Perspectives on Efficiency in Transportation David Levinson.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Complete Street Analysis of a Road Diet Orange Grove Boulevard Pasadena, CA Aaron Elias Engineering Associate Kittelson & Associates Bill Cisco Senior.
Advertisements

Figures in Chapter 1. Learning objectives After studying this chapter, you should be able to; Define logistics and supply chain management. Describe logistics.
Chapter 131 Chapter 13: Fundamental Concepts for Uninterrupted Flow Facilities Explain why capacity is the heart of transportation issues. Define capacity.
GIS and Transportation Planning
The SoCoMMS Model Paul Read Dan Jones. The Presentation Outline of the Study The Modelling Framework Accessibility Model.
What is the Model??? A Primer on Transportation Demand Forecasting Models Shawn Turner Theo Petritsch Keith Lovan Lisa Aultman-Hall.
GEOG 111 & 211A Transportation Planning Traffic Assignment.
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning, IIT, Kharagpur Perspective Plan for Barddhaman Planning Area – Vision 2025 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORT.
Spring INTRODUCTION There exists a lot of methods used for identifying high risk locations or sites that experience more crashes than one would.
Multimodal Concurrency: Response to 2005 Legislative Session Briefing for House Local Government Committee November 30, 2006 King Cushman Puget Sound Regional.
You Are the Traffic Jam: Examination of Congestion Measures
Sequential Demand Forecasting Models CTC-340. Travel Behavior 1. Decision to travel for a given purpose –People don’t travel without reason 2. The choice.
CE 2710 Transportation Engineering
Multi-Modal Concurrency PSRC TRAC-UW Depart of Urban Design and Planning Evans School.
11 Quantifying Benefits of Traffic Information Provision under Stochastic Demand and Capacity Conditions: A Multi-day Traffic Equilibrium Approach Mingxin.
Lec 20, Ch.11: Transportation Planning Process (objectives)
Estimating Congestion Costs Using a Transportation Demand Model of Edmonton, Canada C.R. Blaschuk Institute for Advanced Policy Research University of.
Planning Process ► Early Transport Planning  Engineering-oriented  1944, First “ O-D ” study  Computational advances helped launch new era in planning.
Access Management: Why And How? An Introduction To Access Management Problems, Principles and Treatments.
K.O.R.E. Enterprises Workshop Urban Transportation Systems 10/15/08.
Transportation and Cities Mark Magalotti P.E. Senior Lecturer University of Pittsburgh School of Engineering Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering.
Traffic Assignment Convergence and its Effects on Selecting Network Improvements By Chris Blaschuk, City of Calgary and JD Hunt, University of Calgary.
May 7, 2013 Yagnesh Jarmarwala Phani Jammalamadaka Michael Copeland Maneesh Mahlawat 14 th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference.
Forecasting Travel Time Index using a Travel Demand Model to Measure Plan Performance Thomas Williams, AICP Texas A&M Transportation Institute 2015 TRB.
June 15, 2010 For the Missoula Metropolitan Planning Organization Travel Modeling
BPAC. “Congestion management is the application of strategies to improve transportation system performance and reliability by reducing the adverse impacts.
How to Put “Best Practice” into Traffic Assignment Practice Ken Cervenka Federal Transit Administration TRB National Transportation.
Modeling in the “Real World” John Britting Wasatch Front Regional Council April 19, 2005.
2030 Mobility Plan City of Jacksonville Planning and Development Department January 2011.
Transportation Planning, Transportation Demand Analysis Land Use-Transportation Interaction Transportation Planning Framework Transportation Demand Analysis.
Capturing the Effects of Smart Growth on Travel and Climate Change Jerry Walters, Fehr & Peers Modeling for Regional and Interregional Planning Caltrans.
