Bike Planner Overview

Similar documents
Assessment of socio economic benefits of non-motorized transport (NMT) integration with public transit (PT)

Rerouting Mode Choice Models: How Including Realistic Route Options Can Help Us Understand Decisions to Walk or Bike

Rail Station Fact Sheet CentrePort/DFW Airport Station

Rail Station Fact Sheet UNT Dallas Station

The Case for New Trends in Travel

Bicycle Demand Forecasting for Bloomingdale Trail in Chicago

Rail Station Fact Sheet University of Dallas Station

Health Impact Analysis for Integrated Regional Land Use and Transportation Plan

Memorandum. Drive alone

Planning Guidance in the 2012 AASHTO Bike Guide

A Framework For Integrating Pedestrians into Travel Demand Models

I-105 Corridor Sustainability Study (CSS)

Webinar: Development of a Pedestrian Demand Estimation Tool

OC Healthy Communities Forum. The proportion of the population that live within a half mile of a major transit access point.

An Assessment of Potential Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions from Proposed On Street Bikeways

Multimodal Transportation Plan

Categorizing Cyclists: What Do We Know? Insights from Portland, OR

2010 Pedestrian and Bicyclist Special Districts Study Update

Strategic Plan for Active Mobility Phase I: Bicycle Mobility

Bicycle Facilities Planning

SUSTAINABILITY, TRANSPORT, & HEALTH. Ralph Buehler, Virginia Tech

2017 North Texas Regional Bicycle Opinion Survey

APPENDIX W OFF-MODEL ADJUSTMENTS

Stress Bikeway Network

San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Open House

San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

Public Works AGENDA ITEM D-2 STAFF REPORT

Determining bicycle infrastructure preferences A case study of Dublin

Impact of Shared Mobility and Technology on Public Transportation

Pedestrian Demand Modeling: Evaluating Pedestrian Risk Exposures

DON MILLS-EGLINTON Mobility Hub Profile

NEWMARKET CENTRE Mobility Hub Profile

Rail Station Fact Sheet DFW Airport North Station* (*station under construction with anticipated start of service in late 2018)

Traffic Safety Barriers to Walking and Bicycling Analysis of CA Add-On Responses to the 2009 NHTS

Health, Transportation and Bicycling: Connecting the Dotted Lines

TRANSIT & NON-MOTORIZED PLAN DRAFT FINAL REPORT Butte County Association of Governments

the 54th Annual Conference of the Association of Collegiate School of Planning (ACSP) in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania November 2 nd, 2014

Urban planners have invested a lot of energy in the idea of transit-oriented

Active and Green: Healthy Communities Are Sustainable Communities

92% COMMUTING IN THE METRO. Congested Roadways Mode Share. Roadway Congestion & Mode Share

8403 Colesville Road, Silver Spring, Maryland USA Telephone: (240) Fax: (240)

TR NEWS. Public Health and Transportation. Innovation, Intervention, and Improvements NUMBER 299 SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2015

Toronto Complete Streets Guidelines

Bike Routes Assessment: 95 Ave, 106 St & 40 Ave. Replace with appropriate image in View > Master.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Connectivity Study. Old Colony Planning Council

DON MILLS-SHEPPARD Mobility Hub Profile

Rail Station Fact Sheet Downtown Carrollton Station

How Travel Demand Has Been Changing. Susan Handy Asilomar 2015

Roadway Bicycle Compatibility, Livability, and Environmental Justice Performance Measures

What s Health Got to Do With It? Health and Land Use Planning

Climate Change Action Plan: Transportation Sector Discussion Paper: Cycling

Transportation Trends, Conditions and Issues. Regional Transportation Plan 2030

Understanding Travel Modes to Non-work Destinations: Analysis of an Establishment Survey in Portland, Oregon

Matt Dykstra PSU MGIS Program

Transportation and Health Tool

Bike Score: Applying Research to Build Web-Based Tools to Promote Cycling

Is St. Louis Ready for a Bike Share System? May 14, 2014 Public Open House

Rail Station Fact Sheet CityLine/Bush Station

South Bay Bicycle Master Plan American Planning Association National Conference Los Angeles, CA

Active Travel and Exposure to Air Pollution: Implications for Transportation and Land Use Planning

