23)^ This especially applies under scenarios where event patrons
must self-park. When a parking area reaches a near-capacity occupancy
level, drivers experience difficulty locating an empty parking space and
must circulate through the lot again or seek another parking area.
Continuous events and street use events often utilize self-park areas.

Overflow parking areas comprise both on-street parking and
public/private off-street parking areas, located off-site but in the
immediate vicinity of the event venue. Figure 5-11 shows a designated
off-street parking area, as noted by a light post banner, for the
Summerfest music festival in downtown Milwaukee, WI. Identification of
off-site parking areas depends on walking distance to the event venue.
For example, a 15-minute walking time threshold allows consideration of
off-street parking areas within 3,600 feet of an event venue, assuming a
pedestrian walking speed of 4 feet per second. Parking areas located
further from the venue would require a continuous shuttle service.

Table 5-17 shows a parking occupancy summary for a regional/multi-venue
event in downtown Denver, CO. The spreadsheet format conveniently
organizes and presents occupancy estimates by time of day and day of
week. A parking demand analysis for a regional/multi-venue event
presents special challenges. Practitioners must determine the hourly
parking requirements for each facility separately. Parking areas in this
case function under *shared parking* operation, servicing variable
demand rates from different planned special events over the course of a
day.

![](media/image1.wmf)

Figure 5-10

Parking Demand Analysis Process

Figure 5-11

Designated Event Off-Site Parking Area

![](media/image2.png){width="3.0in" height="1.6770833333333333in"}

Table 5-17

Example Event Parking Occupancy

Summary^(23)^

**Traffic Demand Analysis**

A traffic demand analysis determines: (1) a local area directional
distribution and (2) the overall assignment of event-generated traffic.
This analysis references results obtained through the travel forecast,
market area analysis, and parking demand analysis.

![](media/image3.jpeg){width="3.0in"
height="2.416535433070866in"}![](media/image4.png){width="0.41653543307086616in"
height="0.9688976377952756in"}The local area directional distribution
indicates freeway ramps and intersections, including turning movements,
traversed by event-generated traffic arriving to or departing from a
planned special event. The regional directional distribution, as
determined in the market area analysis, quantifies the percentage of
event patron trips (e.g., origins) by regional freeway and arterial
corridor, and the planned special event parking areas, as determined in
the parking demand analysis, represent *sink nodes* or location of trip
destination. Traffic assignment includes event-generated automobile
traffic, express buses, charter buses, limousines, and other vehicles
transporting event patrons, participants, and event employees.
Practitioners performing traffic demand analyses should possess a
personal knowledge of the roadway system surrounding an event venue in
addition to existing traffic conditions.

A parking demand analysis assesses event parking *sufficiency*. The
analysis does not define local traffic patterns to/from individual
parking areas. Practitioners, instead, must gauge the utility associated
with drivers choosing individual parking areas. The key components
comprising this utility include driving time, parking cost, and walking
time.^(24)^ The attractiveness of each lot varies by freeway or arterial
corridor serving the event site, yet event patrons will accept a
moderate increase in overall driving/walking time in exchange for a
substantial parking cost savings. The event planning team and traffic
management team must recognize such driver behavior and formulate the
appropriate traffic flow routes and develop traffic management
strategies to manage site access and circulation effectively. Figure
5-12 illustrates one strategy, instituting on-street parking
restrictions on the day-of-event. Pre-trip and en-route traveler
information also influences driver choice regarding parking selection.

![](media/image5.jpeg){width="3.0in" height="2.25in"}Figure 5-12

Local Area Planned Special Event Parking Restriction

Traffic demand analysis includes developing composite background and
event-generated traffic projections for all roadway system facilities
serving the event venue. Composite traffic volumes expressed as an
hourly (or sub-hourly) rate meet roadway capacity analysis input
requirements. These rates identify the peak hour capacity analysis
periods during event patron arrival and/or departure. Practitioners must
adjust background traffic volumes to account for displaced and diverted
traffic due to road closures required to stage the planned special
event. These road closures alter traffic patterns to/from commercial
trip generators, residential areas, and places of worship. Displaced
background traffic assignment involves identifying the shortest path
alternate route that has excess capacity.