Evaluation: Based On Perspectives on Efficiency in Transportation and Identifying Winners and Losers in Transportation David Levinson.
1 Introduction to Transportation Systems. 2 PART I: –CONTEXT, CONCEPTS AND CHARACTERIZATION.
David B. Roden, Senior Consulting Manager Analysis of Transportation Projects in Northern Virginia TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference.
Architecture David Levinson. East Asian Grids Kyoto Nara Chang-an Ideal Chinese Plan.
Interpreting Demand and Capacity for Street and Highway Design Lecture 6 CE 5720 Norman Garrick Norman W. Garrick.
Data Palooza Workshop May 9, 2013 Rabinder Bains, FHWA – Office of Policy and Government Affairs.
HSM: Another Tool for Safety Management in Wyoming 1 Excellence in Transportation.
Integrated Travel Demand Model Challenges and Successes Tim Padgett, P.E., Kimley-Horn Scott Thomson, P.E., KYTC Saleem Salameh, Ph.D., P.E., KYOVA IPC.
3000 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 208 Washington, DC
Forecasting and Evaluating Network Growth David Levinson Norah Montes de Oca Feng Xie.
Geometric Design (I). Learning Objectives To understand the considerations and quantifiable aspects of geometric design.
Assessing the Marginal Cost of Congestion for Vehicle Fleets Using Passive GPS Data Nick Wood, TTI Randall Guensler, Georgia Tech Presented at the 13 th.
TRANSIMS Version 5 Network Files January 20, 2011 David Roden – AECOM.
Traffic Flow Parameters Surface Street Application.
Both road vehicles and travelers vary in a number of characteristics. Vehicles differ in the road space they occupy, the visual obstruction they impose.
The 5 Es David Levinson Framework Motivation Welfare comprises efficiency and equity. We are also concerned with the environment and the experience.
Analyzing the Mobility Impacts of TOD Level of Service in Transit Oriented Districts Service for Who?
The Challenge  Traveler information offerings are evolving very rapidly  User expectations, technologies, and roles are all in motion  Agencies need.
1 Importance and Exposure in Road Network Vulnerability Analysis: A Case Study for Northern Sweden Erik Jenelius Transport and Location Analysis Dept.
A case–driven comparison of Freeway Performance Measurement Systems by Shailesh Deshpande.
Chapter 9 Capacity and Level of Service for Highway Segments
Generated Trips and their Implications for Transport Modelling using EMME/2 Marwan AL-Azzawi Senior Transport Planner PDC Consultants, UK Also at Napier.
Shaping our Future Transportation Transportation trends Influencing trends through land use decisions Alternative futures: Base Case and Scenario Complementary.
IH-10 Managed Lanes Project: A “Public-Public” Partnership ENGINEERS PLANNERS ECONOMISTS Wilbur Smith Associates Presented at the Value Pricing Conference.
2015 Urban Mobility Scorecard Tim Lomax Texas A&M Transportation Institute Austin Chamber of Commerce December 2015.
Complete Streets Training
Moving Ahead The American Public Speaks on Roadways and Transportation in Communities Federal Highway Administration Industry Briefing March 20, 2001.
Travel Demand Forecasting: Traffic Assignment CE331 Transportation Engineering.
CEE 320 Winter 2006 Transportation Planning and Travel Demand Forecasting CEE 320 Steve Muench.
The New 2010 Highway Capacity Manual An Overview.
TRAFFIC STUDY AND FORECASTING SHRI DEVI POLYTECHINIC
Transportation Modeling – Opening the Black Box. Agenda 6:00 - 6:05Welcome by Brant Liebmann 6:05 - 6:10 Introductory Context by Mayor Will Toor and Tracy.
2040 LONG RANGE PLAN UPDATE Congestion Management Process Plan (CMPP) Major Update February 24, 2016.
Urban Mobility Management and Emissions Measurement System Boile Maria 1,2 Afroditi Anagnostopoulou 1 Evangelia Papargyri 1 1 Centre for Research and Technology.
Introduction and Workshop Objectives
Presented to 2017 TRB Planning Applications Conference
Travel Demand Forecasting: Mode Choice
Transportation Engineering Wrap-up of planning February 2, 2011
Problem 5: Network Simulation
Presentation transcript:

Perspectives on Efficiency in Transportation David Levinson

Four Perspectives on Efficiency PerspectiveProfession Mobility and SafetyEngineers Utility (Consumer’s Surplus) Economists ProductivityManagers AccessibilityPlanners

Reason for Multiple Measures  Planning, investment, regulation, design, operations, management, and assessment.  Each profession claims to represent traveler.  Professions take the "objective" viewpoint of the omniscient central planner (who may in fact be an engineer, manager, or economist) rather than the "subjective" perspective of the travel consumer.

Criteria for Choosing MOE 1.Different measures (e.g. transit and auto level of service) should be collectively complete in that one could combine them to attain an overall measure. 2.Each measure should scale or aggregate well (e.g. it should be possible to combine measures of auto level of service measured on separate links or for separate trips). 3.The measure should align with user experience and be understood by those users. 4.The performance indicator must be measurable, or calculable from available (observable) data. 5.The measure should be predictable, or able to be forecast 6.It must be useful in a regulatory or control context (so that the measure can be used to allow or restrict new development to maintain standards, or to help guide operational traffic engineering decision).

Normative and Positive  To say that the speed on a link is 50 kilometers per hour tells us nothing about whether that is good or bad, it simply is.  By comparing the measure to a normative standard (for instance, a speed limit), we can then determine whether we have a speeding problem (the speed limit is 30 kph), a congestion problem (the speed limit is 110 kph), or no problem.

Mobility  Highway Capacity Manual (segments)  Texas Transportation Institute (metro areas)  Quantitative and Qualitative  Auto and Non-auto  Scale: Intersection, Link, Subnetwork, Trip, Network  Basis: Time or Flow

Roadway Mobility Measures Measurement ScaleVolume and CapacityTime Intersection approachVolume to Capacity Ratio:Stopped Delay: Queue Length Total IntersectionCritical Lane Volume:Average Delay: Road SegmentDensity:Average Delay: Volume to Capacity Ratio:Average Travel Time: Road NetworkArea Cordon:Average Travel Time (Distance): Area Screenline:Average Percent Delay: Average Congestion Index:Average Trip Time (Distance) Ratio: Average of Area Intersection: Shoulder Hour Index: Distribution Measure:

Qualitative Mobility Measures Volume &Capacity  Parking Availability and Cost  Connectivity  Conflict with Non-auto System  Hazard  Auto Service Stations  Comfort Time  Coverage  Aesthetics  Destination Distribution  Information System

Non-Auto Mobility Measures Measurement StageVolume and CapacityTime Walk (Bike) and Walk Access and Egress to Transit Sidewalk (Bikeway) RatioCoverage ConnectivityCircuity HazardDelay Bicycle ParkingAesthetic Travel Time Auto Access and EgressParking Availability and Cost Park and Ride Access Time WaitingWaiting comfortFrequency In-VehicleUsageOpportunity Service ComfortReliability Absolute Time Relative Time Directness

Consumer’s Surplus

Consumer’s Surplus Criticisms  Transportation rather than activities as the base for consumer's surplus  Aggregation error involved.  No consideration of choice and the existence of non-user benefits in the consumers’ surplus metric.  The costs and benefits associated with spillovers and externalities are often improperly captured

Productivity Measures DescriptionFormula Productivity of Public Labor (P GL ) Productivity of Private Labor (P PL ) Productivity of Public Capital (P GK ) Productivity of Private Capital (P PK )

Accessibility Measures DescriptionFormula Accessibility (A) in zone i depends on the opportunities (e.g. jobs P) in zone j and the transportation cost c ij between them Job - Worker Ratio (R) in zone i at radius r (in transportation cost) is the Jobs (P) within radius r divided by Workers (Q) within radius r Density (D) in zone i is the sum of jobs and workers within radius r, divided by the area contained within Difference (  ) in zone i is the difference between the number of jobs and workers in radius r Force (F) between zones i and j is the product of the jobs (P) in zone j and the workers (Q) in zone i and a function of the transportation cost c ij between them

Accessibility

Travelers and Subjectivity  Just as Einstein noted that the point of view of the observer shaped the measurement of time, point of view also affects the perception of time as a measure of transportation level of service.  Moving towards trip-based measures of effectiveness will more closely align with user experience

Conclusions  Four Classes of Efficiency Measures: Mobility, Utility, Productivity, Accessiblity.  Each is a gauge, none should be exclusive.  None captures the subjective perspective of travelers.  New measures must be developed which do reflect the customer.