David B. Roden, Senior Consulting Manager Analysis of Transportation Projects in Northern Virginia 1 2015 TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Overview Examples of TranSight Applications What Does TranSight Analyze? Model Structure.
Advertisements

Parsons Brinckerhoff Chicago, Illinois GIS Estimation of Transit Access Parameters for Mode Choice Models GIS in Transit Conference October 16-17, 2013.
Feedback Loops Guy Rousseau Atlanta Regional Commission.
Traffic assignment.
Getting on the MOVES: Using Dynameq and the US EPA MOVES Model to Measure the Air Pollution Emissions TRPC – Smart Corridors Project Chris Breiland Fehr.
Transportation leadership you can trust. FDOT Systems Planning White Paper A Recommended Approach to Delineating Traffic Analysis Zones in Florida.
GREATER NEW YORK A GREENER Travel Demand Modeling for analysis of Congestion Mitigation policies October 24, 2007.
The SoCoMMS Model Paul Read Dan Jones. The Presentation Outline of the Study The Modelling Framework Accessibility Model.
Intercity Person, Passenger Car and Truck Travel Patterns Daily Highway Volumes on State Highways and Interstates Ability to Evaluate Major Changes in.
GEOG 111 & 211A Transportation Planning Traffic Assignment.
Session 11: Model Calibration, Validation, and Reasonableness Checks
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.
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.
A National County-Level Long Distance Travel Model Mike Chaney, AICP Tian Huang, PE, AICP, PTOE Binbin Chen, AICP 15 th TRB National Transportation Planning.
TRIP ASSIGNMENT.
1 Using Transit Market Analysis Tools to Evaluate Transit Service Improvements for a Regional Transportation Plan TRB Transportation Applications May 20,
Versatile Applications of EMME/2 and ENIF: Seattle Experience Madhavi Sanakkayala Heather Purdy & Sujay Davuluri Parsons Brinckerhoff, Seattle.
Source: NHI course on Travel Demand Forecasting (152054A) Session 10 Traffic (Trip) Assignment Trip Generation Trip Distribution Transit Estimation & Mode.
BALTIMORE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL MODEL ENHANCEMENTS FOR THE RED LINE PROJECT AMPO TRAVEL MODEL WORK GROUP March 20, 2006.
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.
Orange County Business Council Infrastructure Committee December 14, 2010 Draft Long-Range Transportation Plan Destination 2035.
Lynn Peterson Secretary of Transportation Combining Macro Scopic and Meso Scopic Models in Toll and Traffic Revenue Forecasting SR 167 Corridor Completion.
© 2014 HDR, Inc., all rights reserved. COUNCIL BLUFFS INTERSTATE SYSTEM MODEL Jon Markt Source: FHWA.
Performance Analysis Presentation to the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board (NCR-TPB) November 28, 2012 Adopted: July 18, 2012 Item.
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to TRB Planning Applications Conference presented by Vamsee Modugula Cambridge Systematics, Inc. May.
Analysis of a Multimodal Light Rail Corridor using an Activity-Based Microsimulation Framework S. Ellie Volosin & Ram M. Pendyala, Arizona State University,
April 2010 Scott Smith Volpe Center / RITA / U.S. DOT Transportation Border Working Group Meeting Boston, MA An Integrated Regional Planning / Microsimulation.
1 The Aggregate Rail Ridership Forecasting Model: Overview Dave Schmitt, AICP Southeast Florida Users Group November 14 th 2008.
TRANSIMS Version 5 Application Concepts January 20, 2011 David Roden – AECOM.
Connectivity & Mobility
Regional Traffic Simulation/Assignment Model for Evaluation of Transit Performance and Asset Utilization April 22, 2003 Athanasios Ziliaskopoulos Elaine.
NTERFACING THE MORPC REGIONAL MODEL WITH DYNAMIC TRAFFIC SIMULATION INTERFACING THE MORPC REGIONAL MODEL WITH DYNAMIC TRAFFIC SIMULATION David Roden (AECOM)
“An Iterative Capacity Constrained Parking Methodology for Ridership Forecasts for BART Extension Stations” Mike Aronson May 19, th TRB National.
SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY San Francisco’s Dynamic Traffic Assignment Model Background SFCTA DTA Model Peer Review Panel Meeting July.
DRAFT What If… The Washington Region Grew Differently? Public Forum on Alternative Transportation and Land-Use Scenarios National Capital Region.
Major Transportation Corridor Studies Using an EMME/2 Travel Demand Forecasting Model: The Trans-Lake Washington Study Carlos Espindola, Youssef Dehghani.
Transportation leadership you can trust. TRB Planning Applications Conference May 18, 2009 Houston, TX A Recommended Approach to Delineating Traffic Analysis.
S. Erdogan 1, K. Patnam 2, X. Zhou 3, F.D. Ducca 4, S. Mahapatra 5, Z. Deng 6, J. Liu 7 1, 4, 6 University of Maryland, National Center for Smart Growth.
1 What If… The Washington Region Grew Differently? February 2005 Public Meeting on Alternative Transportation and Land-Use Scenarios National Capital Region.
Incorporating Traffic Operations into Demand Forecasting Model Daniel Ghile, Stephen Gardner 22 nd international EMME Users’ Conference, Portland September.
MATRIX ADJUSTMENT MACRO (DEMADJ.MAC AND DEMADJT.MAC) APPLICATIONS: SEATTLE EXPERIENCE Murli K. Adury Youssef Dehghani Sujay Davuluri Parsons Brinckerhoff.
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to TRB 11 th Conference on Transportation Planning Applications presented by Dan Goldfarb, P.E. Cambridge.
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to 12 th Annual TRB Transportation Planning Application Conference presented by Dan Goldfarb, P.E. Cambridge.
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to Safety Data Analysis Tools Workshop presented by Krista Jeannotte Cambridge Systematics, Inc. March.
SHRP2 C10A Sensitivity Testing of an Integrated Regional Travel Demand and Traffic Microsimulation Model TRB Planning Applications Conference May ,
How Does Your Model Measure Up Presented at TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference by Phil Shapiro Frank Spielberg VHB May, 2007.
Bharath Paladugu TRPC Clyde Scott Independent Consultant
May 2009TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference 1 PATHBUILDER TESTS USING 2007 DALLAS ON-BOARD SURVEY Hua Yang, Arash Mirzaei, Kathleen.
11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference CORRADINO May 9, Validation of Speeds and Volumes in a Large Regional Model Southeast.
Analyzing the Mobility Impacts of TOD Level of Service in Transit Oriented Districts Service for Who?
TPB CLRP Aspirations Scenario 2012 CLRP and Version 2.3 Travel Forecasting Model Update Initial Results Ron Kirby Department of Transportation Planning.
Transportation Performance Measures Ronald D. Utt Presentation to the November 2015 ADC Meeting, Austin, TX.
INCORPORATING INCOME INTO TRAVEL DEMAND MODELING Brent Spence Bridge Case Study October 13, 2015.
An AQ Assessment Tool for Local Land Use Decisio ns 13 th TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference May 9, 2011 Reno, Nevada Mark Filipi, AICP.
The Regional Mobility and Accessibility Study Initial Results of CLRP/CLRP+ Analysis with Round 6.4 Growth Forecasts and Five Alternative Land Use Scenarios.
TRANSIMS Version 5 Demand Files January 20, 2011 David Roden – AECOM.
Company LOGO Georgia Truck Lane Needs Identification Study Talking Freight Seminar March 19, 2008 Matthew Fowler, P.T.P Assistant State Planning Administrator.
Transit Choices BaltimoreLink Ad-hoc Committee Meeting January 12, 2016.
Generated Trips and their Implications for Transport Modelling using EMME/2 Marwan AL-Azzawi Senior Transport Planner PDC Consultants, UK Also at Napier.
1 What If… The Washington Region Grew Differently? The TPB Regional Mobility and Accessibility Study Ronald F. Kirby Director, COG Department of Transportation.
Travel Demand Forecasting: Traffic Assignment CE331 Transportation Engineering.
City of Joliet - Sustainability City of Joliet Sustainability Initiatives American Planning Association National Conference April 16, 2013.
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.
Regional Transportation Plan Draft Hybrid Scenario Transportation Policy Committee 7/22/03.
Macro / Meso / Micro Framework on I-395 HOT Lane Conversion
2017 SCORT Conference Washington, DC
Jim Henricksen, MnDOT Steve Ruegg, WSP
Slugging in the I-395 Corridor
Presentation transcript:

