Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Transportation Modeling Forum
January 24, 2018
2
Organization Structure
3
Transportation Analysis and Modeling (TAM)Applications Team
Service Bureau Modeling Applications
4
Transportation Analysis and Modeling (TAM)Development Team
VACANT
5
Forum Agenda
• Current Projects
• Service Bureau and the ABM, A Retrospective
• Project Updates
• Regional Plan Modeling
6
Current Projects
Wu Sun [email protected]
Ziying Ouyang [email protected]
Rick Curry [email protected]
7
• Timeline: 8/2017 - 4/2018
• ABM2-a bundle of models
− Core San Diego residents model
− Active transportation model
− Special market models
• Crossborder model
• Visitor model
• San Diego air passenger model
• External trip models
• Heavy truck model
• Commercial travel model (CTM)
• Border Xpress air passenger model
ABM2
8
• Differences between ABM1 and ABM2
− Travel behaviors from 2015 transit onboard survey, and 2016-2017 HH travel behavior survey
− Travel time reliability
− Escort model for drop-off / pick-up kids to and from school
− Tour-based CTM
− Cross Border Xpress (CBX) air passenger model
− Updated heavy truck model
− Improved transit path finding procedure
− Migration from TransCAD to EMME
ABM2
9
• Model base year: 2016
• Key tasks:
− Data preparation and processing
− Software update
− Three rounds of calibration and validation
− Sensitivity tests
− Database and performance measure updates
− Final report
• Status
− Second round of calibration and validation
ABM2
10
• Timeline: 1/2017 - 1/2018
• EMME is a transportation modeling software
• Goal
− Convert model components and have comparable results
• Major tasks
− Import networks into EMME
− Create EMME traffic and transit assignment specifications and validate skimming and assignment results
− Convert TransCAD GISDK scripts to Python scripts
− Create GUI of Master Run Tool
− Test and validate base year 2012
− Training and documentation
EMME Conversion
11
EMME Conversion
12
Project Structure
− New emme_project folder with Emme data
EMME Conversion
13
Status
− Conversion is 90% complete
− Remaining tasks:
• Data exporting and database loading
• Technical report
• Testing, testing and testing
EMME Conversion
14
• Timeline: 5/2017 - 6/2018
• T&R Model
− Non-Investment Grade Model - Level II (ish)
− Model Will be Used for Both Countries
• Model Outcomes
− Size / Configuration of Otay Mesa East POE and Mesa de Otay II
− Economic Analysis
• POE 30/40-year revenue
• Economic productivity loss due to border delays
State Route 11 – Otay Mesa East (OME) Traffic and Revenue (T&R) Model
15
State Route 11 OME T&R Model
0
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
30,000,000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Annual Northbound Personal Vehicle Crossings
San Ysidro Otay Mesa Total
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Annual Northbound Otay Mesa Truck Crossings
16
State Route 11 OME T&R Model
Incremental Construction to Maximize Resources/OpportunitiesIntegrated Border System (Roads + POE = One System)Innovations Strategy = Optimize Operations + Maximize Capacity
17
State Route 11 OME T&R Model
• High Level - Model Work Flow
18
Service Bureau & the ABM, A Retrospective
Mike Calandra [email protected]
Wu Sun [email protected]
19
• Project recap
• Administrative Process
• Procedures
− Conversion of land use into ABM inputs
− Shadow Pricing & Density Variables
− Networks
• Custom Model Output
• Quality Control
• Cost Analysis
Service Bureau & the ABM, A Retrospective
20
• Public agencies customizing Series 13
− Port of San Diego
− San Diego Regional Airport Authority
− City of San Diego Community Plan Updates
− City of Escondido Centre City Pkwy
− City of San Marcos University District
− City of Lemon Grove Downtown Specific Plan Area
− Skyway Analysis
Service Bureau Project Recap
21
• Private Developments customizing Series 13
