Metropolitan Travel Forecasting: Current Practice and Future Direction

1
Metropolitan Travel Forecasting Current Practice
and Future Direction

• AMPO Travel Modeling Work Group
• December 10, 2007
• Washington, DC

2
1863Founding of the National Academy of Sciences
3
About the National Academies

• Historic mission form committees of experts to
  address critical national issues and give advice
  to the federal government and the public.
• Provide independent, objective, and non-partisan
  advice with high standards of scientific and
  technical quality. Checks and balances are
  applied at every step in the study process to
  protect the integrity of the reports and to
  maintain public confidence in them.

4
Transportation Research Board

• One of five major divisions within the National
  Academies
• Much of what TRB does is different from the core
  mission of the National Academies
• Metropolitan Travel Forecasting is a
  traditional National Academies policy study

5
Sponsors of the Study

• Office of the Secretary, USDOT
• Federal Highway Administration
• Federal Transit Administration

6
Scope of the Study

• Determine state of practice in metropolitan
  travel forecasting
• Identify technical shortcomings of the models for
  their intended uses
• Recommend actions needed to ensure appropriate
  technical processes are being used

7
Committee

• Martin Wachs, chairman, RAND Corporation,
• MPOs
• Michael R. Morris, North Central Texas COG
• Charles L. Purvis, Oakland MTC
• Guy Rousseau, Atlanta Regional Commission
• Richard E. Walker, Metro Portland, OR
• Academia
• George B. Dresser, TTI, TX
• Ronald W. Eash, Northwestern University, IL
• Robert A. Johnston, University of California,
  Davis
• Eric J. Miller, University of Toronto, Canada
• State DOTs
• Laura L. Cove, North Carolina DOT
• Mary Lynn Tischer, Virginia DOT
• Consultants
• Thomas B. Deen
• Richard H. Pratt

8
Technical Advisory Group

• Williams Davidson, PB Consult
• Thomas Rossi, Cambridge Systematics
• Williams Woodford, AECOM

9
Sources of Information

• Web-based survey of MPOs
• In-depth interviews of MPOs
• Literature review
• Briefings from stakeholders
• The expertise of the committee

10
Review of the Committees Report

• Elizabeth Deakin, U of California
• Mark Hallenbeck, U of Washington
• Lester Hoel, U of Virginia
• Charles Howard, Seattle MPO
• Keith Killough, SCAG
• Ron Kirby, Washington DC MPO
• Frank Koppelman, Northwestern U
• Keith Lawton, Consultant

11
Oversight of the Review Process

• Adib Kanafani, U California
• Mike Walton, U Texas

12
The Result

13
Findings

• 4-step model is basic approach (estimate trips,
  distribute among origins and destinations,
  determine mode, assign to network)
• Basic framework unchanged for over 50 years
• Many variations in complexity of approach
• Complex issues lead to complex models (e.g.
  travel models linked with land use models)
• San Francisco City, Columbus Ohio MPO, and New
  York MTC have adopted more advanced approaches

14
Findings (cont)

• There is no single approach to travel forecasting
  that is correct for all MPOs
• The planning context and the nature of questions
  being asked should determine the type and
  complexity of model tools employed

15
Findings- Current Models

• Inadequate for demand analysis of many
  applications
• Induced travel
• Land use policies
• HOT and time variable road pricing
• Environmental justice
• Telecommuting
• Mode of access to transit
• Traveler response to congested networks

16
Findings- Current Models (cont)

• Certain modes are poorly characterized, e.g.
• Non-motorized travel
• Freight and commercial vehicle travel

17
Findings- Current Models (cont)

• Inadequate for supply-side analysis-
• No disaggregate estimates of volumes and speeds
  on specific routes by time of day. This affects-
• Evaluation of traffic ops improvements
• Time shifting in congested networks
• Evaluation of freight movement policies
• Emissions estimates
• Evacuation planning

