Upload
pascale-stevenson
View
30
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Session 709: Integrated Land Use and Transport Models in Practice. Sensitivity Testing with the Oregon Statewide Integrated Model (SWIM2). 88 th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting January 2009, Washington DC Presenters: Brian Gregor/ODOT & Tara Weidner/PB. Outline. Background - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
T Weidner PB | B Knudson, ODOT | JD Hunt HBA Specto | R Picado PB
Sensitivity Testing with the Oregon Statewide Integrated Model (SWIM2)
88th Transportation Research Board Annual MeetingJanuary 2009, Washington DC
Presenters: Brian Gregor/ODOT & Tara Weidner/PB
Session 709: Integrated Land Use and Transport Models in Practice
Outline
Background
Oregon SWIM2 Calibration Prep for Model Application
Results Scenario 1: Increased Highway Capacity Scenario 2+3: Increased Driving Costs (4 and 10-
fold)
Concluding remarks
Acknowledgements Sponsorship:
Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Agency Lead:
ODOT Transportation Planning Analysis Unit (TPAU). Funding:
Federal Highway Administration. Consultant Team:
Parsons Brinckerhoff leadHBA Specto Inc.EcoNorthwest
Special thanks: Alex Bettinardi of ODOT
Why Integrated Models in Oregon?
New state and federal mandates in early 90's required entire system view
ODOT modelers wanted to remain relevant in Oregon regulatory and policy environment
1995 OMIPOregon Modeling
Improvement Program
1996 TLUMIPTransportation Land Use Model Integration Project
The Oregon Path…Application-driven research
SWIM1 Model
SWIM2 Model
• Assembled (2004-2005)• Calibrated (2008)
• WV Forum (2001)• East/Central OR Fwy (2001)• Bridge Options Study (2002)• Newberg Bypass (2004)• OR Transportation Plan (2005)
• TRANUS/Oregon (2000)
• OR Amtrak Ridership (2008/2009)• OR Climate Change (2009)• OR Freight Study (2009/2010)• MPO & Co. Connection (2009/2010)
Economy
Oregon Statewide Integrated Model (SWIM2)
SyntheticPopulation
GoodsTransport
Employmentby Industry
ConstructionTotals
Labor
Flows
Assignment Aggregate/EquilibriumMicro-simulationNext Time Period Feedback
ProductionTotals
Space
Inventory
OD Trip Tables
ProductionInteraction
PersonTransport
LandDevelopment
HH
Labor
ExternalTransport
CommodityFlows
TransportModels
SpatialModels
SWIM2 Calibration
Challenges:
Multi-dimensional targets, inconsistencies, different years, varying confidence levels e.g. Commodity flow data, floor space price data,
floor space quantity data
Unavailable inputs must be synthesized, adds errors e.g. Floor space quantity data
As a result, more emphasis placed on behavioral response than ability to tightly match all targets
Iterative SWIM2 Calibration Process
Stage 1: Estimate module parameters where data exists
Stage 2: Calibrate individual sub-models in isolation
Stage 3: Calibrate full model, baseyear + over timeincluding Sensitivity Tests of likely policy scenarios 20-years, in 3-year increments unrealistically large change, to identify direction of
change “proof-of-concept” scenarios test behavioral
response to likely policy levers
Preparations for Model Application
Prepare ODOT staff to perform policy analysis
Knowledge Transfer Ongoing Agency Staff Training Evaluate Model Variability (micro-simulation)
User Interface Tools Model Runner System GUI (scenarios, start runs) Output Processing tools (automate, compress) File Management tools (model files, output
processing) Computer Cluster
Purchase Hardware Backups/archiving processes
Oregon Activity: 3.7M pop; 1.8M jobs 6 MPOs
SWIM2 Geographic Coverage
2,950 alphazones 519 betazones
SCENARIO 1: INCREASED HWY CAPACITY
Increased Capacity: 2024 Household Change (vs. Reference)
Portland
SalemCorvallis
Bend Eugene
Rogue Valley
Increased Capacity: HouseholdsTota
