Transcription

1 SEDA-COG MPO Long Range Transportation Plan, Appendix E Comment Cluster Analysis Methodology

2

3 Cluster Analysis of Comment Data compiled by the State Transportation Commission and PennDOT and its use in Public Engagement during the SEDA- COG MPO Long Range Transportation Plan Recent outreach efforts by the State Transportation Commission (STC) and PennDOT collected public comment on transportation issues and the status of the system using online web portals. The portals allowed any member of the public to identify transportation features on a web map and locate comments at their points of concern. The State Transportation Commission conducted two such surveys, in support of the 2015 and 2017 Twelve Year Program revisions. In 2014, PennDOT compiled input for their long range planning effort, PA On Track, using a similar online portal technique. Taken together, the three surveys yielded more than 1,200 unique comment points within the SEDA-COG MPO area, as shown in Table 1. Dataset Table 1. Comments in the SEDA-COG MPO Area SEDA-COG MPO Comments 2015 Twelve Year Plan (STC) PA OnTrack LRTP (PennDOT) Twelve Year Plan (STC) 697 TOTAL COMMENTS 1,262 With the comment datasets being made available to the Planning Partners as GIS point shapefiles, SEDA- COG MPO obtained the three datasets and attempted to combine them into one dataset. In each survey, participants tagged their comments according to a pre-defined set of topic categories. Table 2 shows the categories used in each survey and how they were combined into a standardized set of categories, so that the datasets could be combined TYP (STC) Table 2. Topic Category Merging 2014 PA OnTrack (PennDOT) 2017 TYP (STC) SEDA-COG MPO LRTP Cluster Analysis Bridge Bridge Bridge Bridge Freight Freight Freight Bike-Ped Highways Traffic Walking Path Bike Path Roadway Congestion Pedestrian or Bike Roadway Pedestrian or Bike Roadway Safety Safety Safety Transit Transit Transit Transit Appendix E - Page 1

4 When merged, comments were distributed into the six (6) standardized topic categories as described in in Table 3. Topic Category Table 3. Total Merged Comments by Topic Category SEDA-COG MPO Comments Bridge 79 Freight 62 Pedestrian or Bike 428 Roadway 367 Safety 218 Transit 108 The datasets were merged in GIS and the spatial Cluster Analysis of the comment points was undertaken. The Cluster Analysis was an application of Hot Spot Analysis techniques implemented in ESRI ArcGIS software. The technique works from the Getis-Ord Gi* statistic. The component statistics are calculated for each feature according to its context with neighboring features. Statistically significant hot spots are identified when a feature receives a high score and is surrounded by other features with high scores. A high score is determined in a relative manner by comparing the local score of a feature to the scores of all other features in the dataset. 1 The initial analysis completed on the comments in the SEDA-COG MPO area identified 87 clusters (Table 4), which encompassed about 40% of the total comments in the SEDA-COG MPO area. Table 4. Comment Clusters by County County Clusters Clinton 5 Columbia 5 Juniata 2 Mifflin 6 Montour 3 Northumberland 33 Snyder 13 Union 20 TOTAL Appendix E - Page 2

5 In the next step, the comments within each identified cluster were evaluated to see if there were common themes within each cluster. While the ESRI analysis tool effectively identified where multiple comments were located close together, there was no automated way to determine whether or not the clustered comments had any common theme. We considered conducting the Cluster Analysis separately for each transportation topic group, but we had to acknowledge that a single issue could easily receive comments across the comment categories. For instance, we discovered that comments supporting the CSVT project were dispersed among the Safety, Bridge, Roadway, and Freight categories. After eliminating some false clusters and several comprised of neighboring, related small clusters that combined to form larger ones, 52 clusters remained (Table 5). T In preparation for the Forum meetings, the comments and clusters were mapped both at the countylevel and in local detail, with each cluster given its own inset map over an aerial background. A sample county-level map is shown in Figure 1, and a cluster detail collection is shown in Figure 2. The individual comments were listed and reviewed for trends, then examined against overlays of safety issues, pavement and bridge needs, etc. Project ideas and solutions were identified, along with currently programmed projects and existing planning efforts that had already identified the issue. DR AF The county-level mapping and detailed cluster maps formed the primary interaction point for the Transportation Issues Forums. Participants were asked to review the mapping, and agree with ( like ) an existing idea by placing a star sticker next to the project idea. Some participants preferred to write additional ideas on the mapping which were, in turn, liked by others. As a result of the Forums, many of the concerns expressed in the STC and PennDOT comments were confirmed. The Forum process also called attention to new locations of concern, and twenty (20) new project ideas were generated for consideration in the Long Range Transportation Plan. Appendix E - Page 3

