REG 368 – Road &

Transport

Dr AHMAD HILMY ABDUL HAMID

School of Housing, Building & Planning
 What is Transportation Planning?

Planning is the process of deciding what to do and how to do it.

Effective planning allows people’s needs, preferences and values to be reflected

in decisions.

Planning occurs at many different levels, from day-to-day decisions made by

individuals and families, to major decisions made by governments and
businesses that have comprehensive, long-term impacts on society.
 
A basic principle of good planning is that individual, short-term decisions are
coordinated in order to support strategic, long-term objectives.

Comprehensive planning should allow transportation, land use, economic

development and social planning decisions to be coordinated.

The overall goal of transportation planning should be to create a better,

more prosperous and more sustainable place.
 Some Pitfalls to avoid in Effective Transportation Planning
(The Six Deadly No-Nos)

In most cases, contemporary transportation provision and planning work against

the broader goals of creating better places. Some common pitfalls in contemporary
transportation planning that contribute to this problem include:

1. Confusion between goals and objectives

2. Confusion between development and growth
3. Overlooking the broader impacts of transportation plans
4. Planning based solely on projection of past trends
5. Focusing only on those issues that are easy to measure
6. Focusing on mobility and not accessibility
1. Don’t Confuse Goals and Objectives

Goals are desired outcomes to be achieved, such as health, equity and

happiness.

Objectives are ways to achieve goals.

During a planning process it is helpful to ask regularly, “What are we trying

to achieve?”

The ‘what’ is the goal – we develop objectives to achieve this goal.

It is important not to confuse goals and objectives because

Goals are fundamental – we can’t just substitute one goal for another.
One the other hand, different objectives can be employed to achieve a given
goal. It is important to keep our options open and selective the objective that is
best for the situation.
2. Plan for Development, not for Growth

Planners must make a distinction between growth (increased quantity) and

development (increased quality).

In other words, growth means getting bigger, while development means

getting better.

Transportation plans should contribute to the development of a place not

simply to its growth.

Zurich – The Little Big City

In Zurich in the 1970s, transportation planning was done with the explicit intent
that they wanted to develop but not necessarily to grow. Other places might
be willing to accommodate both development and growth. But the important
point is that development should be accorded the higher priority – not growth.
3. Don’t Overlook the Wider Impacts of Transportation Plans

Transportation plans always have wide ranging impacts, affecting not just
travel but also economic, social and environmental aspects of our lives.

These impacts may be short term or much longer term, and

they may extend across geographic and political boundaries.

If we don’t consider these wider impacts, our plans will lead to unintended
or undesirable consequences.
Understanding the Wider Impacts of Transportation Planning

Litman define three levels of impact from transportation planning

First level – Direct impacts or changes in travel conditions and costs.

 
Second level – Current indirect impacts or changes in travel behavior,
tax revenue, and external impacts.
 
Third level – Long-term indirect impacts or changes in land use,
economic development.
 Example of the Different Levels of Impact of a Transportation Plan

Increasing roadway capacity can have the first-level impacts of initially reducing traffic congestion
and increasing vehicle traffic speeds.

A second-level impact is that the increased traffic capacity may attract additional travel from other
routes and times (Rebound Effects), and it may create barriers to walking and cycling.

A third-level impact may be that over the long run, land use patterns become more dispersed and
automobile dependent (Land Use Impacts).  This is one source of so called 'induced traffic' - traffic
over and above what one would expect from just extrapolating from the past rate of growth.
The Different Geographic Scales of Planning

Planning also occurs at many different geographic scales. Some geographic scales reflect
natural areas and boundaries and others just reflect political jurisdictions (see table below).

In your project you need to be careful in understanding at which level of geography you are
working. This can be very confusing - sometimes plans apply to overlapping levels of
geography.

Also, the impact of transportation planning often extends beyond the boundary of the
jurisdiction for which the plan was developed.

 
4. Do Not Base Plans Simply on Predicting Past Trends

Contemporary transportation planning is often based on using past trends

to predict future vehicle traffic. This predicted traffic volume is then used
to determine the size of new transportation facilities. One problem with
this approach is that it assumes that the factors that led traffic volume to
increase in the past will continue into the future.

Supposedly in banking they know that this is not a reasonable approach

since they warn you ‘Past performance is no guarantee of future results’.

We also have to consider the long term impact of widening roads, for
example – as we discussed earlier - because they change the conditions,
they can lead to induced traffic, which in turn makes the prediction useless.