As a preliminary step to assess the need to perform a detailed roadway
capacity analysis, draw a circular screen line (e.g., 0.5 to 1 mile
radius) around the event venue site. Note each roadway segment
intercepted by the screen line, and estimate the segment's capacity in
each direction of travel. Create a chart of hourly composite traffic
volumes for each identified segment, and assess capacity deficiencies in
both directions of travel. Figure 5-13 shows a preliminary road segment
capacity analysis conducted as part of a feasibility study for a
regional/multi-venue event in Denver, CO.

![](media/image6.png){width="3.0in" height="1.7604166666666667in"}

Figure 5-13

Example Preliminary Road Segment

Capacity Analysis^(23)^

**Roadway Capacity Analysis**

A roadway capacity analysis uses traffic demand analysis results to
measure the impact of a proposed planned special event on roadway system
operations. At the feasibility study level, a roadway capacity analysis
references existing roadway facility operations and capacity (e.g., no
reverse flow operation or other capacity enhancements). The analysis
assumes pedestrian access management strategies will minimize
pedestrian/vehicular conflicts, and parking area access points provide
sufficient service flow rates through proper design. Regardless of
capacity analysis outcome, pedestrian accommodation and parking
management represent key considerations in a planned special event
traffic management plan.

Roadway capacity analysis involves freeway segments, freeway junctions
such as ramps and weaving areas, street segments, signalized
intersections, and unsignalized intersections. To evaluate these
facilities, practitioners can employ one of two approaches: (1) analyze
section and point capacity or (2) analyze network operations.

-   The first approach pertains to applying Highway Capacity Manual
    (HCM) recommended capacity analysis methodologies to discrete
    locations in the study area. Practitioners determine roadway
    sections, freeway junctions, or intersections for analysis, then
    apply an appropriate HCM methodology to identify movement capacity
    constraints and measure operations level of service.

-   The latter approach concerns utilizing a computer traffic simulation
    model to identify bottleneck locations, or *hot spots*, and
    associated saturation flow rates. Practitioners scope the size and
    detail of the simulation model network, and the model works to
    reveal operational deficiencies.

Computer traffic simulation models provide seamless analysis of traffic
operations across a network of roadway segments and intersections. This
proves particularly useful in analyzing a corridor of closely spaced
traffic signals where signal coordination and vehicle spillback from
adjacent intersections sharply impact traffic operations. Numerous
macroscopic and microscopic simulation models exist, including the
CORSIM microscopic computer traffic simulation model developed and
supported by FHWA. CORSIM can interface component freeway (FRESIM) and
arterial (NETSIM) simulation models. For example, it has the capability
of showing a freeway entrance ramp bottleneck and the resulting queue
spillback on adjacent streets (or vice versa). As shown in Figure 5-14,
CORSIM also affords practitioners and event planning team stakeholders
the opportunity to view an animation of simulated traffic operations.

Figure 5-14

CORSIM Simulation Animation

## **Mitigation of Impacts**

Mitigating anticipated planned special event impacts on travel
represents the ultimate goal of conducting a feasibility study. The
mitigation of congestion and potential safety impacts identified through
a feasibility study requires development of a traffic management plan
and complementing travel demand management strategies. In turn,
practitioners can utilize the tools and techniques used to determine
feasibility study results in order to evaluate various mitigation
strategies and determine if the selected strategies adequately mitigate
identified transportation system deficiencies.

![](media/image7.png){width="3.0in" height="2.3208333333333333in"}Table
5-18 lists numerous tools for mitigating planned special event impacts
on local roadway and regional transportation system operations. In
meeting the overall travel management goal of *achieving efficiency*,
these tools target utilizing the excess capacity of the roadway system,
parking facilities, and transit. Through travel demand management, event
planning team stakeholders develop attractive incentives and use
innovative communication mechanisms to influence event patron
decision-making and, ultimately, traffic demand. Chapters 6 and 7

Table 5-18

Tools for Mitigating Planned Special Event Impacts on Transportation
System Operations

