Tampa Bay Regional Planning Model (TBRPM v7.x)

Transcription

1 Express Lane Model in Tampa Bay Area presented by Hoyt Davis, Kapil Arya, & Chunyu Lu March 26, 2014 Introduction Tampa Bay Regional Planning Model (TBRPM v7.x) 4 Step Model used for 2035 Long Range Transportation Plans (LRTP) One feedback loop for HBW Distribution Sophisticated Mode Choice Generation CTOLL based tolling model Daily Highway Assignment Two Period Transit Assignments (HBW, HBO & NHB) Highway Assignment Distribution Mode Choice Transit Assignment Pre Assignment HBW Distribution 1

2 Introduction Need for New Starts Model for Alternatives Analysis Time of Day components added d Mode Choice structure expanded Six loop feedback for Peak Distribution Four Period Highway Assignments (AM, Mid Day, PM, Evening) Two Period Transit Assignments (Peak, Off Peak) Introduction Need for Managed / Express Lanes Model Consistency with Managed Lane Model Application for FSUTMS Phase 1 Report FDOT Central Office Adopted changes to final Highway Assignment only CTOLL converted to Diversion Curve Methodology Designated as TBRPM ML 2

3 Toll Modeling in TBRPM Build Shortest Impedance Path between OD Pair Toll cost converted to equivalent time using CTOLL (inverse of value of time) Total path impedance computed by summing travel time and time equivalent of toll OD Volume Assigned to the Shortest Impedance Path Toll Modeling in TBRPM General Purpose Path B Tolled Path B Travel Time= 20 min Travel Time = 20 min Impedance= 20 min Toll: $0.5 Toll Equivalent Time = 2 min Impedance = 20+2 = 22 min A A 3

4 Central Office Express Lane Framework General Purpose (GP) path Paid path Introduce one more Path in TBRPM ML General Purpose (GP) path Paid path Toll (TL) path Express Lane (EL) path Three Shortest Time Paths Developed between Each OD Pair GP path includes GP link(s) only TL path must include TL link(s) and can also include GP link(s) EL path must include EL link(s) and can also include TL link(s) and GP link(s) TL and EL paths are considered only if faster than GP path; ignored otherwise 4

5 Case I: Only One Path Exists All the demand is assigned to the one path, either GP, TL, or EL path Case II: Two Paths Exist Travel shares computed for the two competing paths using diversion curve and assigned to the two paths Case III: Three Paths Exist Travel shares computed for the three competing paths using diversion curve and assigned to the three paths Case IIa: GP and EL Paths Exist Skim GP and EL paths Compute toll on EL (Distance * Toll Rate) Compute travel time saving Compute toll to travel time saving ratio Compute GP and EL travel shares Case IIb: GP and TL Paths Exist Same as Case IIa with the exception that toll values are read from an input file 5

6 General Purpose Path B Express Lane Path B Travel Time= 16 min Travel Time = 20 min Distance on EL= 5 mile Toll Rate = $0.20/mile Toll = 5 * 0.20 = $1.00 A A Travel Time Saving = = 4 min Toll / Travel Time Saving = $1 / 4 min = $15 / hour Lookup $15 / hour on Diversion Curve 40% share for EL, 60% share for GP th Share Paid Pat 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Diversion Curve Toll to Travel Time Saving Ratio ($/hour) 6

7 Case III: GP, EL and TL Paths Exist Apply diversion curve in two steps Travel share of GP and Paid paths Split the share of Paid paths into TL and EL Total Travel GP Path Paid Path EL Path TL Path Diversion Curve Development Developed from Household Income 3 Year ACS Data for FDOT D7 Counties Percent 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Diversion Curve and Household Income Income or Cost to Travel Time Saving Ratio in $/hour Minneapolis Diversion Curve HH Income Based Diversion Curve HH Income 7

8 Network Coding Cube Network Lane Line Diagram Express Lanes Coded as Separate Facility Type Model Validation TOD Factors Percentage (%) 9.0% Traffic Counts vs. Household Survey 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% Hour 2007 HouseHold Survey 2006 Traffic Counts 8

9 Model Validation TOD Factors Percentage (%) 9.0% Traffic Counts vs. Household Survey by Purpose 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% Hour HBW HBO NHB Model Validation Counts by Facility Percentage (%) 9.0% Year 2006 Traffic Counts by Facility Type 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 00% 0.0% Hour Freeways Divided Arterials Undivided Arterials Collectors Total 9

10 Model Validation Counts by County Percentage (%) 9.0% Year 2006 Traffic Counts by County 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% Hour Hillsborough Pinellas Pasco Hernando Citrus Model Validation Existing Tollways Veterans V/C Ratio: CTOLL: 1.08 Diversion i Curve: Crosstown V/C Ratio: CTOLL: 1.02 Diversion Curve:

11 CTOLL vs. Diversion Curve Comparison Express Lane Split % 40% Express Lane % by Peak and Off Peak Direction 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Toll Rates (Cents per Mile) DiversionCurve Peak CTOLL Peak DiversionCurve OffPeak CTOLL OffPeak Average Daily vs. Design Hour Volumes AADT 250,000 Future Year Testing: Average Daily vs. Design Hour DDHV 40, ,000 35,000 30, ,000 25,000 20, ,000 15,000 50,000 10,000 5,000 0 Segments AADT 2035 Daily 2012 DDHV 2035 PeakHour 11

12 Average Daily vs. Design Hour Volumes ADT 250,000 Future Year Testing: Average Daily vs. Design Hour DHV 40, ,000 35,000 30, , ,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 50,000 10,000 5,000 0 Segments AADT 2035 Daily 2012 DDHV 2035 PeakHour Updated 2035 Subarea OD Trip Table Extraction 12

13 Questions? Subarea Trips and Volumes 13