The approach of basing planning on past trends is derisively referred to as

‘predict and provide’ planning by some.
 Kingston is an example
of a place which has
experienced induced traffic

Road Widening Resulting from "Predict and Provide" Planning in Kingston, Jamaica
(source: Garrick, Half-way-Tree Rd, Kingston 2004)
Traffic Capacity: The Ultimate Solution

And yet traffic still

seems not to be moving
With Canada and Mexico
we could add a few more
lanes in each direction
5. Do not focus just on those issue that can be easily measured

Vehicle traffic is relatively easy to measure, so transportation system

quality tends to be evaluated based largely on automobile travel conditions
(e.g., average traffic speeds, roadway Level-of-Service, vehicle congestion
delay, vehicle operating costs, parking supply).

Accessibility impacts, including impacts on transit service quality, non-

motorized transport and land use accessibility, are often harder to measure
and tend to be ignored.

This approach tends to favor automobile-oriented solutions, and

undervalues alternative solutions to transportation problems
6. Focus on Accessibility not Mobility

Accessibility versus Mobility. In order to understand this issue we need

distinguish between traffic, mobility and access as follows:

Traffic 
Conventional transportation often reflects the assumption that
transportation means motor vehicle traffic.
Mobility
A more comprehensive approach reflects the assumption that
transportation means personal mobility, measured in terms of person-trips
and person-kilometers.
Accessibility 
The most comprehensive definition of transportation is Accessibility, the
ability to reach desired goods, services and activities. This is the ultimate
goal of transportation, and so is the best definition to use in transportation
planning.
Understanding the Difference between Accessibility and Mobility

Courtesy of

Ian Lockwood and Paul Moore

Glatting Jackson Kercher Anglin, Inc.
Do these two places provide the same level of Access? Mobility?
Detroit 1949 Street Network – Access or
Mobility?
Detroit Existing Street Network: Access or Mobility?

Viewpoint in next slide

Proof that you can build your way out of congestion
What are the physical differences between these two places?
 Access versus Mobility

Which of these two places

•providemore access with less mobility?

•would you expect more congestion?
•would you expect more people walking?
Before

Chattanooga, TN
After Mobility or Access?

Why?

Chattanooga, TN
 Urban Mobility
1. Urban Movements
2. Urban Transit
 1. Urban Movements
Land use
 Specific movements are linked to specific urban activities and
their land use.
 Involves the generation and attraction of an explicit array of
movements.
 Factors:
 Recurrence, income, urban form, spatial accumulation, level of
development and technology.
Urban movements
 Obligatory: linked to scheduled activities (such as home-to-work
movements)
 Voluntary: free to decide of their scheduling (such as leisure).
 Types of Urban Movements
Movement Type Pattern Dominant Time Destination

Pendular Structured Morning and Localized

afternoon (employment)
Professional Varied Workdays Localized

Personal Structured Evening Varied with

some foci
Touristic Seasonal Day Highly localized

Distribution Structured Nighttime Localized

Main Purposes of Urban Trips

3%
20%

Work
Shopping
School
Business (Work)
15%
49% Business (Personnal)
Home
Other
5%
3%
5%
 Typical Urban Day Trips by
Modes, Origins and
Destinations
1:30 AM 10:45 PM 10:30 PM
Shopping mall Delivery Return Delivery
2:30 AM
8:30 PM
Return Restaurant
Drive alone 7:00 PM 1:30 PM
Drive alone 5:30 PM Walk
Drive alone

7:00 AM Home Work 12:30 PM

Walk
Garbage
pickup 8:00 AM 8:15 AM
Carpool Drive alone

10:00 AM
Passengers 10:05 AM Parcel
School Parcel Drop off
Freight (drop off child) Pickup
 Time of the Day in a North
American Metropolis

35
Shopping
30 Social / Recreation
Work
25 Total trips
Percentage

20

15

10

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Home-to-Work Trips Modes,
United States, 1985-1999

100%

80%
Works at home
Other means
60% Walks only
Bicycle or motorcycle
40% Mass transportation
Carpool
Drives self
20%

0%
1985 1989 1993 1997 1999
Modal Split for Global Cities,
1995

100
90
80
70 Private Motor Vehicle
60 Transit
50 Walking / Cycling
40
30
20
10
0
Chinese American Australian West High Income Low Income
Cities Cities Cities European Asian Cities Asian Cities
Cities
Mode Share for Commuting,
New York, 1980-2000