+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| # CATEGORY                        | # EXAMPLE TOOLS                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| ## *Traffic C                     |                                   |
| ontrol and Capacity Improvements* |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| Freeway traffic control           | -   Ramp closures or additional   |
|                                   |     capacity                      |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Alternate routes              |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Ramp metering                 |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| Street traffic control            | -   Lane control                  |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Alternative lane operations   |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Road closures                 |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   On-street parking             |
|                                   |     restrictions                  |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Trailblazer signing           |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Parking management systems    |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| Intersection traffic control      | -   Access and turn restrictions  |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Advance signing to improve    |
|                                   |     traffic circulation           |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Traffic signal timing and     |
|                                   |     coordination                  |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| Traffic incident management       | -   Service patrols               |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Tow truck staging             |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Advance congestion warning    |
|                                   |     signs                         |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Portable lighting             |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| ## *Traffic Management*           |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| Traffic surveillance              | -   Closed-circuit television     |
|                                   |     systems                       |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Field observation             |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Aerial observation            |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Media reports                 |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Portable traffic management   |
|                                   |     systems                       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| En-route traveler information     | -   Changeable message signs      |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Highway advisory radio        |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Media                         |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Static signing                |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Destination signing           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| ## *Travel Demand Management*     |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| Transit incentives                | -   Public transit service        |
|                                   |     expansion                     |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Express bus service from park |
|                                   |     and ride lots                 |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Charter bus service           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| High occupancy vehicle incentives | -   Preferred parking             |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Reduced parking cost          |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| Event patron incentives           | -   Pre-event and post-event      |
|                                   |     activities                    |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| Bicyclist accommodation           | -   Bicycle routes and available  |
|                                   |     parking/lock-up               |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| Local travel demand management    | -   Background traffic diversion  |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Truck diversion               |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| Pre-trip traveler information     | -   Internet                      |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Telephone information systems |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Public information campaign   |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Event and venue               |
|                                   |     transportation guide          |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -   Media                         |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+

detail impact mitigation strategies and tactics.

## ![](media/image2.wmf){width="0.25972222222222224in" height="0.2965277777777778in"}**EXTERNAL FACTORS AFFECTING SCOPE OF EVENT IMPACT**

###### **Overview**

This chapter summarizes event operations planning and impact analysis
activities that address the core factors affecting planned special event
severity. That is, *travel demand*, *road/site capacity*, and *event
operation*. A number of secondary factors warrant consideration in the
event operations phase, including:

-   Available resources

-   Weather

-   Concurrent roadway construction

-   Concurrent planned special events

These factors can greatly influence the level of impact a planned
special event has on transportation system operations. By gaining an
understanding of the special challenges that these external factors
present, the event planning team can develop appropriate contingency
response plans, using the tools and strategies presented in Chapters 6
and 7, to mitigate infrequent but high-impact scenarios.

An assessment of the level of impact that an external factor has on
travel during a particular planned special event involves the
consideration of the following components:

-   Duration -- temporal impact (e.g., when does the external factor
    impact operations and for how long?).

-   Extent -- spatial impact or scope of area

affected (e.g., does the external factor impact a particular corridor or
the entire region?)

-   Intensity -- volume of impact (e.g., how severe is the impact?)

Practitioners should express the impact of an external factor in terms
of how it affects travel demand, road/site capacity, and
personnel/equipment resource quantities. Feasibility study input data
can reflect adjustments made due to certain anticipated external
factors, or practitioners can rerun parking and roadway capacity
analyses to account for a new unexpected factor (e.g., occurrence of
emergency road construction). In turn, revised results may warrant
adjustments to the event traffic management plan.

## **Available Resources**

Available resources refer to the quantity and experience of personnel
and equipment available to plan and conduct day-of-event travel
management operations. Besides the size of a planned special event, the
level of required resources depend on time/place of occurrence, other
planned special events, and equipment status.

A special factor that may place significant strain on available
resources involves the occurrence of planned special events at a venue
under reconstruction. Shown in Figure 5-15, venue reconstruction places
additional demand on the amount of traffic management team personnel and
equipment resources needed to manage events hosted by the venue during
its reconstruction. Stakeholder response to on-site parking restrictions
include redevelopment of traffic management plans to accommodate parking
demand, pedestrian access, and traffic flow in the immediate vicinity of
the venue.

Figure 5-15

Stadium Reconstruction

Figure 5-16 presents a site and pedestrian accommodation plan for 2002
Green Bay Packers games during Lambeau Field renovation. Appendix F
contains contingency parking and pedestrian accommodation plans for
event patrons traveling to Lambeau Field.

