Upload
louisa-norris
View
214
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
15th TRB Transportation Planning Applications ConferenceTuesday, May 19th, 2015 – Atlantic City, NJ
Integrating Travel Demand Models &SHRP2 C11 Tools:
Statewide Assessment of the Broader Economic Benefits from Transportation Investment
Eirini Kastrouni, Elham Shayanfar, Lei Zhang,Paul Schonfeld, Subrat Mahapatra
National Transportation Center @MarylandUniversity of Maryland – College Park
1National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu
Presentation Outline
National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu 2
1. Introduction, Research Motivation & Research Objective
2. Methodology & Tools Overview
3. Case Study
4. Estimation Results
5. Conclusions & Research Contribution
6. Future Research Directions
Introduction
3
How are transportation improvements evaluated?
First-level: direct benefits
travel time savings, vehicle operating cost reductions, safety benefits and emission reductions
Second-level: wider economic benefits positively affect the intensity of economic activities due to agglomeration effects
production cost reduction, increased gross domestic product, and growth of business sectors and income in the affected region
National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu
Research Motivation
4
Develop a comprehensive framework and a prototype tool for estimating the broader economic benefits of transportation improvements for Maryland.
Current State-of-Practice
Lack of satisfactory and transferable tools
Benefit-cost analysis tools often focus on direct benefits only, e.g., time savings, accident reduction
Broader economic benefits (productivity gain, spillover, market accessibility, etc.) are often ignored
National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu
Research Objective
5
The objective of this research is to quantify the wider economic benefits of transportation infrastructure investment. To achieve this:
Integration of the Maryland travel demand model with the SHRP2 C11 tools
Integration demonstration through a case study
Estimation of travel time reliability improvements and changes in market access in performance and monetary terms.
National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu
Maryland Statewide TransportationModel (MSTM)
6
Statewide four-step travel demand model currently used by MSHA
Trip generation, trip distribution, mode choice, and traffic assignment
Allows consistent estimates of future development impacts on transportation performance measures.
MSTM study area: Maryland, Delaware, DC, & parts of Virginia, West Virginia, New Jersey, Pennsylvania
National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu
Maryland Statewide TransportationModel (MSTM)
7National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu
SHRP2 C11: Wider EconomicBenefits of Transportation
8
Buyer-Supplier Market Access Tool: Inputs: population, employment, GRP, generalized travel
costs Output: effective density (measure of accessibility to
employment), productivity
Reliability Tool: Inputs: facility attributes, traffic, capacity, value of travel
time, incidents, reliability Output: incident delay, recurring delay, delay costs, cost of
unreliability, etc.
Accounting Framework Tool: Assigns a dollar value to the previously estimated benefits
National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu
MSTM & SHRP2 C11 7-Level Integration Framework
9National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu
Customizing SHRP2 C11 Tools for MD
10
Maryland-Specific Parameters in lieu of the Default SHRP2 C11 Parameters
Impedance Decay Parameter: behavioral parameter that captures spatial distribution of trips and market proximity based on average trip length in the study area ~ α = 1 (Zhang et al., 2013)
Value of Time VOT: MSTM-specific value of time:23.3 and 106.4 cents per min for personal & commercial travel respectively
Reliability Ratio RR: MSHA’s value of 0.75 for congestion-relief projects
Productivity Elasticity with respect to market access: μ = 0.01 (He et al., 2015)
National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu
11
Wide Range of Projects: Large-Scale Construction Toll Lanes/Managed Lanes
Local ConnectorsTransit Projects
Freight-related Projects
MSTM & SHRP2 C11 Integration
National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu
Case Study: Inter-County Connector
12
Project Information6-lane toll highway 9 entry/exit points
Study Area13 counties
National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu
Market Accessibility
13
Buyer-Supplier Market Access Tool Results
National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu
Travel Time Reliability
14
Travel Time Reliability Improvement Results
National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu
Accounting Framework
15
Value of Total Annual Benefits from ICC Construction
National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu
Estimation Results: Summary
16
Direct Benefits
Broader Economic Benefits
Project Benefit and Cost Summary
Travel Time $311.6M
Fuel $8.3M
Maintenance $4.7M
Market Accessibility $69.8M
Travel Time Reliability $0.2M
Project Cost $2,560M
Direct Benefits $324.6M
Broader Economic Benefits $70M
Broader Economic Benefit as a
Percentage of Direct Benefit
22%
Note: All benefits are annual figures. Cost estimates consider initial construction only.
National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu
17National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu
Other Case Studies
Case Studies
ICC ETL LOCAL
BRT
Total Project Cost $2,560 M $756 M $75 M $519 M
Annual Direct Project Benefits $325 M $63 M $6.3 M $47 M
Annual Broader Economic Benefits
$70 M $5.5 M $1.1 M $23.1 M
Broader Economic Benefits as a Percentage of Direct Benefits
22% 9% 18% 49%
ICC: Inter-County ConnectorETL: Express Toll LanesLOCAL: Local ConnectorBRT: Bus Rapid Transit
Conclusions
18
Summary 7-level integration framework is applicable to capital
investment, operational investment, and demand management projects anywhere in MD
Customized for MD and regional differences considered
Research Contribution Analysis of the economic benefits of new transportation
infrastructure investment by integrating an economic analysis tool with a statewide travel demand model;
SHRP2 C11 tools’ parameter customization for Maryland in a bid to obtain sounder, region-specific results;
Integration demonstration on a much debated case study, the Inter-County Connector (ICC).
National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu
19
Future Research Directions
A Comprehensive Framework
National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu
Acknowledgement
20
This research is jointly funded by the Maryland State Highway Administration (MSHA) and the National Transportation Center at the University of Maryland (NTC@Maryland).
National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu
Thank You!
Questions, Comments, and Suggestions are Welcome. Please Contact:
21National Transportation Center @Maryland || www.ntc.umd.edu || www.tep.umd.edu