100%
90%
80%
70%
Other non walk
60% Taxi
50% Bus
40% Subway
30% Automobile

20%
10%
0%
1980 1990 2000
 2. Urban Transit
Context
 Dominantly an urban transportation mode.
 The great majority of transit trips are taking place in large cities.
 Conditions fundamental to the efficiency of transit systems:
 High density and high mobility demands over short distances.
 Shared public service:
 Benefits from economies of agglomeration related to high densities.
 Economies of scale related to high mobility demands.
Transit systems
 Many types of services established to answer mobility needs.
 Variety of transit systems around the world.
 Private Vehicle and Public
Transport Market Share,
1990/91
100.0%
American Cities
90.0%
European Cities
80.0%
Private Vehicle Market Share

70.0%

Asian Cities
60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0%
Public Transport Market Share
 2. Urban Transit
Metro system
 Heavy rail system, often underground in central areas, with fixed routes, services and
stations.
 Uniform frequency of services (peak hours increase).
 Fares are commonly access driven and constant.
Bus system
 Scheduled fixed routes and stops serviced by motorized multiple passengers vehicles
(45 - 80 passengers).
 Services are often synchronized with other heavy systems (feeders).
 Express services (notably during peak hours).
Transit rail system
 Fixed rail (tram rail system and commuter rail system)
 Frequency of services strongly linked with peak hours.
 Traffic tends to be imbalanced.
 Separate fares and proportional to distance or service zones.
the World by Annual Ridership
and Metropolitan Population,
2000
Subway Ridership (billions)
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Sao Paulo
London
Hong Kong
Osaka
Population
Paris
Ridership
New York City
Seoul
Mexico City
Tokyo
Moscow

0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Metropolitan Population (millions)
 2. Urban Transit
Shuttle system
 Privately (dominantly) owned using small buses or vans.
 Routes and frequencies tend to be fixed (can be adapted).
 Service numerous specific functions:
 Expanding mobility along a corridor during peak hour.
 Linking a specific activity center (shopping mall, university campus, industrial zone,
hotel, etc.).
 Servicing the elderly or people with disabilities.
Paratransit system
 Flexible and privately owned demand-response system:
 Minibuses, vans or shared taxis.
 Commonly servicing peripheral and low density zones.
 Door-to-door service, less loading and unloading time, less stops and more
maneuverability in traffic.
 2. Urban Transit
Taxi system
 Privately owned cars or small vans offering an on-call,
individual demand-response system.
 Fares:
 Commonly a function of a metered distance/time.
 Can be negotiated.
 When competition is not permitted, fares are set up by regulations.
 No fixed routes:
 Servicing an area where a taxi company has the right (permit) to
pickup customers.
 Rights are issued by a municipality.
 Several companies may be allowed to compete on the same territory.
 Components of an Urban
Transit System
X
X X
X X X
X

X
X X X X
X
X

X
X
X X
X
X
X X

Metro station Transit rail station Bus stop Shuttle stop Paratransit Taxi service
X
Express stop boundary
Transfer
 Estimated Ridership of the
World’s Largest Public Transit
Systems, 1998
New York

Manila

Paris

London

Sao Paulo

Buenos Aires

Beijing

Mumbai

Seoul

Hong Kong

Osaka-Kobe-Kyoto

Shanghai

Moscow

Mexico City

Tokyo-Yokohama

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000

Estimated Annual Journeys (billions)
 Millions

2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000

0
19
70
19
80
19
81
19
82
19
83
19
84
19
85
19
86
19
87
19

Bus
88
19
89
19
90
19
91
19

Heavy Rail
92
19
93
19
94
19
95
19
96
Light Rail

19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
Trips by Public Transport in the
United States, 1970-2002
D – Urban Transport Problems
1. Geographical Challenges Facing Urban
Transportation
2. Automobile Dependency
3. Congestion
 1. Geographical Challenges
Facing Urban Transportation
Context
 Most important transport problems often related to urban areas.
 Urban productivity:
 Dependent on the efficiency of its transport system.
 Move labor, consumers and freight between several origins and
destinations.
 Growing complexity of cities:
 Accompanied by a wide array of urban transportation problems.
 Some problems are ancient like congestion (Rome).
 Others are new like environmental impacts:
 Notably CO2 emissions linked with the diffusion of the internal
combustion engine.
 1. Geographical Challenges
Facing Urban Transportation
Traffic congestion and parking difficulties.
Public transport crowding and off-peak
inadequacy.
Difficulties for pedestrians.
Environmental impacts and energy consumption.
Accidents and safety.
Land consumption.
Freight distribution.
 2. Automobile Dependency
Causes
 Advantages of automobile use:
 Performance, comfort, status, speed, and convenience.
 Illustrate why car ownership continues to grow worldwide.
 Factors of growth:
 Sustained economic growth (increase in revenue and quality of life).
 Complex individual urban movement patterns.
 Peripheral urban growth.
Factors of dependency
 Underpricing and consumer choices:
 Most road infrastructures are subsidized (considered a public service).
 Drivers do not bear the full cost of car usage.
 Car ownership is a symbol of status
 Single home ownership.
 2. Automobile Dependency
 Planning and investment practices:
 Aims towards improving road and parking facilities in
an ongoing attempt to avoid congestion.
 Transportation alternatives tend to be disregarded.
 In many cases, zoning regulations impose minimum
standards of road and parking services and de facto
impose a regulated car dependency.
 3. Congestion
Congestion
 Occurs when transport demand exceeds transport
supply in a specific section of the transport
system.
 Each vehicle impairs the mobility of others.
 Types:
 Recurring congestion (specific times of the day and on
specific segments of the transport system).
 Random events (accidents and weather conditions).
 Recurring Congestion