l H
ou
seh
old
s
EUG
PDX
BEND
RV
Significant Growth at South terminus with improved
Portland connection
Some Growth
mid-valley
Less Growth outside valley
SALCORV
Increased Capacity: 2024 Floorspace Change
2024 Increased Travel Cost Scenario relative to Reference Case
Residential Non-Residential
HHs
Floorspace
Employees
Floorpace
Quantity Price Quantity Price
Portland Metro 1.7% 1.6% -0.9% 1.3% 1.1% 0.2%
Salem/Keizer 0.4% 0.3% -0. 8% 0.3% 0.3% -0.0%
Corvallis 0.8% 0. 7% -0.5% 1.4% 0.3% 0.3%
Eugene/Springfield 5.5% 4.9% -0.7% 3.6% 0.3% -0.0%
Rogue Valley -0.2% -0.3% -0.3% -0.6% -0.2% -0.0%
Bend -0.3% -0.3% -0.4% -0.7% -0.3% -0.0%
NonMPO -0.6% 0.6% -0.2% 0.4% 0.1% 0.1%
Oregon 1.0% 1.3% -0. 5% 1.0% 0.6% 0.1%
Increased Capacity: 2024 Transport Results
Scenario
Mean Distance (miles) Mean Time (minutes)
StatewideWillamette Valley Statewide
Willamette Valley
TRUCK TRIPSReference 108 61 286 192Increased Capacity 110 63 267 179
AUTO TOURSReference 14 13 33 34Increased Capacity 14 13 33 34
AUTO TOURS MODE SPLITDrive Transit Walk/Bike Total
Reference 88% 4% 8% 100%Increased Capacity 88% 4% 8% 100%
Truck Trip lengths increase, but times decline (7%)
Auto Tour lengths, times, and mode do not change
SCENARIO 2+3: INCREASED DRIVING COSTS
Increased Costs (10-fold): More Detail…
Portland
Salem
Corvallis Eugene
Increased Costs: MPO Density Curves
Regional Centers densities gain 20%+ Other areas 0-10% density gains
Persons Per Acre
Pro
port
ion
of
MP
O L
an
d A
rea
Increased Costs (10-fold): EmploymentTota
l Em
plo
ym
en
t
SAL
RV
NON-MPO
EUG
PDX
BEND
Centralization to 3
Regional Centers
Eugene gets Salem
overflow
Portland urban inertia overshadowed by Salem’s
central location
Non MPO areas lose
growth
CORV
Increased Costs (4-fold): 2024 Floorspace Results
2024 Increased Travel Cost Scenario relative to Reference CaseResidential Non-Residential
HHs
FloorpaceEmployees
FloorpaceQuantity Price Quantity PriceTravel Cost Increase (4-fold)
Metro -0.5% 0.2% 35.27% 4.3% 4.96% 0.27%Salem/Keizer 13.9% 15.0% 58.08% 21.9% 1.18% 5.12%Corvallis 9.1% 8.9% 27.91% 3.7% -0.36% 1.06%Eugene/Springfield 0.9% 1.6% 18.58% 6.6% 2.56% 0.09%Rogue Valley 25.1% 23.9% 28.42% 19.3% 2.47% 0.43%Bend 17.4% 16.9% 28.19% 9.5% 2.03% 1.59%NonMPO 2.2% -0.0% 19.67% 2.3% -0.63% 1.8%Oregon 3.0% 2.8% 30.24% 6.0% 2.83% 0.86%
Floorspace created in new regional centers. High prices reflect difficulty in meeting residential
needs. Nonresidential floorspace changes muted.
Increased Costs: 2024 Transport Results
Scenario
Mean Distance (miles) Mean Time (minutes)
StatewideWillamette Valley Statewide
Willamette Valley
TRUCK TRIPSReference 108 61 286 192
High Travel Cost (4-fold) 104 60 259 174High Travel Cost (10-fold) 93 55 281 178
AUTO TOURSReference 14 13 33 34High Travel Cost (4-fold) 10 10 23 26High Travel Cost (10-fold) 8 8 18 19
AUTO TOURS MODE SPLITDrive Transit Walk/Bike Total
Reference 89% 4% 8% 100%High Travel Cost (4-fold) 81% 6% 13% 100%High Travel Cost (10-fold) 66% 10% 24% 100%
Truck Trip lengths and times decline (5-10%)
Auto Tour lengths and times decline (30-40%), more sensitive
Significant person mode shift
2024 Person Trips by Selected Modes
Not all MPO offer Transit
Held current service levels
Concluding Remarks
Success!! ‘Extreme’ scenarios accommodated Good direction & magnitude in all
components (activity, land development, transport)
Understandable geographical patterns Internally consistent, price signals
working Transition to Agency & Policy Application
…well underway
Some challenges remain…
Assumption of fixed economy/halo effects File management Summarizing Outputs/Improving
Visualization Runtimes/convergence Additional Scenario Testing…
Note: Updated TRB paper on ODOT websitehttp://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TPAU/references.shtml#Statewide_Model