###### **Weather**

Weather conditions affect travel demand, road/site capacity, or both.
For example, in winter, snow banks in permanent venue parking areas
reduce the number of on-site parking spaces required for an event
sell-out. Rain can create significant problems for unpaved parking areas
and access roads. A one-day rain event totaling approximately 0.70
inches during the 2002 U.S. Golf Open forced the traffic management team
to close all unpaved parking areas adjacent to the golf course. Figure
5-17 displays a traffic advisory service television announcement issued
to indicate contingency parking arrangements that used paved lots.

![](media/image8.jpeg){width="3.0in" height="1.63125in"}With regard to
travel demand, weather conditions have a significant impact on
attendance (e.g., increased attendance or reduced attendance) and/or the
rate of arrivals and departures at some special events. For instance,
event patrons will attend an event at a domed stadium on a rainy day,
but patrons

will bypass arriving at the venue early to tailgate, thus concentrating
patron arrivals.

## **Concurrent Road Construction and Planned Special Events**

The occurrence of planned events, including road construction and other
planned special events, create a range of impacts affecting different
traffic management plan components. On a regional level, the
characteristics (e.g., increased traffic demand, road/lane closures) of
concurrent planned events reduce available capacity in roadway corridors
serving a particular planned special event, thus affecting traffic flow
patterns. Local impacts include reduced parking supply, in the event of
other area planned special events, and restricted traffic circulation.

The identification of concurrent planned events requires interagency
communication at the local, county, and state level. Figure 5-18
illustrates an example of a local department of public works (DPW)
inventory, accessible through the DPW website, of active local road
construction and other planned special events within the jurisdiction.

Key considerations include:

-   With regard to planning for a specific planned special event, the
    event planning team should identify road construction activities in
    all jurisdictions within a certain travel time or distance radius,
    equivalent to the event market area, of the event venue. Appendix G
    contains a local stakeholder outreach letter pre pared by the
    Wisconsin DOT to identify local road construction in the vicinity of
    Miller Park and scheduled during the 2002 All-Star baseball game.

![](media/image9.jpeg){width="6.343055555555556in"
height="4.960416666666666in"}Figure 5-16

Site and Pedestrian Accommodation Plan for Stadium Reconstruction

Figure 5-17

Contingency Parking Plan for Weather

![](media/image10.jpeg){width="3.0208333333333335in"
height="1.9479166666666667in"}

-   The event planning team must also interact with area venue operators
    and determine a timeline of planned special events in the region,
    particularly those affecting the transportation system serving the
    subject planned special event.

-   Recognizing the regional impacts (e.g., county and multi-county) of
    major planned special events, the event planning team should obtain
    information, including attendance estimates, on planned special
    events occurring in other metropolitan areas and areas with large
    venues within a certain radius (e.g., 50 or 100 miles). Highway
    corridors traversing one jurisdiction can realize a significant

Figure 5-18

Internet Summary of Road Construction and Planned Special Events
*(Graphic courtesy of the City of Milwaukee DPW.)*

increase in background traffic during typical off-peak periods as a
result of traffic generated by major events occurring in other
jurisdictions.

### External Factor Monitoring and

### Assessment

The event planning team should maintain, and continually update, a
spreadsheet matrix or map of inter-jurisdictional roadway construction
and planned special events occurring over some defined period of time.
For example, Appendix G contains a Wisconsin DOT summary of local and
state road construction coupled with major planned special events
occurring in the Milwaukee metropolitan area over Summer 2002.
Identification of concurrent planned events allows stakeholders to merge
transportation planning and operations efforts and consider revising
road construction schedules.

![](media/image11.png){width="3.0208333333333335in"
height="2.536111111111111in"}On a broader scale, a regional committee on
planned special events monitors planned events across a metropolitan
area through regular meetings with traffic operations agencies, law
enforcement, community officials, event organizers, and other agencies.
The committee facilitates communication and coordination between
specific event planning and operation task forces to ensure optimal
application of personnel and equipment resources. The Traffic Incident
Management Enhancement (TIME) program in southeastern Wisconsin
maintains such a committee. As highlighted in Chapter 2, the TIME
special event committee proposed development of a traffic management
planning tool designed to evaluate the severity level of any planned
special event proposed in the greater Milwaukee metropolitan area. Table
5-19 lists specific external factors, and associated criteria, accounted
for in the draft planning tool.

