Stratified Transit Market Segmentation

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
THURSTON REGION MULTIMODAL TRAVEL DEMAND FORECASTING MODEL IMPLEMENTATION IN EMME/2 - Presentation at the 15th International EMME/2 Users Group Conference.
Advertisements

1 ODOTs Complete Streets Initiative. 2 Tipping Point for Complete Streets.
Complete Street Analysis of a Road Diet Orange Grove Boulevard Pasadena, CA Aaron Elias Engineering Associate Kittelson & Associates Bill Cisco Senior.
Mass Transit OSullivan Chapter 11. Outline of the Chapter Analyze some empirical facts about public transit in the United States Analyze the commuters.
Salt Lake City Downtown Transportation Master Plan Light Rail & Bus; Presentation Background and Introduction August 23, 2006.
In Portland, Oregon TRB Planning Applications Conference Reno, Nevada Mark Bradley Research & Consulting.
Political Support Needed to Improve Transportation 06 | 25 | 2013 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA SFMTA | Municipal Transportation Agency Image: Market and Geary.
January 8, 2014 FMATS College Road Corridor Study FMATS Technical Committee Update.
Environmental Attitudes and Travel Behavior of Youth Cindy Tse, Master of Applied Science Student, UBC Sustainable Mobility Summit 2011 October 31, 2011.
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to Regional Transportation Plan Guidelines Work Group Meeting presented by Christopher Wornum Cambridge.
Smith Myung, Cambridge Systematics Sean McAtee, Cambridge Systematics Cambridge Systematics.
USING SUMMIT FOR TRANSIT AND MODEL ANALYSIS AMPO TRAVEL MODEL WORK GROUP October 23, 2006.
Western Oregon University Oregon Department of Transportation Transportation Safety Division Driver Risk Prevention Curriculum Model Habit Review.
Presented to presented by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Transportation leadership you can trust. Comparison of Activity-Based Model Parameters Between Two.
What is the Model??? A Primer on Transportation Demand Forecasting Models Shawn Turner Theo Petritsch Keith Lovan Lisa Aultman-Hall.
Chapter 4 1 Chapter 4. Modeling Transportation Demand and Supply 1.List the four steps of transportation demand analysis 2.List the four steps of travel.
CE 2710 Transportation Engineering
Estimating Congestion Costs Using a Transportation Demand Model of Edmonton, Canada C.R. Blaschuk Institute for Advanced Policy Research University of.
Spatial Resolution in SANDAG Activity-Based Model: How Much More Detail Is Enough? 15th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference, Columbus.
Using All Street Networks in Modeling Non-Motorized Travel: A Case Study in San Diego 15th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference,
Presented to presented by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Estimating Commuter Rail Station- Level Ridership Using American Community Survey Journey to Work.
BETTER AIR QUALITY 2004 SPECIFIC TRANSPORT MEASURES TO REDUCE EMISSIONS IN HYDERABAD, INDIA Yash Sachdeva, RITES Ltd Viresh Goel, RITES Ltd D.S.Chari,
1 Using Transit Market Analysis Tools to Evaluate Transit Service Improvements for a Regional Transportation Plan TRB Transportation Applications May 20,
Challenge 2: Spatial Aggregation Level Multi-tier Modeling in Ohio Attempts to Balance Run Time and Forecast Granularity Gregory Giaimo, PE The Ohio Department.
FOCUS MODEL OVERVIEW CLASS FIVE Denver Regional Council of Governments July27, 2011.
National Transportation || || 1 Lei Zhang, Ph.D. Associate Professor Director,
TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference Houston, Texas May 2009 Ann Arbor Transportation Plan Update-- Connecting the Land Use & Transportation.
Calculating Transportation System User Benefits: Interface Challenges between EMME/2 and Summit Principle Author: Jennifer John Senior Transportation Planner.
D/TTAS - Transport policy data needs Transport Statistics Liaison Group 19 th September 2013.
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to TRB Planning Applications Conference presented by Vamsee Modugula Cambridge Systematics, Inc. May.
The Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission The 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference May 9,
Characteristics of Weekend Travel in the City of Calgary: Towards a Model of Weekend Travel Demand JD Hunt, University of Calgary DM Atkins, City of Calgary.
David B. Roden, Senior Consulting Manager Analysis of Transportation Projects in Northern Virginia TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference.
Ying Chen, AICP, PTP, Parsons Brinckerhoff Ronald Eash, PE, Parsons Brinckerhoff Mary Lupa, AICP, Parsons Brinckerhoff 13 th TRB Transportation Planning.
Transport.tamu.edu The mode of transportation I use to get to campus the majority of the time is: Drive alone3826 (49 %) Carpool526 (7 %) Ride Transit2277.
Presented to: Presented by: Transportation leadership you can trust. The Development of a Method to Estimate Changes in Freight Mode Share TRB Transportation.
Critical Issues in Estimating and Applying Nested Logit Mode Choice Models Ramachandran Balakrishna Srinivasan Sundaram Caliper Corporation 12 th TRB National.
How Does Your Model Measure Up Presented at TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference by Phil Shapiro Frank Spielberg VHB May, 2007.
Presented to MTF Transit Committee presented by David Schmitt, AICP November 20, 2008 FSUTMS Transit Model Application.
Weighing the Scenarios: The Costs and Benefits of Future Transit Service Produced for MTDB by The Mission Group © 2000 by The Mission Group. 1 Dave Schumacher.
Phase 2: Data Collection Findings and Future Steps.
Enlarging the Options in the Strategy-based Transit Assignment TRB Applications Conference Reno 2011 Isabelle Constantin and Michael Florian INRO.
May 9, th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18 1 IMPROVING CONSISTENCY BETWEEN TRANSIT PATH- BUILDING AND MODE.
Perspectives on Efficiency in Transportation David Levinson.
Complete Streets Training Module 4b – Designing for All Users.
Transportation Survey General Information
Greater Golden Horseshoe Model
Strategic Plan for the New Connecticut Statewide Model
2018/5/14 QUANTIFYING PHYSICAL ACTIVITY USING AN ACTIVITY-BASED TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL My topic today is---READ Question try to address is- READ I want to.
Measuring Walkability
Local Government Roundtable Session Arlington, Virginia
Using Linked Non-Home-Based Trips in Virginia
HCPS Transportation: Choice, Magnet, Attendance Area Schools
Validating Trip Distribution using GPS Data
Oregon Transportation Options Plan: Implementation Process
Analysis of light rail rider travel behavior: Impacts of individual, built environment and crime characteristics on transit access. Paper by S. Kim, G.F.
Karen Tsang Bureau of Transport Statistics Department of Transport
Modelling Sustainable Urban Transport
Assessing the Impacts of Commuter Shuttles in San Francisco
Transportation Management Plan Modernization Project
Chapter 4. Modeling Transportation Demand and Supply
TransCAD Route Systems 2018/11/22.
Improved treatment of special attractors
Chapter 5. The Transportation-Planning Process
Transit Path-Building: “To Multipath or Not to Multipath”
First-Mile/Last-Mile: Sweating the Small Stuff
Norman Washington Garrick CE 2710 Spring 2016 Lecture 07
Drive alone 3826 (49 %) Carpool 526 (7 %) Ride Transit 2277 (29 %)
Public Workshop September 26, 2019.
Presentation transcript:

Stratified Transit Market Segmentation Multiple ways to Walk to Transit…. Multiple Transit Modes to Walk to TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference Dan Tempesta Marty Milkovits May 8, 2013

Presentation Overview Typical Market Segmentation Shortcomings of Typical Market Segmentation Stratified Market Segmentation The decision making for construction must balance out the tradeoffs between maintaining traffic (minimizing congestion, allowing local access, maintaining mobility) and Construction Concerns (safety ,cost and constructability) THe right side of the balance is more easily quantified than the left. This presentation demonstrates how we quantify the left side.

Typical Market Segmentation Available Mode Choice Options DA: Drive Alone, SR: Shared Ride, WB: Walk to Bus, WP: Walk to Premium, DB: Drive to Bus, DP: Drive to Premium, and NM: Non-motorized Modes (Walk and Bike) Options Defined by Access Mode and Transit Mode The decision making for construction must balance out the tradeoffs between maintaining traffic (minimizing congestion, allowing local access, maintaining mobility) and Construction Concerns (safety ,cost and constructability) THe right side of the balance is more easily quantified than the left. This presentation demonstrates how we quantify the left side.

Typical Market Segmentation Mode Accessibility DA: Drive Alone – Accessible to All TAZ SR: Shared Ride – Accessible to All TAZ WB: Walk to Bus – Accessible to TAZ with Transit WP: Walk to Premium – Accessible to TAZ with Transit DB: Drive to Bus – Accessible to All TAZ DP: Drive to Premium – Accessible to All TAZ The decision making for construction must balance out the tradeoffs between maintaining traffic (minimizing congestion, allowing local access, maintaining mobility) and Construction Concerns (safety ,cost and constructability) THe right side of the balance is more easily quantified than the left. This presentation demonstrates how we quantify the left side.

Typical Market Segmentation Availability/Accessibility Accessibility – Zone Based Availability – Zone Pair Based

Shortcomings Consider a TAZ with 2 transit stops 46% of the TAZ is walk accessible 54% of the TAZ is drive to transit accessible

Shortcomings Now add a new rail station TAZ 66% of the TAZ is walk accessible 34% of the TAZ is drive to transit accessible

Why is this a Shortcoming? The model will give 66% of the TAZ walk to transit accessibility This overstates the accessibility of BOTH bus and rail TAZ

Stratified Transit Market Need Mode Specific Transit Buffers Stratified Markets Bus Accessible (Blue) Rail Accessible (Red) Bus & Rail Accessible (overlap), and Auto Only Accessible (No Coverage) TAZ Accessible Mode Percentage of Production TAZ Bus/Auto 33% Rail/Auto 20% Bus/Rail/Auto 13% Auto Only 34%

Implementation The Devil is in the Details

Stratified Transit Market The Paths Matter “Bus” Trips are transit trips that do not use Rail at all during their trip “Rail” Trips use rail at some point during their trip

Stratified Transit Market Walk to Rail Restrictions Bus/Rail indicates that no restriction is necessary and N/A indicates that there would not be a path available for this option by definition

Stratified Transit Market Drive to Rail Restrictions Bus/Rail indicates that no restriction is necessary and N/A indicates that there would not be a path available for this option by definition

Stratified Transit Market Attraction Production Accessible Mode Percentage of Production TAZ Percentage of Attraction TAZ Bus/Auto 33% 22% Rail/Auto 20% 6% Bus/Rail/Auto 13% 11% Auto Only 34% 61%

Stratified Transit Market Attraction Production Market Share Attraction Mode Accessibilities Total Bus/Auto Rail/Auto Bus/Rail/ Auto Auto Only 22% 6% 11% 61% 100% Production Mode Accessibilities 33% 7.3% 2.0% 3.6% 20.1% 20% 4.4% 1.2% 2.2% 12.2% Bus/Rail/Auto 13% 2.9% 0.8% 1.4% 7.9% 34% 7.5% 3.7% 20.7%

Stratified Transit Market

Stratified Transit Market Combine Market Specific Paths with Market Shares

Conclusions Stratifying the Transit Market will remove artificially high walk Accessibilities Implementation Requires Mode Specific Buffers Path Restrictions