Factors influencing choice of commuting mode

Town of Superior. Superior Trails Plan

Methodology for assessing the benefits of active transportation projects EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Infrastructure and Programs. What does the data say? Advancing Non-motorized Transportation in Vermont 11/15/09

Chapter 4. Gardena. Alta Planning + Design 75

Driverless Vehicles Potential Influence on Bicyclist Facility Preferences

Rail Station Fact Sheet Buckner Station

Kevin Manaugh Department of Geography McGill School of Environment

SUITABILITY STUDY FOR A BICYCLE SHARING PROGRAM IN SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA LINDSAY KATHRYN MAURER

City of Novi Non-Motorized Master Plan 2011 Executive Summary

Using GIS and CTPP Data for Transit Ridership Forecasting in Central Florida

Pre-Plan Consultation Summary

FACTS AND FIGURES: MAKING THE CASE FOR COMPLETE STREETS IN LEE COUNTY

Update on Regional Bicycle, Pedestrian, & Trail Planning. Presented to TCC November 21, 2014

Community & Transportation Preferences Survey

REGIONAL HOUSEHOLD TRAVEL SURVEY:

RE-CYCLING A CITY: EXAMINING THE GROWTH OF CYCLING IN DUBLIN

Chapter 2. Bellingham Bicycle Master Plan Chapter 2: Policies and Actions

Erfurt, April

Attachment C: Benefit-Cost Analysis Spreadsheet

City of Jacksonville Mobility Fee Update

Factors Associated with the Bicycle Commute Use of Newcomers: An analysis of the 70 largest U.S. Cities

Low Carbon Mobility Plan For Indian Cities

Cabrillo College Transportation Study

Rail Station Fact Sheet Highland Village/Lewisville Lake Station

Bicycle Traffic Count Factoring: An Examination of National, State and Locally Derived Daily Extrapolation Factors

NASHUA REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION REGIONAL BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PLAN

ADOT Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Summary of Phase IV Activities APPENDIX B PEDESTRIAN DEMAND INDEX

Bike/Multipurpose Trail Study for Glynn County, Georgia MAY 16, 2016

Calculating the ROI of TDM for Physical Activity in Arlington, VA. Sonali Soneji, AICP Simple Solutions Planning & Design, LLC

Chapter 6. Lawndale. Alta Planning + Design 147

Active Transportation Goals

National Association of REALTORS National Smart Growth Frequencies

Flyaway Bus: GIS Analysis on Current and Potential Ridership, Revenue, and Prospective Stations

T1-A - Service Reduction (Re-sizing)

Bicycle Corrals Portland Designing Streets NYC October 25, 2012 Roger Geller, Bicycle Coordinator Portland, OR

General Plan Circulation Element Update Scoping Meeting April 16, 2014 Santa Ana Senior Center, 424 W. 3rd Street, Santa Ana, CA 92701

DUNDAS WEST-BLOOR Mobility Hub Profile

Beyond First First Last Last Mile Strategies. APA National Conference April 3, 2016 Chelsea Richer, AICP Fehr & Peers

Methodology for assessing the benefits of active transportation projects

Transcription:

Bike Planner Overview A Web-based Sketch Planning Tool for Los Angeles County presented by William E. Walter, GISP April 12, 2017 GIS-T Transportation leadership you can trust.

Bike Planner Overview

Guiding Principles Created web-based tool for city staff to evaluate projects Completed within 1 year (no new data collection) Impacts are sensitive to local conditions at block level» Demographics, density of bike facilities by type, land use mix Estimates impacts of:» Bikeways (Paths, Lanes, Tracks, Boulevards),» Transit Station Bike Parking Facilities, and» Workplace Bike Amenities (parking, showers) Sketch-level scenario analysis» Includes recreational and utilitarian bicycling impacts» Reduced VMT, new bike trips and BMT 3

Oversight Convened Peer Review Panel to review methods and results:» Jennifer Dill, PSU» Peter Furth, Northeastern U.» Jeremy Raw, FHWA» Bill Stein, Portland Metro» Susan Handy, UC Davis» David Ory, MTC» Thomas Götschi, U. Zürich Convened User Group to review interface / operations» City staff» LA County Bike Coalition» SCAG 4

