1

Florida’s New Florida’s New Transit Modeling Transit Modeling

SystemSystemHuiwei Shen, Yongqiang Wu & Dave Huiwei Shen, Yongqiang Wu & Dave

SchmittSchmitt

1111thth TRB Planning Applications TRB Planning Applications ConferenceConference

Daytona Beach, Florida May Daytona Beach, Florida May 66thth-10-10thth, 2007, 2007

2

Background/ContextBackground/Context

Florida is one of few states that Florida is one of few states that standardizes modeling practicesstandardizes modeling practices

Original standards developed in early Original standards developed in early 1980s1980s

Original transit model needed re-Original transit model needed re-evaluationevaluation Florida MTF decided in 2005 to convert Florida MTF decided in 2005 to convert

models from Tranplan to Voyagermodels from Tranplan to Voyager Increasing pressure on transit models from Increasing pressure on transit models from

New StartsNew Starts

3

Work Task OverviewWork Task Overview

FDOT needed an updated transit FDOT needed an updated transit model using PT that was mindful of model using PT that was mindful of the:the: Existing standardsExisting standards User & planner needsUser & planner needs New/Small Starts & FTA guidanceNew/Small Starts & FTA guidance Features & capabilities of PT & VoyagerFeatures & capabilities of PT & Voyager

Key challenge: PT was largely Key challenge: PT was largely untested & unused at the timeuntested & unused at the time

4

Technical ChallengesTechnical Challenges

Leg vs. linkLeg vs. link

Multi-path path-builderMulti-path path-builder

Always finding a transit pathAlways finding a transit path

5

Leg vs. LinkLeg vs. Link

Centroid

Station

Rail Line

6

Transit Link ExampleTransit Link Example

Centroid

Station

Sidewalk link

Walk-access connector

Sidewalk link

Rail Line

7

Transit Leg ExampleTransit Leg Example

Centroid

Station

Walk-access leg

Rail Line

Two requirements:

• All connectors must connect transit stop to transit stop or transit stop to centroid

• Connectors must ‘spider’ highway network

8

Leg vs. LinkLeg vs. LinkImplicationsImplications

Could not use link-based access connectors Could not use link-based access connectors

Spidering along highway network conflicts Spidering along highway network conflicts with percent walk computations developed with percent walk computations developed in GISin GIS Ubiquitous vs. specific accessUbiquitous vs. specific access

Requires program to coordinate percent Requires program to coordinate percent walks & walk-access connectorswalks & walk-access connectors Lack of any walk-access connectors implies no Lack of any walk-access connectors implies no

real transit access → re-set percent walks to zeroreal transit access → re-set percent walks to zero

9

Technical ChallengesTechnical Challenges

Leg vs. linkLeg vs. link

Multi-path path-builderMulti-path path-builder

Always finding a transit pathAlways finding a transit path

10

Transit Path-BuildersTransit Path-Builders

Two types: single-path & multi-pathTwo types: single-path & multi-path Single-path Single-path

Exclusively available in Tranplan, Exclusively available in Tranplan, Minutp & TP+Minutp & TP+

Dominant path-builder in Florida & USDominant path-builder in Florida & US Multi-pathMulti-path

Available in TransCAD & Cube-Voyager Available in TransCAD & Cube-Voyager (PT)(PT)

Becoming more prevalentBecoming more prevalent

11

Multi-Path vs. Single-Multi-Path vs. Single-PathPath

O D Local Bus

Rail/Shuttle

Express Bus

PathPath Weighted Weighted TimeTime

Single-Single-Path Path Skim Skim

ValuesValues

Multi-Multi-Path Path Skim Skim

ValuesValues

Rail/Rail/ShuttleShuttle 55 min55 min 100%100% 45%45%

Local BusLocal Bus 90 min90 min ---- 20%20%

Express Express BusBus 65 min65 min ---- 35%35%

Also loading

percentages!

12

Multi-Path BuildersMulti-Path Builders AdvantagesAdvantages

Reflect sensitivities that would otherwise:Reflect sensitivities that would otherwise: Be impossible in single-path builders, or Be impossible in single-path builders, or Create inconsistencies between the path-builder & mode Create inconsistencies between the path-builder & mode

choice modelchoice model Offer better consistency between path-builder & mode Offer better consistency between path-builder & mode

choice weightschoice weights UnknownsUnknowns

How to…How to… Design a multi-path model Design a multi-path model Coordinate it with the mode choice modelCoordinate it with the mode choice model Calibrate & validate Calibrate & validate Introduce a new transit modeIntroduce a new transit mode

Whether they meet FTA New/Small Starts guidanceWhether they meet FTA New/Small Starts guidance Whether they work as intended/desiredWhether they work as intended/desired

13

HappeningsHappenings

Citilabs added a best-path ‘switch’ to PT in Citilabs added a best-path ‘switch’ to PT in summer 2006summer 2006 Addresses FTA’s New Starts quality control testsAddresses FTA’s New Starts quality control tests Mimics single-path builder from TranplanMimics single-path builder from Tranplan Not compatible with all parameters/keywordsNot compatible with all parameters/keywords

