1 / 23

Comparison of an ABTM and a 4-Step Model as a Tool for Transportation Planning

Comparison of an ABTM and a 4-Step Model as a Tool for Transportation Planning. TRB Transportation Planning Application Conference May 8, 2007. Acknowledgments. ABTM Model (Daysim) Designers, Architects John Bowman, Ph.D Mark Bradley Application and Shell Program Developers

humphreym
Download Presentation

Comparison of an ABTM and a 4-Step Model as a Tool for Transportation Planning

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Comparison of an ABTM and a 4-Step Model as a Tool for Transportation Planning TRB Transportation Planning Application Conference May 8, 2007

  2. Acknowledgments • ABTM Model (Daysim) Designers, Architects • John Bowman, Ph.D • Mark Bradley • Application and Shell Program Developers • John Gibb, DKS Associates • Parcel Data Production Process • Steve Hossack, SACOG

  3. Overview • Background on Models • Validation • Performance Measures

  4. Sacramento Facts • 2.1 million people • Nearly 1 million jobs • State capitol • Unique geography: • To West: SF Bay Delta (San Francisco=90 miles) • To East: Sierra Nevada Mountains • To North, South: Sacramento, San Joaquin Valleys • Rivers!

  5. Sacramento Facts (cont’d) • Growing • 20,000 dwellings / year since Yr. 2000 • 50,000 people / year since Yr. 2000 • Since 1997: 3 new cities formed, more on the way… • SACOG • MPO for part or all of 6 counties + cities within • Board=31 elected officials from 28 jurisdictions • Current work transit share • 3% for region • 20% for jobs in CBD • +/- 1% for jobs elsewhere

  6. SACOG Models: SACMET • SACMET = Traditional 4-step model • HH’s cross classified (P x W x I) • 4 home-based purposes • 2 non-home-based (but still household-generated) purposes • 7 modes incl. bike, walk • Commercial vehicle “purpose” • Mode/destination choice for HBW • Gravity distribution for else • Fixed time-of-travel factors • Conventional assignments • Runs = 6 hours on good PC

  7. SACOG Models: SACSIM • SACSIM = ABTM • Synthetic population (controls = P x W x I, Age, …) • 7 activity types (work, school, escort, shop, pers.bus., meal, soc/rec.) • 7 modes incl. bike, walk • Long term choice (auto ownership, work location) • Day pattern (#’s, types of tours, 0/1 stops per tour, etc) • “Short term” choice models (i/m stops and locations, tour/trip mode, times of travel, etc.)

  8. SACOG Models: SACSIM (cont’d) • Population, employment and some transport variables input at “parcel/point” level of detail (650k non-empty parcels) • Proximity measures = combination TAZ-to-TAZ skims + parcel-to-parcel orthogonal distances • Shorter trips more parcel-to-parcel, longer trips more TAZ-to-TAZ

  9. SACOG Models: SACSIM (cont’d) • Major SACSIM operational components • DAYSIM = stand-alone ABTM program, handles household-generated, I-I travel only • TP+ application handles rest: • I-X, X-I, X-X • Commercial vehicles • Airport passenger • Skims going into DAYSIM • Reads DAYSIM outputs, creates assignable (TAZ-to-TAZ) trip tables • Iteration / conversion looping and sampling • Runs = 12 – 20 hours on good PC

  10. Validation

  11. Census Worker FlowsSACMET

  12. Census Worker FlowsSACSIM

  13. Validation (cont’d) • Key differences • Lots more to calibrate/validate w/ SACSIM • Population characteristics • Travel behavior by person type • Time of travel • Observed data feels even more inadequate than before • More “natural” solutions to odd/errant outputs

  14. Performance Measures • Household-Generated VMT • The number of vehicle miles a household requires to perform their daily activities • Developed during Blueprint planning process • Decreases in HH VMT for: • Mixed use (shortening trips) • Density (more non-motorized) • Mode shift

  15. HH VMT for “Sample” Family…

  16. Trip Shortening…

  17. Mode Shift…

  18. Perf. Measures (cont’d)

  19. Given Similarity in Result, Why Bother? • Parcel input data eliminates some TAZ aggregation “bias” • ABTM + synthetic population accounts for demographics more directly • Potential for tying travel more directly to: • Land use • Demographics • EJ analysis

  20. VMT / HHby Density w/in ¼ Mi. of HH

  21. VMT / HHby Density w/in ¼ Mi. of HH

  22. VMT / HHby Density w/in ¼ Mi. of HH

  23. VMT / HHby Density w/in ¼ Mi. of HH

More Related