1 / 18

NCHRP 08-36/Task 137: Assessing the Utility and Costs of Statewide Travel Demand Models

This report assesses the usefulness and financial implications of statewide travel demand models for state transportation agencies. The study includes a scenario-based survey to determine the value and budget requirements of these models.

monicaw
Télécharger la présentation

NCHRP 08-36/Task 137: Assessing the Utility and Costs of Statewide Travel Demand Models

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. NCHRP 08-36/Task 137:Assessing the Utility and Costs of Statewide Travel Demand Models Prepared by: Gregory D. Erhardt University of Kentucky Flavia Tsang RAND Corporation Danny Francis University of Kentucky Requested by: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Standing Committee on Planning June 19, 2018

  2. Project Objectives Provide technical and planning staff at state transportation agencies with sufficient information to: • Make a budget request for statewide model development and maintenance • Articulate the value they expect to receive from statewidemodeling • Quantify that expected value Introduction

  3. Method: Scenario Based Survey • 2-hour structured web interview • Respondents from 27 DOTs + 5 consultants Introduction

  4. Method: Scenario Based Survey The interviews were composed of three parts: • Part 1: About You and Your Agency: Respondents were asked a series of questions about the agency that they represent. • Part 2: Scenarios: Estimating Costs: In this section, respondents were asked to imagine that they have the ability to influence the selection of technical resources for planning. They were given a series of three model upgrade scenarios and asked to develop a budget estimate for doing so. • Part 3: Scenarios: Go/No-Go Decisions: Again, respondents were asked to imagine that they have influence over the selection of modeling and technical resources. They were given a series of scenarios in which they must recommend a go/no-go decision for whether this new DOT should proceed with a statewide modeling project at the cost specified. This section included a total of nine scenarios, which vary based on the policies to be analyzed and on the type of model considered. Introduction

  5. Scenarios:Segmented by model development option and policy focus Introduction

  6. Part 1: Classifying Existing Practice

  7. Classification of Existing SW Model Practice Part 1: Classification

  8. Part 2: Costs of Statewide Models

  9. Reported 10-year spending vs population Part 2: Costs

  10. Example Cost Scenario Setup Part 2: Costs

  11. Cost Scenario Worksheet Part 2: Costs

  12. Estimated Model Development and Data Collection Costs Part 2: Costs

  13. Part 3: Value of Statewide Models

  14. Policy Interest and Statewide Model Use Part 3: Value

  15. Example Go/No-Go Scenario Setup Part 3: Value

  16. Willingness to Pay for Model Upgrades, in 10-Year Cost per Capita Part 3: Value

  17. The Qualitative Case for Statewide Modeling Multiple states listed each the following as areas where statewide models are particularly valuable: • Forecasting Traffic for New Facilities • Bridge Analysis • Detour Analysis and Emergency Route Analysis • External Flows for Urban Models • Economic Analysis • Project Prioritization Part 3: Value

  18. Thank you to the program manager, Larry Goldstein, and to the NCHRP Project Panel for valuable input and guidance. For questions, please contact: Greg Erhardt greg.erhardt@uky.edu

More Related