Developing Regional Solutions

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
CORPORATE COLLEGE AND REGIONAL COLLABORATION: RE-TOOLING THE WORKFORCE SEMCOG University Tuesday, July 27, Presented by Dr. George Swan III.
Advertisements

Hennepin County Transportation Systems Plan (HC-TSP) Traffic Forecasting Model.
Southeast Michigan Council of Governments Developing Regional Solutions.
Lisa Katz, Workforce Intelligence Network Sarah Sebaly, Workforce Intelligence Network Scott Palmer, Macomb Intermediate School District MI Bright Future.
Virginia’s Growing Mature & Diverse Population: Implications for the Transportation Sector Kevin F Byrnes, AICP
Utilizing Connected Travel Demand and Land Use Models in the Sacramento Region Gordon R. Garry Sacramento Area Council of Governments April 30, 2010.
Presented to presented by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Transportation leadership you can trust. Comparison of Activity-Based Model Parameters Between Two.
Status of the SEMCOG E6 Travel Model SEMCOG TMIP Peer Review Panel Meeting December 12, 2011 presented by Liyang Feng, SEMCOG Thomas Rossi, Cambridge Systematics.
Session 11: Model Calibration, Validation, and Reasonableness Checks
Lec 7. Ch.3P3 Characteristics of urban travel Trip types (purposes) Three approaches for modeling trips Travel behaviors of men and women Trip purpose/temporal,
Trip Generation Modeling—Cross-Classification
Norman W. Garrick CTUP. Norman W. Garrick Transportation Forecasting What is it? Transportation Forecasting is used to estimate the number of travelers.
Trip Generation Modeling
Workforce Intelligence Network 2013 INFORMATION TECH OVERVIEW.
18 May 2015 Kelly J. Clifton, PhD * Patrick A. Singleton * Christopher D. Muhs * Robert J. Schneider, PhD † * Portland State Univ. † Univ. Wisconsin–Milwaukee.
Client Name Here - In Title Master Slide 2007/2008 Household Travel Survey Changes in Daily Travel Patterns 1994 to 2007/2008 Robert E. Griffiths Technical.
2010 Travel Behavior Inventory Mn/DOT TDMCC- Jonathan Ehrlich October 14, 2010.
Trip Generation Review and Recommendations 1 presented to MTF Model Advancement Committee presented by Ken Kaltenbach The Corradino Group November 9, 2009.
Use of Establishment Surveys to Estimate Non Resident Travel in Urban Areas Chris Simek Ed Hard David Pearson Stacey Bricka Stella Nepal Columbus, Ohio.
PresentationA Explore Detroit Region Trip Chaining Behavior Presented by Liyang Feng & Jilan Chen Southeast Michigan Council of Governments The 12 th TRB.
Student versus Non-Student Data: (Census Special Tabulation #137) Selected Summary File 3 Data for Tompkins County, NY.
Detroit Regional Manufacturing Skills Alliance. History In late 2006 the Detroit Regional Chamber was selected as the convener for the advance manufacturing.
Southeast Michigan Council of Governments. SEMCOG 2040 Regional Forecast SEMCOG 2040 Regional Forecast SEMCOG General Assembly March 22, 2012.
Norman W. Garrick Transportation Forecasting What is it? Transportation Forecasting is used to estimate the number of travelers or vehicles that will use.
NHTS Update and Data Analysis Plans presented to Florida Model Task Force presented by Krishnan Viswanathan November 10, 2009.
Transit Service Quality and Transit Use: TBOT, Task 5.
Southeast Michigan Council of Governments. Working Together to Improve Regional Operations through Traffic Incident Management Working Together to Improve.
Joint Development of Land Use and Light Rail Stations The Case of Tel Aviv Regional Science Association International -The Israeli Section Daniel Shefer,
TYBEE ISLAND TOURISM STUDY, OUTLINE 1.Introduction 2.Survey of Tybee Island Visitors 3.Visitor Expenditure Patterns 4.Estimated Annual Visitation.
Comparison of an ABTM and a 4-Step Model as a Tool for Transportation Planning TRB Transportation Planning Application Conference May 8, 2007.
Southeast Michigan Council of Governments. SEMCOG Region St. Clair Macomb Oakland Livingston Washtenaw Wayne Monroe.
Southeast Michigan Council of Governments. Brian D. Mohr, Li-yang Feng, and Tom Bruff Southeast Michigan Council of Governments 11 th TRB Applications.
Weighting Household Surveys By David F. Pearson, Ph.D., P.E. April 2007.
Southeast Michigan Council of Governments. Livingston Washtenaw Monroe Oakland Wayne Macomb St. Clair SEMCOG Region.
Greater Ann Arbor Region Health Leaders Council. 2 CURRENT STATE OF AFFAIRS This data covers Region 9 RPI: Washtenaw, Livingston, Monroe, Lenawee, Jackson,
Brian D. Mohr and Jilan Chen Southeast Michigan Council of Governments 11 th TRB Applications Conference Daytona Beach, FL May 8, 2007 SEMCOG Household.
Regional Concept for Transportation Operations: An action plan to address transportation operations in Southeast Michigan Talking Technology & Transportation.
Travel Demand Forecasting: Trip Generation CE331 Transportation Engineering.
The Southeast Michigan Council of Governments. presentationA Crash Analysis Tools and Training for Local Users J. Thomas Bruff, Engineering Coordinator.
Travel Demand Forecasting: Traffic Assignment CE331 Transportation Engineering.
Tenneco Inc. Vice President & General Manager
Loudoun County Housing Needs Assessment
Use Survey to Improve the DFX Transit Model
Presentation by: Anderson Economic Group, LLC Scott D
Facilitator: Tressa Dorsey High Impact Partners
Robust Estimation Techniques for Trip Generation in Tennessee
Validating Trip Distribution using GPS Data
TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL UPDATE
Transportation Planning Applications Conference Sheldon Harrison
Leta F. Huntsinger, PhD, PE Senior Technical Principal, WSP
Impacts of Proxy Reporting in Household Surveys on Trip Rates
Auto Ownership Model For Southeast Florida Models Southeast Florida FSUTMS Users Group Meeting Ft. Lauderdale, FL May 16, 2008 Corradino.
Presented to 2017 TRB Planning Applications Conference
Yijing Lu (Baltimore Metropolitan Council)
Quality Reviews for Damage Prevention
Steps Closer to ABM: Example from Jerusalem
Travel Demand Forecasting: Mode Choice
Identifying Worker Characteristics Using LEHD and GIS
Tract > 75% White Tract > 75% Black Tract > 25% Hispanic
9th Wealthiest County in the United States
مدل های ایجاد سفر TRIP GENERATION MODELS
Tourism’s Impacts on MA
Trip Distribution Review and Recommendations
Activity-Travel Trends
Norman Washington Garrick CE 2710 Spring 2016 Lecture 07
Region 1B RPI Council 2018 Regional Prosperity Dashboard.
Texas A&M Transportation Institute Safe-D Project AVID Slides
Model Work Trips Appropriately Based on Travel Behavior and Change Pattern Differences 2016HTS Characteristics and Changes vs. 2006HTS 16th TRB National.
MSP Regional Travel Behavior Inventory Program
Robust, Diversified, High-Growth Region
Presentation transcript:

