PRESENTED TO: CTP 2040 POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE PRESENTED BY: RON WEST, CAMBRIDGE SYSTEMATICS CTP 2040 Scenario Strategies and Analysis Framework November 18, 2014

Overview Analysis framework VMT reductions of each strategy Equity analysis of road user charge (RUC)  And RUC combined with transit improvements

CSTDM VERSUS OFF-MODEL SPECIFIC POLICY OR ASPIRATIONAL OBJECTIVE Analysis Framework

Analysis Method: Policy or Goal? Specific PolicyAspirational Objective CSTDM  Road User Charge  Transit Improvements  Carpool Occupancy to 3+  HOV/HOT lanes Off-Model  Expanded BRT  Expanded Ped /Bike Infrastructure  Incident Management  Caltrans TMS Master Plan  ITS Elements  Increased Telecommuting  Increased Carpooling  Increased Car Sharing  Eco Driving  Expanded Ped /Bike Mode Shares

Analysis Framework Analyze all strategies using one common metric  Reduction in vehicle miles travel  Year 2040 average weekday daily condition Clear documentation  Key input assumptions  Outcomes presented as apples-apples

Off Model Data Sources MPO Sustainable Community Strategies ARB policy papers CAPCOA Moving Cooler TCRP 118 (Bus rapid transit) Data Sources converted to changes in VMT

VMT REDUCTIONS FOR INDIVIDUAL STRATEGIES DRAFT ALT 2: COMBINED VMT REDUCTIONS CTP Strategies: Forecasts

Draft Alternative 2 VMT Changes StrategyVMT Change Category Modeled Strategy Road User Charge (RUC)-17.0% Pricing Transit Service Improvements-6.0% Mode Shift Carpool Lane Requirements*-0.8% Mode Shift HOV/HOT Lanestbd Mode Shift Off Model Strategies Telecommute/Work at Home-0.4% Transportation Alternatives Carpoolers-2.9% Transportation Alternatives Car Sharing-1.1% Transportation Alternatives Bus Rapid Transit-0.1% Mode Shift Expand Bike-0.4% Mode Shift Expand Pedestrian-0.4% Mode Shift Incident Management-1.0% Operational Efficiency Caltrans' (TMS) Master Plan-1.2% Operational Efficiency ITS/TSM-0.6% Operational Efficiency Eco-driving-0.2% Operational Efficiency Sub-Total Modeled (CSTDM) -23.8% Sub-Total Off-Model -8.4% Total -32.2%

Road User Charge - Equity Analysis Increased 2040 auto operating costs by 73% Request at last PAC meeting: Examine impact on low income households  Also analyzed: RUC combined with transit improvements Three Income Groups  $0 - $25K, $25 - $100K, > $100K ($2010)  Low Income = 14% of travelers (short distance)  Medium Income = 53% of travelers  High Income = 31% of travelers

2040 Mode Shares by Income Groups Drive Alone HOV 2HOV3+Transit Bike/ Walk Low Income Alt 125%28%19%10%19% RUC23%27%18%11%21% RUC + Transit17%26%17% 23% Med Income Alt 134%30%22%5%9% RUC33%30%22%5%10% RUC + Transit28%30%21%10%11% High Income Alt 144%28%20%3%5% RUC43%28%20%3%6% RUC + Transit38%29%20%7%6% All Alt 136%29%21%5%9% RUC34%29%21%6%10% RUC + Transit29% 20%10%11%

Mode Changes – Compared to Alt 1 Drive Alone HOV 2HOV3+Transit Bike/ Walk Low Income RUC -8%-3%-4%11%9% RUC + Transit -32%-11% 65%13% Med Income RUC -4%0%-1%11% RUC + Transit -20%-2%-3%102%19% High Income RUC -2%1%0%10%12% RUC + Transit -14%1%0%155%23% Total RUC -4%0%-1%11% RUC + Transit -19%-2%-3%100%18%

Equity Analysis Preliminary Conclusions Low income travelers more affected by RUC than other income groups  RUC = stick (auto modes less attractive)  Transit improvements = carrot RUC by itself has a bigger impact on VMT  Transit improvements have a greater impact on mode choice  Higher transit share changes for middle and high income groups More analysis will be conducted  Examine how changes affect individual household travel behaviors  Change in cost of travel

VMT x CTP Alternative (Daily VMT x 1000) Draft forecasts

CATEGORIES: Pricing Mode shift Transportation alternatives Operational efficiencies Strategies

Pricing – Road User Charge CSTDM RUC Strategy  Year % increase  17% VMT decrease (16 cent/mile increase in auto operating costs)  Other Tests included  Year % increase (22 cents/miles): 23% VMT decrease  Year % increase (8 cents/mile): 11% VMT decrease  Year % increase (2 cents/mile): 3% VMT decrease 

Mode Shift - Transit Analyze high-end 2040 transit alternative  Double bus and train service  Double operating speeds  Reduced or free fares  Convert 20% of local bus routes to BRT  Timed transfers  Reduced fares on high-speed rail Resulted in 6.0% reduction in VMT  BRT expansion: 0.07% VMT reduction

Mode Shift – Bicycle & Pedestrian Lower end  Calculate VMT reductions based on value of investments Higher end  Assume mode shares are doubled for bike and walk  Also assumed that 50% of trips come from auto modes  Average trip lengths: Bike 3.03 miles; Walk 0.55 miles*  0.41% VMT reduction for bike; 0.43% for walk * Source: 2012/2013 CHTS

Mode Shift - Carpools Raise statewide HOV occupancy to 3+  0.8% reduction in VMT Add HOV lanes  Gap closures  Interregional connectors  Will be tested during final analysis of Alt 2

Transportation Alternatives Carsharing  MTC: -1.3% VMT given +5% in carsharing adoption rates  Applied only to short distance personal travel  Converts to 1.1% reduction in total VMT  SACOG: Lower rate of VMT reduction: -0.12% Telecommuting  SACOG: VMT reduction between 0.13% & 0.39% Carpooling  MTC: -2.9% VMT given +5% in carpooling  Applied to short and long distance personal travel.

Operational Efficiencies ITS/TSM  SACOG: 0.19% to 0.62% reduction in VMT Caltrans TMS Master Plan  ARB: 1.2% reduction in VMT ITS/TSM  SACOG: Range of VMT reductions from 0.09% to 0.62% Eco Driving  ARB: 0.23% reduction in VMT  Assumes 10% adoption rate for short distance personal travel.

UPDATE ON CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE TRAVEL ANALYSIS MODEL CSTDM

CSTDM Update CSTDM Update is now complete  2010 base year (plus Year 2010 backcast)  Year 2015, 2020, 2035, 2040 and 2050 horizon years

CSTDM System Models Travel Modes Short Distance Personal Long Distance Personal Short Distance Truck Long Distance Truck External Travel Auto Single Occupant √√√ Auto 2 persons √√√ Auto 3+ persons √√√ Transit (bus & urban rail) √ Bicycle √ Walk √ Air √ Intercity Rail √ Trucks (3 classes) √√√

CSTDM Zones and Network (Current Model) 92,000+ nodes 250,000+ links Multi-modal 5454 internal zones 53 external zones

Contributions to Statewide Travel PersonalTruck ExternalTotal Short DistLong DistShort DistLong Dist Total Person Trips93%0.20%7%0.06%0.34%100% Total Vehicle Trips88%0.15%12%0.11%0.30%100% Total VMT (Auto/Truck ) 79%10%3%2%6%100%