Initiated testing different model setupsInitiated testing different model setups To provide empirical data to assist with FTA/Citilabs To provide empirical data to assist with FTA/Citilabs

discussionsdiscussions Help determine best design for a PT-based transit Help determine best design for a PT-based transit

modelmodel Identify any software or design-related issues early Identify any software or design-related issues early

onon

14

Transit Model SetupsTransit Model SetupsSetupSetup AccessAccess NetworNetwor

kkPath/Path/

SkimsSkimsMode Mode

ChoiceChoiceAssignmAssignm

entent

PTPT

Multi-Multi-pathpath

PTPT PTPT

PT, path PT, path for each for each access access

mode onlymode only

Access-only:Access-only:

Walk/PNR/ Walk/PNR/ KNRKNR

PTPT

PTPT

Best-pathBest-pathPTPT PTPT

PT, path PT, path for each for each access & access & transit transit mode mode

combinaticombinationon

Access & Access & mode: mode:

Walk/PNR/ Walk/PNR/ KNR by KNR by

bus/project/ bus/project/ fixed-fixed-

guidewayguideway

PTPT

PT-PT-TRNBUILTRNBUILDD

PT, PT, converted converted

to to TRNBUILTRNBUILD within D within modelmodel

PT, PT, converted converted

to to TRNBUILTRNBUILD within D within modelmodel

TRNBUILTRNBUILD, path for D, path for

each each access & access & transit transit mode mode

combinaticombinationon

Access & Access & mode: mode:

Walk/PNR/ Walk/PNR/ KNR by KNR by

bus/project/ bus/project/ fixed-fixed-

guidewayguideway

TRNBUILDTRNBUILD

15

FindingsFindings Developed PT Best-path setup that mimics PT-Developed PT Best-path setup that mimics PT-

TRNBUILD resultsTRNBUILD results Multi-path model design results very different Multi-path model design results very different

from Best-path & TRNBUILDfrom Best-path & TRNBUILD Further research needed to define multi-path Further research needed to define multi-path

model setupmodel setup RecommendationsRecommendations

Short-term – proceeding with PT Best-path setupShort-term – proceeding with PT Best-path setup Separate guidelines for General & New/Small Starts useSeparate guidelines for General & New/Small Starts use

Long-term – track evolving FTA guidance, industry Long-term – track evolving FTA guidance, industry progress & PT updates; goal - evolve to multi-pathprogress & PT updates; goal - evolve to multi-path

16

Technical ChallengesTechnical Challenges

Leg vs. linkLeg vs. link

Multi-path path-builderMulti-path path-builder

Always finding a transit pathAlways finding a transit path

17

Finding a Transit Path Finding a Transit Path

Previous path-builders like Tranplan & Previous path-builders like Tranplan & TRNBUILD would not develop a TRNBUILD would not develop a transit path if walking is fastertransit path if walking is faster Skim would contain all zero’s or just have Skim would contain all zero’s or just have

zero IVTzero IVT No similar logic in PT:No similar logic in PT:

It does not allow the use of consecutive It does not allow the use of consecutive non-transit legsnon-transit legs

If any transit is available, it will always If any transit is available, it will always find a transit path – no matter how find a transit path – no matter how crazy…crazy…

18

Finding a Transit Path Finding a Transit Path ExampleExample

-Take walk connector 137-2909

-Ride all-stop north to 2849

-Take escalator up to 7849

-Ride skip-stop south to 7909

-Take walk connector 7909-136

19

Finding a Transit Path Finding a Transit Path SolutionSolution

Generate “all-walk connectors” from all Generate “all-walk connectors” from all zones to all zoneszones to all zones

Compare all-walk time/utility to transit Compare all-walk time/utility to transit skim/utilityskim/utility If all-walk time is less onerous, zero out transit If all-walk time is less onerous, zero out transit

skimskim

Can be done post skimming or in mode Can be done post skimming or in mode choicechoice

20

StatusStatus

Developed “framework” documents to Developed “framework” documents to summarize key pointssummarize key points Theoretical – coordination of individual partsTheoretical – coordination of individual parts Application – parameter settings, technical Application – parameter settings, technical

detailsdetails Both available on Both available on www.fsutmsonline.netwww.fsutmsonline.net

Developed training model with full Developed training model with full transit modeltransit model

Transit model training workshop: June 4-Transit model training workshop: June 4-7, 20077, 2007

21

Special ThanksSpecial Thanks

James Ryan & Nazrul Islam, FTAJames Ryan & Nazrul Islam, FTA

Wade White & Dudley Morrell, Wade White & Dudley Morrell, CitilabsCitilabs

William Woodford, Jeffrey William Woodford, Jeffrey Bruggeman & Ashutosh Kumar, Bruggeman & Ashutosh Kumar, AECOM ConsultAECOM Consult

22

Thank you!Thank you!