Travel Demand Model - OKI

More documents

Recommendations

Info

OKI/MVRPC Travel Demand Model – Version 6.0while people who use routes than run longer headways tend to pay attention to the schedule andarrive at the bus stop about 7-10 minutes before the bus is supposed to arrive. Typically oneexpects a higher coefficient on the initial wait when compared to the additional wait. Thisexpectation was fulfilled by the estimation result; however the initial wait variable had lowsignificance and a very high ratio with respect to the in-vehicle time.Run #70a considered a separate coefficient for transit drive access time. As shown in Table 4.2the estimated coefficient is too high and results in an unacceptably high ratio of drive access toin-vehicle time. The model also exhibits an unacceptably high ratio of walk access time to invehicletime.Run #67 was an attempt to estimate separate coefficients for parking cost and out-of-pocketcosts (auto operating cost and transit fare). In this run, as well as in several others where thisseparation was tried, the result was a positive coefficient for the out-of-pocket cost variable.Some of the other models explored considered the following:• Attempts were also made to estimate separate coefficients for centroid (i.e. access andegress) walk and transfer (i.e. sidewalk) walk, with no satisfactory estimation results.Typically this resulted in very high centroid walk access coefficients and insignificant transferwalk coefficients.• Alternative market segmentation schemes, including auto ownership, were also tried, but weconcluded that the chosen segmentation best explains modal usage given the availability (orlack thereof) of a private car for each household worker.• As mentioned above, the initial estimation runs considered local bus and express bus asseparate modes. In general this resulted in very low in-vehicle time coefficients, as shown inthe Appendix.• Terminal walk and park times were excluded from the model because they consistentlyshowed unacceptably high coefficients.• Due to the importance of the CBD in attracting work trips, a CBD indicator variable was usedto capture modal preferences for CBD trips after controlling for time and cost. While thevariable was significant, it had a very high correlation with the parking cost variable, andresulted in models with low, insignificant, and sometimes positive cost coefficients.• The effect of residential density on transit usage was also explored through an indicatorvariable. This variable was significant in models that considered local and express busmodes separately, but not in models that considered a single transit mode.Finally, several attempts were made to estimate a nested structure for the most promisingmultinomial models. Run #83, shown in Table 4.2, was one such attempt, in this case using atwo-level nest (auto vs. transit) for the model shown in Run #71h. As shown, the estimatedcoefficient for the logsum variable (Theta) is larger than 1.0, indicating that the nesting structureis not supported by the data. Similar results were obtained for various other nesting structures.Since the data do not support the estimation of a nesting structure, the logsum coefficients to beused in the application program were synthesized from other metropolitan area models.Proposed values for the OKI/MVRPC mode choice models are listed in Table 4.3, along with thevalues current used in Model 5.4. The logsum, or structural, model coefficients directly influencemodel elasticity at lower levels of the nest as well as the impact of lower level choices on upperlevel decisions. Based on