18
Findings- Current Models (cont)

• Advanced travel models are being developed
• Detailed representation of person and household
  activities and travel
• Continuous representation of time and network
  performance
• Implemented in a few places appear to work well
  

19
Findings- Current Practice

• Inadequate data
• Optimism bias
• Quality control
• Validation errors
• (FTA commended for efforts to ensure QC)

20
Findings- Obstacles to Model Improvement

• Preoccupation with meeting immediate demands of
  production
• Fear of legal challenges
• Significant budget and staff limitations
• Insufficient evidence that advanced models can be
  implemented for a reasonable cost and provide
  significant improvements
• Poor/inadequate data

21
Findings- Federal Government

• Federal support for models development not
  commensurate with federal demands on modeling
• Reduction in federal support in 60s and 70s
  federal investment 15 million annually in
  current dollars compared with about 2.5 million
  today
• Growth in federal planning and environmental
  requirements for states and MPOs has increased
  significantly

22
Overarching Recommendations

• Develop and implement new modeling approaches
  better suited to providing reliable forecasts for
  such applications as operational analyses,
  environmental assessments, evaluation of policy
  alternatives, freight forecasts
• Take steps to ensure better practice
• Federal, state, regional collaboration needed to
  deliver better models and practice

23
Recommendations for MPOs

• MPOs would benefit from establishing a national
  cooperative RD program
• 4-5 million annually, governed by MPOs
  themselves, for models selection, deployment,
  evaluation
• NYSMPO shared cost initiative

24
Recommendations for MPOs (cont)

• Continue peer reviews
• University partnerships
• Reasonableness checks of project forecasts
• Document experience with advanced practice

25
Recommendations for States

• Support development of MPO cooperative research
  program
• Evaluate, in cooperation with MPOs,
  socio-economic forecasts used for modeling
• Continue MUGs

26
Recommendations for Federal Govt

• Support and provide funding for incremental
  improvements to 4-step models that are
  appropriate for use.
• Support and provide funding for development,
  implementation, evaluation of advanced models.
• Continue TMIP
• Increase funding 0.005 of federal aid is about
  20 million, which is roughly comparable to the
  15 million of support in the 60s and 70s.
• MPO Certification- models check-list incorporate
  MPO peer reviews
• Provide flexibility for MPOs to apply models
  appropriate to their needs.

27
Federal, State, Local

• Establish goals, responsibilities, improved
  training elements, means of improving travel
  modelsperhaps through a steering committee of
  principle stakeholders.
• Develop and keep current a national handbook of
  practice (not a standards manual)perhaps through
  national organization that could bring partners
  together perhaps funded by MPO CRP, NCHRP,
  federal government.
• Document data requirements for updating travel
  models, validating models, freight modeling,
  meeting air quality conformity requirements, etc.

28
A strategy for change

• Practice resistant to change.
• For the past 40 years, advances in RD
  innovation in modeling has led to only
  incremental change.
• Need to break out of this cycle.
• Harness the coordinated resources of each level
  of government.
• Return to creativity and innovation of the early
  days of travel forecasting.

29
TRB Annual Meeting Session

• Metropolitan Travel Forecasting Current Practice
  and Future Direction-Wednesday, January 16, 2008,
  730 PM - 930 PM, Hilton Georgetown W.Charles
  L. Purvis, Metropolitan Transportation
  Commission, presiding
• Findings and Recommendations of the Report
  Martin Wachs, RAND Corporation
• Perspectives of Stakeholders Gloria Shepherd,
  Federal Highway AdministrationRonald T. Fisher,
  Federal Transit AdministrationCharles E. Howard,
  Puget Sound Regional CouncilDeb Miller, Kansas
  Department of Transportation
• Proposal for a Metropolitan Planning Cooperative
  Research Program Michael R. Morris, North
  Central Texas Council of Governments
• Summary of Discussion and Next Steps Martin
  Wachs, RAND Corporation