10 3
Traffic
9 2
Congestion
8 Capacity 1
7 0
6 -1
5 Unused Capacity -2
4 -3
3 -4
2 -5
1 -6
0 -7
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
 Average Hourly Traffic on
George Washington Bridge,
2002
20,000 Eastbound
18,000 Westbound
Total
16,000

14,000

12,000

10,000

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

0
M

PM

PM
PM
AM

AM

AM

M
1A

2A

3A

4A

5A

6A

7A

8A

9A

1P

2P

3P

4P

5P

6P

7P

8P

9P
12

10

11
12

10

11
 The Vicious Circle of
Congestion

Congestion Public
The number pressures to
of increase
movements capacity
increases
New
The average capacity
length of Movements
movements are more
increases Urban sprawl
easy
is favored
 American Cities, 1986-1990 (in
1,000 hours per day)

0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000

Los Angeles

New York

San Francisco

Washington

Chicago

Houston

Detroit
1986
Boston 1990
 Traffic Conditions in Major
American Cities, 1982-2003

100%
90%
80%
70% Extreme
60% Severe
50% Heavy
40% Moderate
30% Uncongested
20%
10%
0%
1982 1990 1997 2003
 3. Congestion
Ramp metering
 Controlling access to a congested highway by letting automobiles in one at
a time instead of in groups.
Traffic signal synchronization
 Tuning the traffic signals to the time and direction of traffic flows.
Incident management
 Making sure that vehicles involved in accidents or mechanical failures are
removed as quickly as possible from the road.
HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) lanes
 Vehicles with 2 or more passengers (buses, vans, carpool, etc.) have
exclusive access to a less congested lane.
Public transit
 Offering alternatives to driving.
Highway Planning
 Objectives
1. Identify highway system components
2. Define transportation planning
3. Recall the transportation planning process and its
design purposes
4. Identify the four steps of transportation demand
modeling and describe modeling basics.
5. Explain how transportation planning and modeling
process results are used in highway design.
Highway System Components
1. Vehicle
2. Driver (and peds./bikes)
3. Roadway
4. Consider characteristics, capabilities, and
interrelationships in design

Start with demand needs (number of lanes?)

 Transportation Planning
(one definition)
Activities that:
1. Collect information on performance
2. Identify existing and forecast future system
performance levels
3. Identify solutions
 
Focus: meet existing and forecast travel demand
Where does planning fit in?
 Transportation Planning
in Highway Design
1. identify deficiencies in system
2. identify and evaluate alternative alignment
impacts on system
3. predict volumes for alternatives
 in urban areas … model? … smaller cities may not need
(few options)
 in rural areas … use statewide model if available … else:
see lab 3-type approach (note Iowa is developing a
statewide model)
Truck Traffic
 Planning at 3 levels
State … STIP Statewide Transportation
Improvement Program (list of projects)
Regional … MPO Metropolitan Planning
Organization (>50,000 pop.), 25 year long
range plan and TIP (states now also do LRP)
Local …project identification and prioritization
Four Steps of Conventional
Transportation Modeling

1. Trip Generation
2. Trip Distribution
3. Mode Split
4. Trip Assignment
 Study Area
Clearly define the area under consideration
 Where does one entity end?
 May be defined by county boundaries, jurisdiction, town
centers
 Study Area
May be regional
Metropolitan area – Des Moines including suburbs,
Ankeny, etc.
 Overall impact to major street/highway network
Local – e.g., impact of trips to new Ames mall
 Impact on local street/highway system
 Impact on intersections
 Need for turning lane or new signal – can a model do
this level of detail?
 Study Area
Links and nodes
Simple representation of the geometry of the
transportation systems (usually major roads or
transportation routes)
Links: sections of roadway (or railway)
Nodes: intersection of 2+ links
Centroids: center of TAZs
Centroid connectors: centroid to roadway network
where trips load onto the network
Travel Analysis Zones (TAZs)
Homogenous urban activities (generate same types of
trips)
 Residential
 Commercial
 Industrial