a number of nested logit model estimation activities completed overthe last few years, it has become clear that logsum coefficient values less than 0.5 are unlikelyand may overstate the elasticity responses of lower level choices. Use of 0.2 and 0.3 values inthe existing model are, therefore, problematic and may distort overall model sensitivities. Therecommended set of values is more consistent with recent experience and applicable to thenesting structure proposed for the OKI/MVRPC mode choice model.Mode Choice - Home-Based Work Model Estimation 19
OKI/MVRPC Travel Demand Model – Version 6.0Table 4-2 HBW Mode Choice Estimation ResultsBest ModelVariablesRun #71hRun #79d Run #70a Run #67 Run #83Estimate t stat. Estimate t stat. Estimate t stat. Estimate t stat. Estimate t stat.In-vehicle time -0.0248 -2.8 -0.0248 -2.8 -0.0223 -2.5 -0.0106 -1.4 -0.0170 -2.1Cost -0.0021 -3.9 -0.0021 -3.9 -0.0018 -4.4 -0.0014 -2.5Parking Cost -0.0023 -5.2Out-of-Pocket Cost 0.0018 1.9First wait -0.0409 -2.8 -0.0424 -2.9 -0.0419 -3.1 -0.0287 -2.2First wait < 10 min. -0.0717 -1.3First wait > 10 min. -0.0341 -1.8Transfer wait -0.0461 -2.8 -0.0461 -2.8 -0.0518 -3.1 -0.0444 -3.3 -0.0327 -2.3Walk access time -0.0876 -5.6 -0.0880 -5.6 -0.0892 -5.8 -0.0975 -6.9 -0.0612 -3.0Drive access time -0.0970 -1.8 -0.0940 -1.9Logsum (Theta) 1.462 3.5Constants:Shared Ride 2 -2.41Zero Auto Hhlds.Autos < Workers -0.81 -0.81 -0.91 -0.81Autos = Workers -2.31 -2.31 -2.45 -2.31Autos > Workers -2.51 -2.51 -2.66 -2.51Shared Ride 3+ -3.59Zero Auto Hhlds.Autos < Workers -2.16 -2.16 -2.32 -2.16Autos = Workers -3.31 -3.31 -3.52 -3.31Autos > Workers -3.77 -3.77 -3.99 -3.77Walk to Transit 0.50Zero Auto Hhlds. 3.76 4.00 3.83 2.43Autos < Workers 1.58 1.83 1.69 1.24Autos = Workers -0.83 -0.58 -0.72 -0.54Autos > Workers -1.32 -1.07 -1.22 -0.90Drive to Transit -1.91Zero Auto Hhlds. -1.10 -0.89 -0.74 -2.23Autos < Workers -1.47 -1.24 -0.98 -1.55Autos = Workers -2.99 -2.76 -2.44 -2.45Autos > Workers -3.39 -3.16 -2.77 -2.63No. of observations 7032 7032 7032 7032 7032Log-likelihood -2632 -2632 -2639 -2765 -2631Rho-squared 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.62 0.64Value of Time $7.04 $6.98 $7.51 $7.16Ratios to IVT:First wait 1.7 1.9 4.0 1.7First wait < 10 min. 2.9First wait > 10 min. 1.4Transfer wait 1.9 1.9 2.3 4.2 1.9Walk access 3.5 3.6 4.0 9.2 3.6Drive access 1.0 1.0 4.3 8.9 1.0All time variables expressed in minutes, all cost variables expressed in 1995 cents.Mode Choice - Home-Based Work Model Estimation 20
Page 1 and 2:
APPENDIX F • TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL
Page 3 and 4:
OKI/MVRPCTravel Demand ModelVersion
Page 5 and 6:
Table of ContentsPart IPart IIPart
Page 7 and 8:
OKI/MVRPC Travel Demand Model - Ver
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Table A.1 (cont.)Zone System Equiva
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Table A.2Zone System Equivalences -
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Table A.3Zone System Equivalences -
Page 55 and 56:
Table B.1External Stations in the C
Page 57 and 58:
Table B.1External Stations in the C
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
User Documentation forAutomated Acc
Page 105 and 106:
[Transit Format][New Link Attribute
Page 107 and 108:
distance for each centroid or node.
Page 109 and 110:
Figure 1Example Control File for th
Page 111 and 112:
LinkType = 99VolumeDelay = 99Lanes
Page 113 and 114:
NetworkScale = 1.0 Scale factor to
Page 115 and 116:
Figure 4Example Output from DRVLINK
Page 117 and 118:
Appendix ASample EMME/2 Transit Lin
Page 119 and 120:
Appendix FTravel Demand ModelingTec