− Otay Ranch Villages & Otay Ranch Homefed
− Hanson Cantera / Stonecreek
− Ocean Breeze
− Otay Mesa Quarry
− Warner Ranch
− Del Mar Resort
− Safari Highlands
− Qualcomm Stadium Redevelopment
Service Bureau Project Recap
22
• Receive a scope of work for modeling services
• Prepare cost and time estimate
• Log the request into JIRA system
• Executive Team vets each request
• Perform the work, QA / QC, and deliver custom output
• Respond to questions
• Prepare and deliver invoice
• Close out job in JIRA
Administrative Process
23
• Receive a scope of work for modeling services
− Formal contract required for work in excess of $10,000
− Previously accepted email as an agreement for work under $10,000
• New two-page “mini-contract”
− New formal agreement for work under $10,000
− Form to be filled out and sent in as the request
Administrative Process
24
• Conversion of Dwelling Units to Population
• Conversion of non-residential to Employment
• Employees− Most direct input / does not require conversion
• Square Feet− Requires use of a density table that includes regional averages of
“square feet per employee” by land use
• Acres− Applicable for parks, open space and some institutional uses
− Requires use of an employee-per-acre factor
• Allocation of employment by land use code
ABM Procedures
25
• Shadow Pricing
− A procedure to match chosen work and school locations to zonal employment/enrollment inputs
− Substantially changing employment in any given area requires the synthetic population to reevaluate work location choice
ABM Procedures
26
• Density Variables (the 4D’s)
− Density (population & employment)
− Diversity (mix of land uses)
− Design (walkability & intersection density)
− Destination (accessibility to where we want to go)
− Substantially changing either population or employment densities in any given area requires an update to the 4D variables for improved model accuracy
• Challenging when starting with a Green Field
ABM Procedures
27
• Networks
− Different travel model network sources can lead to inconsistencies and model bombs
• TCOV – The Master transportation layer maintained by SANDAG staff for 25+ years− Extract a “hwycov” with freeways and arterials
− Extract a “trcov” with transit routes and stops
• SanGIS All-Streets network− Extract an “active transportation” network with all roads and paths,
and with bicycle network attributes
− MGRA & TAZ centroid connectors
− Transit Access Point (TAP) connectors
ABM Procedures
28
• Average Daily Traffic (by link)
− Output disseminated via the Traffic Forecast Information Center (tfic.sandag.org)
• Activity Reports (by MGRA)
• Region-wide performance measures
− Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT)
− Mode Shares• Daily / All trips
• Peak Period / HOME-WORK trips
Standard Model Output
29
• Average Daily Traffic (by link)
• Trip Distribution
− Select Zone / Select Link
• Activity Reports (by MGRA)
• Project-site performance measures
− Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT)• per capita & per employee
− Transit Route Performance
− Internal Capture
− Mode Choice
Custom Model Output
30
• Some of the model output is not applicable when considering project size, density and footprints
− Project characteristics matter• The ABM is a simulation model and will produce slightly different results
each time it is run with the exact same inputs
• Sensitivity testing used to define relevant projects to model
− The old CMP guidelines of 2400 ADT is a good starting point
− Geography matters• Mode Choice reports and VMT per capita & per employee figures
become statistically insignificant and less reliable when extracted at geographies below the City / Community Plan area level
Custom Model Output Considerations
31
• Model Inputs
− Staff performs QA/QC on land use and network inputs prior to implementation
− Staff and client review inputs prior to model run