David B. Roden, Senior Consulting Manager Analysis of Transportation Projects in Northern Virginia TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference May 19 th, 2015

2

3 Detailed Rating Overview  MWCOG regional model establishes regional travel demand  Fixed regional population and employment by zone  Fixed regional trips by mode and origin-destination zone  Based on TRANSIMS dynamic assignments for 2020 and 2040  Focused on the primary impact areas of each project  Scored based on the project that performed the best in each performance measure  Rated based on stakeholder performance measure weights  Project costs were not considered in the rating, but used to select projects for funding

 Build minimum-impedance paths for individual travelers using 15 minute link travel times and turn delays  Dynamically assign trips to the network  Update 15 minute link travel times and turning delays  Compare the current link travel times and trip travel times to previous iteration values  If the difference is significant (link gap and trip gap), select travelers to update  Average travel times between iterations and between time periods to dampen oscillation effects  Re-build paths for selected travelers and combine with existing paths for other travelers TRANSIMS Dynamic User Equilibrium 4

Dynamic User Equilibrium Process 5 Trip Time and Location Details Time-dependent Network Build Paths 15 minute Link Flows and Travel Times Link Volume Delay and Intersection Control Delay Link Gap Analysis Travel Path and Travel Time for each Traveler Trip Gap Analysis Converged? 15 minute Link and Turn Performance Travel Plan for each Traveler yes no Select Travelers Average Travel Times

