Analysis Scenarios Clause Samples
The 'Analysis Scenarios' clause defines the specific situations or conditions under which certain analyses or assessments must be conducted within the context of the agreement. Typically, this clause outlines the types of scenarios that trigger an analysis, such as changes in market conditions, regulatory requirements, or operational incidents, and may specify the methodologies or standards to be used. By clearly delineating when and how analyses are to be performed, this clause ensures that both parties have a shared understanding of their obligations, thereby reducing ambiguity and supporting informed decision-making.
Analysis Scenarios. The Business-as-usual (BAU) scenario corresponded to 2035 population and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) projection in MTC’s 2035 long-range transportation plan. This scenario assumed that certain level of improvement to passenger vehicles carbon emission rates would result by 2035 from incrementally improved fuel economy. The Low-carbon driving (LCD) scenario assumed the same VMT as the BAU scenario. Carbon emissions by automobiles and light trucks (i.e., light-duty vehicles) were assumed to be lower than in other scenarios owing to increased adoption of LCD fleets, including gas-electric hybrid vehicles and light-duty diesel, biofuel, and electric plug-in vehicles. Two active transportation scenarios (short trip and carbon and physical activity goal) assumed the same total travel distances by all modes as the BAU scenario while assuming increased shares in active transportation. The short trip (ST) scenario assumed a shift of 50% of BAU miles traveled in automobiles for less than 1.5 miles to walking and 50% of BAU miles traveled in automobiles for 1.5 to 5 miles to bicycling. The 2000 Bay Area Travel Survey identified that 24% of car trips in the area were less than 1.5 miles and 33.8% were between 1.5 and 5 miles. The carbon/physical activity goal (C/PAG) scenario optimized both physical activity participation and vehicular CO2 emission reductions by setting the time for participation in walking and bicycling to the median commute times identified in the journey to work data of the American Community Survey for the San Francisco Bay area (U.S. Census Bureau, 2020). To estimate CO2 emissions for all scenarios, the amount of CO2 emissions for a 2010 baseline scenario corresponding to MTC’s 2035 long-range transportation plan was first estimated using MTC’s travel demand model (Brazil and ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2009). To determine CO2 emission reductions for the BAU and LCD scenarios, percent reductions of CO2 emissions estimated by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ (2010) for low-carbon vehicles were applied to the baseline CO2 emissions based on the shares of low-carbon vehicles assumed in the BAU and LCD scenarios. For the active transport scenarios, estimation of CO2 emissions was based on the reduced annual vehicle miles resulting from increases in active transport miles assumed for the scenarios. For each active transport scenario, only VMT of light-duty vehicles (i.e., passenger cars and light trucks) were changed, holding constant for VMT for all other vehicle classes and estimates for nonmo...
Analysis Scenarios. Once the Nashville ITHIM model was calibrated, three scenarios (i.e., conservative, moderate, and aggressive) were developed, each with progressively higher average active transportation (walking and bicycling) participation, while holding total miles traveled by all modes constant. Data from MTTHS showed that residents in the greater Nashville area engaged in an average of 0.7 mile per week of active transportation by walking and 0.3 mile by ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ (▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2017). In the conservative scenario, average distance of walking for transportation was increased to 1.7 miles per capita per week and 1.0 mile for biking. In the moderate scenario, average walking distance was increased to 3.7 miles and bicycling 1.5 miles per capita miles per week, which were translated to roughly 10 additional minutes or walking or biking per day based on average walking and cycling speeds. The aggressive scenario was constructed such that miles of walking or bicycling correspond to the minimum physical activity recommendation (i.e., at least 150 minutes per week of moderate-intensity aerobic physical activity) in the 2018 Physical Activity Guidelines of U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (USDHH, 2018), which translated to 5.7 miles of walking or 3.0 miles of cycling per capita per week. Figure 11 shows the comparison of walking and biking distances and minutes by scenarios.
Analysis Scenarios. (10) Whether or not truck or heavy vehicle distributions need to be considered separately;
Analysis Scenarios. Three unadopted future alternatives (i.e.,S1, S2, and S3) documented in SACOG’s 2016 MTP/SCS were evaluated for the planning horizon year of 2036. The scenarios vary by the amount of investment in facilities for automobile vs. alternative transportation (i.e., public transit and active transportation) and by development densities for residential units and employment. For the MTP/SCS plan adopted in 2016, evaluation for future impacts was performed for year 2020, 2027, and 2036 to see how health benefits are expected to progress over the years. A detailed comparison of the alternatives and the adopted plan is shown in Table 15.