• Model Run
− Staff monitors model run times and server status
• Model Output
− Staff customizes model output based on scope of work
− Peer Review Panel (PRP) to QA/QC output
Quality Control
32
• An evaluation of work by people of similar subject-matter experts
• Performed by SANDAG Principal and Senior leadership
• A process designed to
− Reduce human error
− Improve quality
− Uphold standards
− Provide certification
− Ensure travel demand model accuracy
Peer Review
33
Peer Review Panel (PRP)
34
• The Activity Based Model requires more:
− Staff Time
− Computer Time
− New Procedure Time
− Quality Control Time
• Setting realistic time expectations
− Executive Team vetting
− One custom scenario produced every two weeks is reasonable
− The good news: staff has caught up with the backlog
Cost Analysis
35
• The cost of each ABM scenario is tiered based on the four main model components that can be changed
− Highway / Arterial network
− Transit network
− Active Transportation network
− Land Use updates
− Any combination of those four components
Cost Analysis
36
• Administration processes
• Workspace and scenario creation
• Network and/or land use input customization
• Core model run
• Scenario QA/QC and custom output extraction
• Peer Review
• Follow up questions
• Project closeout and invoicing
ABM Tasks
37
• Cost assessment is on-going
• New price list to be sent to clients
• Scenario Tiers based
− Highway, Transit, Active networks, and Land Use (4)
− Highway, Transit, and Active networks (3)
− Highway, Transit networks, and Land Use (3)
− Transit, Active networks, and Land Use (3)
− Highway and Transit networks (2)
− Highway and Land Use (2)
− Etc…
Price List Update
38
• Select Zone / Link
• Turn Reports
• Travel Time Contours
• Mode Choice
• VMT Disaggregation (the published ITE method)
• VMT per Capita & per Employee
• Volume discount (when 5+ custom scenarios are scoped)
Customized Model Output
40
• Why
− To understand the demographic characteristics and travel behavior of residents in the Region
− To support SANDAG ABM development
• How Often
− Every ten years
• When
− Survey time is from Sept. 2016 to Oct. 2016, and Jan 2017 to March 2017
• What is new
− Use of smartphone app to keep track of multi-day travel
− Active transportation surveys and military on-base surveys
Update: 2016 Travel Behavior Survey
41
Comparison to Prior Study
2006 2016 2016 (Weekday only)
Households 3,536 6,199 6,139
Persons 8,516 12,237 12,089
Trips 34,179 282,092 208,943
GPS Points n/a >6 million >4 million
42
• Address-based sample
• Two Options
− Smartphone app: rMove
− Online reporting
− Call Center
Survey Design
43
Complete Households by Participation Group
Count Percent Weighted Percent
rMove 3,912 63% 659,736 59%
Online Diary 2,077 34% 391,120 35%
Split 210 3% 62,767 6%
Total 6,199 100% 1,113,624 100%
44
Weekday Survey Person Days by Participation Group
Unweighted Percent Weighted Percent
rMove-complete HH day 28,605 74% 6,120,411 67%
rMove-incomplete HH day
6,163 16% 1,942,599 21%
Online diary 4,080 10% 1,079,878 12%
Total 38,848 100% 9,142,888 100%
45
Sampling FrameGroup Type Oversample Rate
Alternative Transportation
Bicycle Commuters
4.0xWalk Commuters
Transit Commuters
Zero Vehicle Households
Hispanic, Spanish, and Low
Income
Hispanic Ethnicity Households
2.5xSpanish Speaking Households
Low Income Households
Other
Active Duty Military
2.0xCollege Student
Young, Non-Family Household
No OversampleDowntown San Diego
1.0xGeneral Population
46
Trip Destinations
47
Travel Behavior
Mode Percent of Unlinked Trips
Driving 86%
Walking 9%
Transit 3%
Biking 1%
Ride Hailing <1%
48
Ride Hailing
• Purpose
− Going home 34%
− Work or work-related 27%
− Social / recreational purpose 11%
• Characteristics
− More towards the end of the week
− Usually single traveler 55%
49
Trip Destinations Using a Ride Hailing Service
50