Convergence Refinement Iterations 6 Free Flow Conditions Router (DUE1) Travel Paths or Problems 15 minute Link Travel Times and Turn Delays Trips by Time of Day and Mode Router (DUE2) Travel Paths or Problems 15 minute Link Travel Times and Turn Delays Router (DUE7) …. up to 7 times Progressively Tighter Convergence

Regional DUE Model 7  Vehicle Demand  2020 = 17.4 million  2040 = 20.1 million  Convergence Process

Northern Virginia DUE Model 8  Vehicle Demand  2020 = 6.77 million  2040 = 7.93 million  Convergence Process

Impact Area Definition  Impact areas were used for the detailed ratings to minimize any distortions in the performance measures related to random effects that are unrelated to the project improvement  2020 and 2040 TPB model results were used to estimate the impact area for each project  Change in peak period volume > 250 vehicles or 20% (100+ vehicles)  The area was defined using TAZ boundaries  The impact areas were modified for the detailed analysis to more effectively capture links and alternate routes that could potentially be effected by project-related changes 9

10 Impact Area Applications  The final assignment with and without the project was conducted using any link within or crossing the impact area boundary  All trips to and from the impact area plus all trips traveling through the impact area in the Northern Virginia baseline simulation are included in the project analysis  The project ratings are based on changes in the performance measures for any link within or crossing the impact area boundary

Project Specific Subarea DUE Model 11  Vehicle Demand  2020 = 0.09 to 1.97 million  2040 = 0.12 to 2.25 million  Convergence Process  Typical Gap Ranges

12 Volume Changes

13 Volume and Speed Profiles

Performance Measure Summary  Transit Crowding = reduction in the number of transit route miles experiencing crowded conditions (local bus > 1.0; express bus and commuter rail > 0.9; Metrorail > 100 passengers/car).  Congestion Duration = reduction in the number of hours of the day auto and transit passengers experience heavily congested travel conditions.  Person Hours of Delay = reduction in the number of person hours of travel time above free flow travel time.  Person Hours of Congested Travel in Automobiles = reduction in the number of person hours of travel in automobiles and trucks on heavily congested facilities.  Person Hours of Congested Travel in Transit Vehicles = reduction in the number of person hours of travel in buses and trains on heavily congested facilities or in crowded vehicles.  Accessibility to Jobs = increase in the number of jobs that can be reached from each household based on a 45 minute travel time by automobile and a 60 minute travel time by transit.  Emergency Mobility = increase in the person hours of travel time resulting from a 10 percent increase in peak hour trip making. 14

15 Transit Impact Analysis Process  Regional transit trips loaded to regional transit routes  2020 = 1.3 million transit trips  2040 = 1.5 million transit trips  Transit ridership and vehicles on links in each 15 minute period  Add to auto persons and vehicles by link and 15 minute period with and without the project  Total used to calculate changes in person hours of delay and congested person hours in transit

16 Emergency Mobility Process  10% of the Northern Virginia subarea trips that started between 6:00 PM and 8:00 PM were rescheduled to start between 5:00 PM and 6:00 PM  The specific start time between 5-6 was proportional to the original start time offset between 6-8  The trips were traced to each project impact area boundary and then assigned to the subarea network with and without the project  Changes in PM Peak Period person hours of delay were used as the performance measure

17 Access to Jobs  15 minute link travel times for all regional links were constructed with and without each project  Travel times for links outside of each project impact area came from the Northern Virginia DUE process  Travel times for links outside of Northern Virginia came from the regional DUE process  Minimum impedance paths were built between each Northern Virginia TAZ to all regional TAZs  3 activity locations were selected near each TAZ centroid  Paths were built between each activity location using 3 trip start times (7:30, 8:00, 8:30) and the travel times were averaged  If the travel time <= 45 minutes, the jobs at the destination were multiplied by the households at the origin  The sum was divided by the total households in Northern Virginia  average number of jobs accessible in 45 minutes

Evaluation Performance Measure Weights 18

Evaluation and Rating Process 19 Absolute Change in each Performance Measure (MOE) for each Project Absolute Change in each Performance Measure (MOE) for each Project Assign a Score (0-100) to each MOE Apply Weights to the MOE Scores Sum Weighted MOE Scores = Project Rating Based on 100 points for the project with the greatest benefit in each MOE (with and without the project) Stakeholder Input Travel Demand and Simulation Models

20 Projects Sorted by Ratings

21 Projects Sorted by Congestion Rating / Cost

22 NVTA Project Selection Process  NVTA assigned 35% of their project selection score to congestion reduction  The 2040 Project Ratings were used for highway projects  A qualitative process assigned high, medium or low congestion reduction potential to transit projects  Other measures (high/medium/low)  Consistent with TransAction 2040 goals (25%)  Activity centers, regional connectivity, multi-modal, improve operations, cost sharing  Project readiness (advanced phase of development) (25%)  Urgency (existing LOS deficiencies for all modes) (5%)  Reduce VMT (transit, PNR, HOV, pedestrian/bicycle trails) (5%)  Safety (5%)

23 Sorted NVTA Project Scores