Utilizing connected travel demand and land use models in the sacramento region
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 35

Utilizing Connected Travel Demand and Land Use Models in the Sacramento Region PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 62 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Utilizing Connected Travel Demand and Land Use Models in the Sacramento Region. Gordon R. Garry Sacramento Area Council of Governments April 30, 2010. Why improve SACOG models?. Models are tools to apply research in the most effective and comprehensive manner to address policy issues

Download Presentation

Utilizing Connected Travel Demand and Land Use Models in the Sacramento Region

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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Utilizing Connected Travel Demand and Land Use Models in the Sacramento Region

Gordon R. Garry

Sacramento Area Council of Governments

April 30, 2010


Why improve SACOG models?

  • Models are tools to apply research in the most effective and comprehensive manner to address policy issues

  • Research points to interrelated causes and consequences

  • Policy issues are often, and more frequently, interrelated


MEPLAN - LandEconomics to PECAS model

I-PLACE3S - Land Use/Transportation Impacts

SACSIM activity-based travel model

Develop Better Information and Tools for Decision Making


PECAS and I-PLACE3S

  • Differences

    • Economic forecast vs. vision development

    • Path dependent vs. horizon year

  • Common elements

    • Parcel data

    • Development policy tools

    • Development costs and rents

  • Partial overlap

    • Employment types, residential definitions


Conclusions on land use models

  • Policy drives data and models

  • Incremental improvement = continuity

  • Model development is “pushed” by research advancements and “pulled” by policy needs

  • Integrated cross-discipline planning and decision-making can be improved with good analysis


Overview of Regional Travel Model (SACSIM)

Performance characteristics

A regional analysis example

A land use project analysis example


I-PLACE3S UsesRegional to Neighborhood-level applications


Regional Blueprint Land Use Scenarios


Edit roadway links or roadway projects

Edit transit routes

Regional Transportation Plan Public Workshops


Roseville Fairgrounds

Neighborhood Study Area Land Use Scenario

 700 more employees

 400 more dwelling units

 - 7 % VMT

74 Acres

Changes from base case:


Two cities used I-PLACE3S to develop General Plan land use scenarios

Local Land Use Plan Updates


User-Defined, includes:

Inventoried allowed land uses

Land uses that might not yet exist in codes (e.g. mixed use)

“Place Types” are the Building Blocks


New Modules Developed Through King County WA Study

Public health

(outcomes: physical activity, BMI, walk and bike trips)

Climate change and air quality

(outcomes: CO2, NOx, HC, and CO; vehicle trips and VMT)


Climate Change Module (Household Inputs)

  • Household demographics

    • Working adults

    • Non-working adults

    • Children

  • Household Income

  • Access to transit

  • Area intersection density

  • Household area density

  • Area mix of land uses


Demographics

Number of adults in household

Employment status

Number of children in household

Ratio of adults to cars

Household income

Access to transit

Intersection density

Area housing density

Area land use mix

Park availability

Area retail and fast food establishments

Physical Activity and BMI Module (Person Inputs)


Demographic Variables


Density & Accessibility Measures


P roduction

E xchange

C onsumption

A llocation

S ystem


PECAS

Framework Components

  • Economic Interactions (Activity Allocation):

    • Production to exchange to consumption location chains

    • determined for all goods, services and labor

    • Equilibrium markets for all commodities, with prices & clearing

    • Consumer surplus and producer surplus considered

  • Space Development (Land Use):

    • Changes in space year-to-year based on allowable zoning and prices from Activity Allocation

  • Links to:

    • Travel model (trip-based or tour-based)

    • Non-spatial economic model


Benefits

  • Apply economic analysis to spatial/land use issues

  • Simulate developer decisions in addition to government policies

  • Land use impacts for travel and emissions

  • Peak spreading of congestion

  • Pricing policy analysis

  • Improved impact assessment


Model comparison – Unit of Analysis

  • SACMET = TAZ and Trip

    • TAZ is a geographic area with number of people, jobs, etc.

    • Trips are “disembodied” and treated as a “gravitational” event

  • SACSIM = Persons and Tours

    • Population represents variety of people in a “real” way

    • Travel is an outgrowth of activities—a way of stringing activities together


Typical Household’s Travel


Vehicle miles traveled as primary indicator

Defining area types by average VMT per household

Land use characteristics of VMT-defined areas

Drilling down to specifics in prototype areas

Forecasting results

A Practical, Regional Planning Application


2005 VMT Per Household


2005 VMT Per Household

  • 2005 reg. average VMT/HH = +/-50 miles

    • Dark green = Group 1--Very Low VMT (< 25 miles)

    • Light green = Group 2--Low VMT (25 – 45 miles)

    • Yellow = Group 3--Average(45-55 miles)

    • Orange = Group 4--High (55-75 miles)

    • Red = Group 5--Very High (75+ miles)


Density in Prototype Areas

  • Density = Jobs + housing per acre at place of residence

  • Higher density = lower VMT


Transit Proximity in Prototype Areas

  • Proximity = % of households within ¼ mile of nearest transit

  • Higher proximity = lower VMT


Mix of Use (Diversity) in Prototype Areas

  • Mix Index = 0 (homogeneous development) to 100 (balanced mix)

  • More balanced mix = lower VMT


Bike/Walk Mode Share in Prototype Areas

  • Regional Average = 7.5 %

  • Higher share in lower VMT areas


Transit Mode Share in Prototype Areas

  • Regional Average = 1.2 %

  • Higher share in lower VMT areas


Curtis Park Village:A Development Project Example


Three Development Options


Project Area Travel Metrics


Project + Neighborhood Travel Metrics


The Project’s Internal Capture Vehicle Miles vs. External Areas


  • Login