Model Application Apply models to block level data» Population, employment, other demographics from 2007-2011 ACS» Recreational trip from 2009 NHTS» 2035 population growth factors and density from SCAG forecasts (TAZlevel)» Land use and infrastructure (intersection and bike facility density) calculated based on one-mile buffer around block centroid Off-model adjustments» Workplace parking - Commute mode share increased based on # workers with improved parking» Transit parking Nonwork trips increased based on avg. transit boardings/alightings per station in jurisdiction * number of improved stations Results summarized at jurisdiction level for scenario analysis 5

Regional Context Existing Bicycle Facilities 6 Unweighted average across tracts: 1.1 mi/sq. mi. (mostly on-street)

Regional Context Existing Bicycle Mode Share 7 Average bicycle work-trip mode share = 0.75%

Bike Planner Framework Trip Purposes» Work» Other utilitarian (e.g., errands, visit friends)» Recreational (includes exercise) Approach» Work: Logistic regression model» Other utilitarian: Factored from work trips» Recreational: discrete choice + regression models 8

Work / Utilitarian Bike Trip Model Evaluated alternative data sources» Disaggregate NHTS and SCAG travel surveys insufficient observations» Aggregate Census (ACS) journey to work (tract level) Tested different model forms (linear, logistic, etc.) Tested numerous explanatory variables» Infrastructure bike facilities, road density, connectivity» Land use area type, population and employment densities» Sociodemographic income, auto ownership, etc.» Interactive terms (none significant) 9

Methodology Bikeway Projects User-Defined Shapefile New Bikeway Type Bikeway Attributes Project Location GIS Calculation Areal Factors Influence Project Impact Fixed Census Tract (later block) Socioeconomic Population Jobs Age Education Income Sex Car Ownership Land Use & Facilities Density Grade Bike Facilities Car Traffic Cycling Conditions Work / Utilitarian Trip Prediction Model Bike Trip Models Predict change in bike travel Recreation Trip Prediction Model New Annual Bike Trips Due to bikeway investments (year 2035 vs. no build) 10

Bike Planner Models Work / Utilitarian Recreational Data Source Travel Purpose ACS (2006-2010), LA County Work & non-work utilitarian NHTS (2009) LA & Orange Strictly recreational (no destination) Model Type Logistic regression 2-Step: binary logit + linear regression Logistic Regression Model Binary Logit Model Work Bike Trips Utilitarian Bike Trips (factor of 1:4) Persons who take at least 1 rec bike trip Linear Regression Model # New Recreational Bike Trips Benefits Calculation 11

Other projects evaluated by Bike Planner Other Projects» Workplace parking - Commute mode share increased based on # workers with improved parking» Transit parking Nonwork trips increased based on avg. transit boardings/alightings per station in jurisdiction * number of improved stations Bike Planner allows for scenario analysis to evaluate/prioritize packages of projects against performance. 12

Benefits Estimation (2035 vs. 2035 no build) Benefit Category Description Performance Measure Mobility New Trips New bike trips (work, non-work, rec) # annual trips by purpose New BMT New bicycle miles traveled (w, nw, r) # annual BMT by purpose Reduced VMT Reduction in vehicle miles traveled Reduction in annual VMT Environmental Energy Consumption Reduced vehicle fuel consumption Annual gallons of motor vehicle fuel reduced GHG Emissions Reduced carbon equivalent emissions Annual lbs of GHG reduced Air Pollution Damages Reduced cost of air pollution damages (public health, building repair, agriculture, ecosystems) Annual cost savings as a result of better air quality($) Economic Household Savings Household vehicle O&M cost savings Annual O&M savings ($) Public Health Fitness Benefits Reduced heath care & mortality costs due to increased physical activity & health Annual economic value of public health benefits of added physical activity

Jurisdiction view of all projects

Creating/editing a project

Creating/editing scenarios

Evaluating Performance

Scenario Comparison

Scenario Comparison

Scenario Comparison

Export benefits report

Export benefits (cont.) Also exports Esri Shapefile for further offline analysis

Contact: William Walter, GISP wwalter@camsys.com 512-691-8509 www.camsys.com Questions?