Analysis Scenarios. The analysis shall have a timeframe adequate to address all phases of the proposed development. Intersections shall be analyzed using the four scenarios in Table 5.8.6.B.3.g: Analysis Scenario Requirements, and shall include queue analysis: Type of Scenario [1] Existing Annual Growth [2] Approved Developments Proposed Development Necessary Improvements Existing X No-Build X X X Build X X X X Build Improved [3] X X X X X Notes: [1] For a phased proposed development analysis, the build and build improved conditions shall be assessed, and the traffic associated with each previous phase shall be included in the analysis of each successive phase of the proposed development. [2] The Annual Growth rate will be determined in the Memorandum of Understanding (see Section 5.8.6.B.3.c). [3] This scenario may be eliminated if improvements are not necessary to satisfy any queuing problems or the LOS criteria in Section 5.8.6.B.4.j(2), Recommendations. (Ord. No. 2016-001, 05/10/2016)
Analysis Scenarios. To estimate the health impacts of increasing amount of walking and bicycling for transportation in the region, NAMPO created three analysis scenarios (conservative, moderate, and aggressive), each with progressively higher average active transportation (walking and bicycling) participation, while holding total miles traveled by all modes constant (see Table 13). It’s noted that the miles of walking and bicycling of the aggressive scenario correspond to the minimum physical activity recommendation (i.e., at least 150 minutes per week of moderate- intensity aerobic physical activity) in the 2008 Physical Activity Guidelines of US Department of Health and Human Services (2008). A fourth scenario, injury-neutral, was created to determine the reduction in vehicle miles that would be needed to offset additional injuries and fatalities incurred by increasing the average weekly walking and bicycling per person by 1 mile each.
Analysis Scenarios. This study evaluated the health outcomes of the adopted SACOG’s 2016 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy for three future years (i.e., 2020, 2027, and 2036). Additionally, three alternative scenarios (i.e., S1, S2, and S3) were also evaluated for health impacts for year 2036. The three scenarios vary in percent increase (i.e., as compared to the 2012 baseline) of land use and transportation investments (Table 29). S2 is the scenario preferred by SACOG. Results of all scenarios are presented as changes with respect to the 2012 baseline conditions.
Analysis Scenarios. Consistent with the County’s TIA guidelines, intersection analysis will be provided for the following analysis scenarios: • Existing (2019) Conditions • Existing plus Project Conditions • Existing plus Ambient Growth plus Project (E+A+P) Conditions • Existing plus Ambient Growth plus Project Plus Cumulative (E+A+P+C) Conditions As the Project is consistent with the County’s General Plan Land Use and Zoning, a build-out analysis is not required per the County’s TIA guidelines. All study area intersections will be analyzed using the Synchro (Version 10) software using the HCM 6th Edition methodology. In addition, the traffic impact analysis will include Basic Freeway Segment, Ramp Junction (Merge/Diverge), and off-ramp queuing analyses at I-215 Freeway interchange at ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ Boulevard consistent with Caltrans requirements. The following special issues will be addressed in the traffic study: • Provide a queuing analysis for the Project driveways and site adjacent intersections to determine necessary storage lengths.
Analysis Scenarios. Consistent with Engineering Bulletin #06-13, the following analysis scenarios are proposed for this traffic study: • Existing (2014) Conditions • Existing plus Project Conditions • Opening Year Cumulative (2015) without Project Conditions • Opening Year Cumulative (2015) with Project Conditions In accordance with Engineering Bulletin #06-13, improvements fully funded by the City of La Quinta’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) will be assumed to be in place for Existing plus Project conditions. Improvements fully funded by the City’s CIP, the Development Impact Fee Program (DIF) and the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program (TUMF) are assumed to be in place for Opening Year Cumulative (2015) conditions. Per Engineering Bulletin #06-13, the following LOS criteria will be utilized for study area intersections: The City of La Quinta has established LOS “D” as the minimum level of service for its street segments. The study area intersections will be analyzed using the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2010 methodology. The parameters provided in Attachment 2 of Engineering Bulletin #06-13 will be utilized for the purposes of this analysis, unless directed otherwise.