**REFERENCES**

1.  Held, T., "Dead Family Reunion in East Troy Is a Go," *Milwaukee
    Journal-Sentinel*, June 28, 2002.

2.  Schmitt, B., "State Troopers Close Roads into Downtown Detroit,"
    *Detroit Free Press*, June 13, 2002.

3.  Laitner, B., "Royal Oak Preparing to Handle Crowds of Red Wings
    Fans," *Detroit Free Press*, June 13, 2002.

4.  "Hundreds questioned in Nevada Casino Deaths," *CNN.com*, April 28,
    2002.

5.  Shaw, T., *Performance Measures of Operational Effectiveness for
    Highway Segments and Systems*, NCHRP Synthesis 311, Transportation
    Research Board, National Research Council, Washington D.C., 2003, 59
    pp.

Table 5-19

External Factors Considered in the Wisconsin TIME Program

Special Event Planning Tool^(25)^

+--------------------------------+-------+-----+------+--------+-----+
| ### QUESTION                   | # INC |     |      |        |     |
|                                | REASI |     |      |        |     |
|                                | NG EV |     |      |        |     |
|                                | ENT I |     |      |        |     |
|                                | MPACT |     |      |        |     |
+--------------------------------+-------+-----+------+--------+-----+
|                                | **    |     |      |        |     |
|                                | CRITE |     |      |        |     |
|                                | RIA** |     |      |        |     |
+--------------------------------+-------+-----+------+--------+-----+
| ## **What is the effect        |       |     |      |        |     |
|  of construction on traffic?** |       |     |      |        |     |
+--------------------------------+-------+-----+------+--------+-----+
| Is there a construction        | Not   | S   | Mode | Consid | Sev |
| project on any of the          | appli | ome | rate | erable | ere |
| corridors leading to or away   | cable | imp | im   | impact | imp |
| from the special event venue?  |       | act | pact |        | act |
+--------------------------------+-------+-----+------+--------+-----+
| Are there any lane closures?   |       |     |      |        |     |
+--------------------------------+-------+-----+------+--------+-----+
| # What effect does the eve     |       |     |      |        |     |
| nt scheduling have on traffic? |       |     |      |        |     |
+--------------------------------+-------+-----+------+--------+-----+
| Is the event scheduled to      | Not   | S   | Mode | Consid | Sev |
| begin or end during a peak     | appli | ome | rate | erable | ere |
|                                | cable | imp | im   | impact | imp |
| period?                        |       | act | pact |        | act |
+--------------------------------+-------+-----+------+--------+-----+
| Is there more than one event   |       |     |      |        |     |
| beginning or ending at the     |       |     |      |        |     |
| same time?                     |       |     |      |        |     |
+--------------------------------+-------+-----+------+--------+-----+
| **What are the weather         |       |     |      |        |     |
| conditions?**                  |       |     |      |        |     |
+--------------------------------+-------+-----+------+--------+-----+
| Is there a forecast for severe | Clear | M   | Mode | S      | S   |
| weather before, during, or     |       | ild | rate | evere- | eve |
| after the special event that   |       |     |      | summer | re- |
| might affect traffic?          |       |     |      |        | win |
|                                |       |     |      |        | ter |
+--------------------------------+-------+-----+------+--------+-----+
| # Are                          |       |     |      |        |     |
| all human resources available? |       |     |      |        |     |
+--------------------------------+-------+-----+------+--------+-----+
| Is the event scheduled to      | Yes   | M   | Some | Few    | N   |
| begin and end during normal    |       | ost |      |        | one |
| working hours?                 |       |     |      |        |     |
+--------------------------------+-------+-----+------+--------+-----+
| Are key individuals available  |       |     |      |        |     |
| if needed?                     |       |     |      |        |     |
+--------------------------------+-------+-----+------+--------+-----+
| # Is all equipment available?  |       |     |      |        |     |
+--------------------------------+-------+-----+------+--------+-----+
| Are all facilities available?  | Yes   | M   | Some | Little | N   |
|                                |       | ost |      |        | one |
+--------------------------------+-------+-----+------+--------+-----+
| Is communication equipment     |       |     |      |        |     |
| working?                       |       |     |      |        |     |
+--------------------------------+-------+-----+------+--------+-----+
| Is all traffic control         |       |     |      |        |     |
| equipment available?           |       |     |      |        |     |
+--------------------------------+-------+-----+------+--------+-----+

6.  Markley, D.D., N.L. Conrad, and G.S. Rutherford, "Serving the
    University of Washington's Husky Stadium," Preprint No. 00113,
    Prepared for the 2001 ITE Annual Meeting and Exhibit, Institute of
    Transportation Engineers, Chicago, Illinois, August 19\--22, 2002.