6 Figure 1. Sample County Level Cluster Map Appendix E - Page 4

7 Figure 2. Sample Cluster Detail Collection Appendix E - Page 5

8 Table 5. Grouped Comment Clusters COUNTY COUNT CLUSTER_ID LOCATION 1 Clinton Mill Hall, Hogan Boulevard 2 Clinton U.S. 220, Auction Road 3 Clinton U.S. 220, Salona 4 Clinton Lock Haven 5 Columbia Bloomsburg West 6 Columbia Bloomsburg Downtown 7 Columbia Berwick 8 Columbia 3 587,589 West of Berwick 9 Juniata 1 74 Mifflintown 10 Juniata 2 75 Port Royal 11 Mifflin 3 64 Milroy 12 Mifflin 2 21,24 Lewistown 13 Mifflin 1 41,48 U.S. 322 to Centre County 14 Montour Danville West 15 Montour Danville East 16 Northumberland Sunbury Downtown 17 Northumberland Sunbury North 18 Northumberland U.S. 11, South of Northumberland 19 Northumberland Northumberland/Packer Island 20 Northumberland Elysburg 21 Northumberland 3 302,305 Northumberland 22 Northumberland 6 314,315 Sunbury East 23 Northumberland 8 412,413 PA 147, Chillisquaque 24 Northumberland 9 415,416 PA 147, Northumberland North 25 Northumberland 7 399,402,403 PA 147, Across from Winfield 26 Snyder U.S. 522 at Salem/University 27 Snyder U.S. 522 at Broad 28 Snyder U.S. 11/15, Susquehanna Valley Mall 29 Snyder U.S. 11/15, Shamokin Dam South 30 Snyder U.S. 11 & 15 Intersection, Shamokin Dam 31 Snyder 3 255,256 U.S. 11/15 Interchange at U.S Snyder 4 257,259 Selinsgrove Southeast 33 Snyder 6 265,266 Selinsgrove Northeast 34 Snyder 7 272,273 U.S. 11/15, Hummel's Wharf 35 Snyder 9 285,287,289 U.S. 11/15 at PA Snyder ,297,299 U.S. 11, North of Shamokin Dam 37 Union U.S. 15, Winfield 38 Union Mifflinburg Appendix E - Page 6

9 Table 5. Grouped Comment Clusters (continued) COUNTY COUNT CLUSTER_ID LOCATION 39 Union East Buffalo Twp, Stein Lane South 40 Union East Buffalo Twp, Stein Lane North 41 Union East Buffalo Twp, Linntown 42 Union U.S. 15, Bucknell to Market 43 Union Airport Road, East Buffalo Township 44 Union U.S. 15, Market to Buffalo 45 Union U.S. 15, Buffalo to William Penn 46 Union U.S. 15, Abbey to Smoketown 47 Union Lewisburg Downtown 48 Union White Deer PIke, West of Watsontown 49 Union ,406 U.S. 15, South of Beagle Club 50 Union ,409 River Road, South of Lewisburg 51 Union ,423 U.S. 15, Kelly Township 52 Union ,421,426 Lewisburg East & River Crossing Appendix E - Page 7