Page 121 and 122:
Index of TablesTable 2-1 Socio-Econ
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Index of TablesTable 2-1 Trip Lengt
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198: OKI/MVRPC Travel Demand Model - Ver
Page 227 and 228: Table of Contents1. Background ....
Page 229 and 230: Index of FiguresFigure 2-1 Alternat
Page 247: OKI/MVRPC Travel Demand Model - Ver
Page 271 and 272: NORTH-SOUTH TRANSPORTATION INITIATI
Page 281 and 282: Run # 63: Start with 7.17 estimatio
Page 283 and 284: Run # 67:Split parking cost from ot
Page 285 and 286: Run # 70a:Include zero-auto segment
Page 287 and 288: Run # 71c:Repeat #71a with zero aut
Page 289 and 290: Run # 71g:Repeat #71d with wait tim
Page 291 and 292: Run # 73:Include residential densit
Page 293 and 294: Run # 76:Nest: auto vs transitVaria
Page 295 and 296: Run # 79:Repeat #72 with zero autos
Page 297 and 298: Run # 80:Nest: auto vs. all othersV
Page 299 and 300:
Run # 82:(071h) nested: auto vs tra
Page 301 and 302:
Run #3VariableModeDrive Shared Ride
Page 303 and 304:
Run #8VariableModeDrive Shared Ride
Page 305 and 306:
Run #12 test: make aoc=10.5 instead
Page 307 and 308:
Run #29VariableModeDrive Shared Rid
Page 309 and 310:
Run #33VariableModeDrive Shared Rid
Page 311 and 312:
Run #37vot constrained to $7.00Vari
Page 313 and 314:
Run #30bSame as #30a, combine cost
Page 315 and 316:
Run #140 (same as run #40)vot const
Page 317 and 318:
Run #140b (same as run #40)vot cons
Page 319 and 320:
Run #141avot constrained to $3.00 &
Page 321 and 322:
Run #141cvot constrained to $3.00 &
Page 323 and 324:
Run # 1:Base RunVariablesModesDA Sh
Page 325 and 326:
Run # 5:Base Run with walk time set
Page 327 and 328:
Run # 8:Base Run, split walkVariabl
Page 329 and 330:
Run # 10: Nested structure (autos v
Page 331 and 332:
Part VITRIP ASSIGNMENT ANDVALIDATIO
Page 333 and 334:
Index of TablesTable 2-1 Average Ve
Page 335 and 336:
Page 337 and 338:
Page 339 and 340:
Page 341 and 342:
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Page 349 and 350:
Page 351 and 352:
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
VOBFigure 4-8 Screenline Location -
Page 357 and 358:
2759OKI/MVRPC Travel Demand Model -
Page 359 and 360:
Page 361 and 362:
Page 363 and 364:
Page 365 and 366:
Page 367 and 368:
Page 369 and 370:
Page 371 and 372:
Page 373 and 374:
Page 375 and 376:
Page 377 and 378:
Page 379 and 380:
Page 381 and 382:
Page 383 and 384:
Page 385 and 386:
Page 387 and 388:
Page 389 and 390:
Page 391 and 392:
Table of Contents1. Introduction...
Page 393 and 394:
Page 395 and 396:
Page 397 and 398:
Page 399 and 400:
Page 401 and 402:
Page 403 and 404:
Page 405 and 406:
Page 407 and 408:
Page 409 and 410:
Page 411 and 412:
Page 413 and 414:
Page 415 and 416:
Page 417 and 418:
Page 419 and 420:
Page 421 and 422:
Page 423 and 424:
Page 425 and 426:
Page 427 and 428:
Page 429 and 430:
Page 431 and 432:
Page 433 and 434:
Page 435 and 436:
Page 437 and 438:
Page 439 and 440:
Page 441 and 442:
Page 443 and 444:
Page 445 and 446:
Page 447 and 448:
Page 449 and 450:
Table of Contents1. Introduction...
Page 451 and 452:
2. Surveys and Other Datasets2.1 OK
Page 453 and 454:
Table 2-1 OKI Home Interview Survey
Page 455 and 456:
Page 457 and 458:
Page 459 and 460:
Table 1-4 On-Board Survey Data Dict
Page 461 and 462:
2.3 External Station Survey - Conso
Page 463 and 464:
2.4 External Cordon Survey - Consol
Page 465 and 466:
2.5 External-External Trip Table fr
Page 467 and 468:
2.20 Screenline Shape File - Screen
show all

Travel Demand Model - OKI

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?