7.  Rankin, E.A., "A Home Run or Out in Left Field? Transportation
    Management for the New Seattle Mariner's Baseball Park," Prepared
    for the ITE 1998 Annual Meeting and Exhibit, Institute of
    Transportation Engineers, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 1998.

8.  "2003 U.S. Cellular Field Resident Permit Parking Program", Chicago
    Department of Transportation, Chicago, Illinois, \[Online\].
    Available: <http://www.ci.chi.il.us/Transportation/Sox/>. \[2003,
    April 25\].

9.  *Joint Operational Policy Statement*, Illinois Department of
    Transportation and Illinois State Police, February 1999.

10. *A Joint Operations Policy Statement*, Washington State Patrol and
    Washington State Department of Transportation, Washington, February
    2002.

11. Wrenn, D., "Turnpike Letting Drivers Go Free in Heavy Traffic,"
    *Charleston Daily Mail*, December 4, 2002.

12. Townsend, E., "Freshman Delegate Wants Bridge Tolls Stopped in
    Backups," *The Star Democrat*, February 10, 2003.

13. "Wrecker and Towing Rules and Regulations for Police Rotation
    Wreckers," City of Cincinnati Municipal Code Section 869.21.

14. Robbins, G., A. Felder, and W.E. Hurrell, "San Francisco's New
    Downtown Ballpark: A Home Run for Public Transit," Preprint No.
    00111, Prepared for the 2001 ITE Annual Meeting and Exhibit,
    Institute of Transportation Engineers, Chicago, Il., August 19\--22,
    2001.

15. Grava, S. and F. Nangle, "Get Me to the Ball Game on Time -- Access
    Time Patterns at Baseball Stadia," Preprint No. 00395, Prepared for
    the 2000 Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board,
    National Research Council, Washington, D.C., January 9\--13, 2000.

16. Peterson, M., D.M. Marum, and A. Moran, "Mode of Access for the New
    Downtown San Diego Ballpark," Prepared for the ITE 2000 Annual
    Meeting and Exhibit, Institute of Transportation Engineers, San
    Diego, Ca., 2000.

17. *Traffic Considerations for Special Events*, Institute of
    Transportation Engineers, Washington, D.C., 1976, 44 pp.

18. Montag, D.A., *Trip Generation Rates and Characteristics for
    Theme-Oriented Fairs and Festivals*, West Virginia University,
    Morgantown, West Virginia, May 1998.

19. *Parking and Traffic Management Plans for Investco Field at Mile
    High*, Prepared for the City and County of Denver by Turner/HNTB,
    June 2002.

20. Volz, M.A. and B.J. Nicholson, "Kansas Speedway Event Management
    Using ITS," n.d.

21. Womble, J.E., "A Transportation and Tourism Profile of Visitors to
    the 1984 Louisiana World Exposition in New Orleans," *ITE Journal*,
    Vol. 55, No. 4, April 1985, pp. 49\--53.

22. Boggs, R., "Challenges in Supporting Planned Special Events in Your
    Community," Presented at the Institute of Transportation Engineers
    2003 Technical Conference and Exhibit Program," Fort Lauderdale,
    Florida, March 23---26, 2003.

23. *Shell Grand Prix of Denver -- Parking and Traffic Management Plan*,
    Prepared for the Grand Prix of Denver by URS Corporation, August
    2002, 33 pp.

24. Sattayhatewa, P. and R.L. Smith, "Development of Parking Choice
    Models for Special Events," Presented at the 82^nd^ Annual Meeting
    of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., January
    12-16, 2003.

25. Silverson, S., Wisconsin Department of Transportation -- District 2,
    Personal Communication, February 18, 2003.