Survey Report Available
http://www.sandag.org/index.asp?classid=13&projectid=540&fuseaction=projects.detail
51
• Timeline: 8/2013 - 10/2017
• 24-hr Regional Mesoscopic Simulation Model
− Current base year – 2013
− Use:
• ITS/TSM/ATDM project testing
• Microsimulation project base
• Next Steps
− Open up for community use
− Update base data (signal timings/NEMA, networks)
Update: Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA)
52
DTA: Transportation System Management
• Variable Speed Limit
− Example: Freeway corridor
• Dynamic Lane Use
− Example: Bus on shoulders
• Signal Coordination
− Example: Arterial corridor
53
DTA: Variable Speed Limit
54
DTA: Variable Speed Limit
55
DTA: Variable Speed Limit
Base Case With VSL
Average Speed 38.6 mph 37.0 mph
Base Case With VSL
Average Speed Drop 7.2 mph 6.5 mph
Speed Drop > 10mph 103 cases 78 cases
2019 Regional Plan
Vision and Goals
2019 Regional Plan
2019 Regional Plan Development Process
2050RegionalGrowthForecast
Vision, Goals, and
Policy Objectives Select
Preferred Transportation
Scenario
Draft/Final2019
RP/SCS, Air Quality
Conformity,and EIR
Network Development(All Modes)
EvaluateTechnologies
DefineUnconstrained
Network
Revenue and Cost
Projections
Update Transit
Strategy
Apply Performance
Measures
Draft/Final RHNA
Fall 2017 / Early 2018 Summer 2018 Spring / Fall 2019Spring 2018
Ongoing Public Involvement
Revenue Constrained
Scenarios
Evaluate Revenue
Constrained Scenarios
2019 Regional Plan
• Transit
• Highway
• Bike
RP: Network Development & Scenarios
2019 Regional Plan
RP: Network Selection Based on Performance Measures
Network
#1
Network
#2
Network
#3
Performance measures
Board selects preferred revenue
constrained Scenario
2019 Regional Plan
RP: Performance Measures
2019 Regional Plan
1. Is delay reduced?
2. Are more people walking, biking, using transit, and sharing
rides?
3. Is the transportation system safer?
4. Do the transportation investments help to improve the regional
economy?
5. Does the transportation network support smart growth?
6. How does the transportation network support public health?
7. Is access to jobs and key destinations improving for all
communities?
8. Are greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduced?
RP: Proposed Performance Measures
2019 Regional Plan
RP: Other Performance Metrics
2019 Regional Plan
RP: ABM - High Level Flow Chart
ABM Core Model
Land Use ModelTransportation
NetworkTransportation
policy
Traffic/Transit Assignment
Traffic impactsEnvironmental
impactsEconomic/financial
analysis
Commercial Travel ModelSpecial Market Models
2019 Regional Plan
RP: ABM2 Model Suite
ABM Core Model
Land Use ModelTransportation
NetworkTransportation
policy
Traffic/Transit Assignment
Traffic impactsEnvironmental
impactsEconomic/financial
analysis
Commercial Travel ModelSpecial Market Models
2019 Regional Plan
RP: ABM2 Model Suite Inputs
ABM Core Model
Land Use ModelApril 2018
TransportationNetwork
Transportationpolicy
Traffic/Transit Assignment
Traffic impactsEnvironmental
impactsEconomic/financial
analysis
Commercial Travel ModelSpecial Market Models
2019 Regional Plan
RP: When Can You Use the SR14 ABM?
2050RegionalGrowthForecast
Vision, Goals, and
Policy Objectives Select
Preferred Transportation
Scenario
Draft/Final2019
RP/SCS, Air Quality
Conformity,and EIR
Network Development(All Modes)
EvaluateTechnologies
DefineUnconstrained
Network
Revenue and Cost
Projections
Update Transit
Strategy
Apply Performance
Measures
Draft/Final RHNA
Fall 2017 / Early 2018 Summer 2018 Spring / Fall 2019Spring 2018
Ongoing Public Involvement
Revenue Constrained
Scenarios
Evaluate Revenue
Constrained Scenarios
68
Open Discussion
69
Forum Agenda Recap
• Current Projects
• Service Bureau and the ABM, A Retrospective
• Project Updates
• Regional Plan Modeling
Next Transportation
Modeling Forum:
June 13, 2018
Transportation Modeling Forum
January 24, 2018