Developing Regional Solutions Southeast Michigan Council of Governments

Jilan Chen & Liyang Feng Transportation Modeling Program Detroit region travel changes: 2005-2015 A Comparison of two household surveys Jilan Chen & Liyang Feng Transportation Modeling Program

SEMCOG Area Seven counties 4,600 square miles 23,000 miles of major roadway 12,600 households surveyed in 2015 6,400 households surveyed in 2005

Regional Socio-economic Changes SE Changes 2005 2015 Difference % Diff # of HHs 1,926,099 1,819,119 (106,980) -6% # of People 4,891,131 4,372,705 (518,426) -11% # of Workers 2,297,584 2,184,666 (112,918) -5% Licensed Drivers 3,367,487 3,098,054 (269,433) -8% # of Autos 3,519,487 3,252,589 (266,898)

Regional Travel Changes: 2005 - 2015 HH Travels 2005 2015 % Diff HH Size 2.54 2.40 -5% Trips / HH 9.60 9.06 -6% Workers / HH 1.19 1.20 1% HBSH Trips / HH 0.91 0.80 -12%   Trips/Person 3.78 3.77 0% HBW Trips Per Worker 1.22 1.21 -1% HBSH Trips / Person 0.36 0.33 -7% Autos Per Driver 1.05

Household Trip Rates by Purpose

Person Trip Rates by Purpose

Trips per Person by County 2005 2015 % Diff 1 - Detroit 3.28 3.52 7.3% 2 - Out Wayne 3.85 3.73 -3.2% 3 - Oakland 3.97 3.86 -2.7% 4 - Macomb 3.78 0.1% 5 - Washtenaw 4.12 3.96 -3.9% 6 - Monroe 3.77 3.75 -0.4% 7 - St. Clair 3.79 1.8% 8 - Livingston 3.69 -1.6% SEM Region -0.3% STD 0.24 0.13 -44.6%

Telecommuting Changes

Home-Based-Shopping Trips

Employment Changes in Selected Sectors

Senior Household Travels: 65+ Years Old Travel Characteristics 2005HHS 2015HHS % Difference Avg. HH Size 1.39 1.54 10% FT Workers Per HH 0.06 0.20 236% PT Workers Per HH 0.10 0.01 -92% Vehicles Per HH 1.21 1.60 33%   Total Trips Per HH 4.64 6.45 39% HBW Trips Per HH 0.24 21% HBSH Trips Per HH 0.85 0.98 15% Trips/Person 3.34 4.20 26% HBW Trips/Person 0.14 0.15 9% HBW Trips/Worker 1.12 -8% HBSH Trips/Person 0.61 0.64 5%

Travels for HHs with 2 Adults and 2 Children Travel Characteristics 2005HHS 2015HHS % Difference Avg. HH Size 4.00 0% FT Workers Per HH 1.28 1.52 18% PT Workers Per HH 0.32 0.13 -60% Vehicles Per HH 2.28 2.33 2%   Total Trips Per HH 16.18 15.04 -7% HBW Trips Per HH 1.91 1.90 -1% HBSH Trips Per HH 1.01 0.78 -23% Trips/Person 4.04 3.76 HBW Trips/Person 0.48 HBW Trips/Worker 1.19 1.15 -3% HBSH Trips/Person 0.25 0.19

Modeling Implication Consider age factors Explore more trip rate variation in different areas & trip generation stratifications. Tour analysis to consider NHB impact Link retail employment forecast with HBSH trips Possible to consider both 2005 & 2015 surveys in future model development

Contact: Jilan Chen: chen@semcog.org Liyang Feng: feng@semcog.org