May be as small as one city block or as large as 10 sq.

miles
Natural boundaries --- major roads, rivers, airport
boundaries
Sized so only 10-15% of trips are intrazonal
www.sanbag.ca.gov/ planning/subr_ctp_taz.html
 Four Steps of Conventional
Transportation Modeling
Divide study area into study zones
4 steps
 Trip Generation
 -- decision to travel for a specific purpose (eat lunch)
 Trip Distribution
 -- choice of destination (a particular restaurant? The
nearest restaurant?)
 Mode Choice
 -- choice of travel mode (by bike)
 Network Assignment
 -- choice of route or path (Elwood to Lincoln to US 69)
Model Step #1…

Trip
Generation
 Trip Generation
Calculate number of trips generated in each
zone
 500 Households each making 2 morning trips to
work (avg. trip ends ~ 10/day!)
 Worker leaving job for lunch
Calculate number of trips attracted to each
zone
 Industrial center attracting 500 workers
 McDonalds attracting 200 lunch trips
 Trip Generation
Number of trips that begin from or end in each
TAZ
Trips for a “typical” day
Trips are produced or attracted
# of trips is a function of:
 TAZs land use activities
 Socioeconomic characteristics of TAZ population
 Trip Generation

Caliper Corp. ModelManager 2000™

 Trip Generation
3 variables related to the factors that influence trip
production and attraction (measurable variables)
 Density of land use affects production & attraction
 Number of dwellings, employees, etc. per unit of land
 Higher density usually = more trips
 Social and socioeconomic characters of users influence
production
 Average family income
 Education
 Car ownership
 Location
 Traffic congestion
 Environmental conditions
 Trip Generation

Trip purpose
 Zonal trip making estimated separately by trip
purpose
 School trips
 Work trips
 Shopping trips
 Recreational trips
 Travel behavior depends on trip purpose
 School & work trips are regular (time of day)
 Recreational trips highly irregular
 Trip Generation
Forecast # of trips that produced or attracted by each TAZ for
a “typical” day
Usually focuses on Monday - Friday
# of trips is forecast as a function of other variables
Attraction
 Number and types of retail facilities
 Number of employees
 Land use
Production
 Car ownership
 Income
 Population (employment characteristics)
 Trip Purpose
Trips are estimated by purpose (categories)
 Work
 School
 Shopping
 Social or recreational
 Others (medical)
Travel behavior of trip-makers depends somewhat on trip purpose
 Work trips
 regular
 Often during peak periods
 Usually same origin/destination
 School trips
 Regular
 Same origin/destination
 Shopping recreational
 Highly variable by origin and destination, number, and time of day
 Household Based
Trips based on “households” rather than individual
Individual too complex
Theory assumes households with similar characteristics have
similar trip making characteristics
However
 Concept of what constitutes a “household” (i.e. 2-parent family,
kids, hamster) has changed dramatically
 Domestic partnerships
 Extended family arrangements
 Single parents
 Singles
 roommates
 Trip Generation Analysis
3 techniques
 Cross-classification
 Covered in 355
 Multiple regression analysis
 Mathematical equation that describes trips as a function
of another variable
 Similar in theory to trip rate
 Won’t go into
 Trip-rate analysis models
 Average trip-production or trip-attraction rates for
specific types of producers and attractors
 More suited to trip attractions
Trip attractions
 Example: Trip-rate analysis
models

For 100 employees in a retail shopping center, calculate

the total number of trips
Home-based work (HBW) =
100 employees x 1.7 trips/employee = 170
Home-based Other (HBO) =
100 employees x 10 trips/employee = 1,000
Non-home-based (NHB) =
100 employees x 5 trips/employee = 500

Total = 170 + 1000 + 500 = 1,670 daily trips

Model Step #2…

Trip
Distribution
 Trip Distribution
Predicts where trips go from each TAZ
Determines trips between pairs of zones
 Tij: trips from TAZ i going to TAZ j

Function of attractiveness of TAZ j

 Size of TAZ j

 Distance to TAZ j

 If 2 malls are similar (in the same trip purpose),

travelers will tend to go to closest
Different methods but gravity model is most popular
 Trip Distribution
Determines trips between pairs of zones
 Tij: trips from TAZ i going to TAZ j

Function of attractiveness of TAZ j

 Size of TAZ j
 Distance to TAZ j

 If 2 malls are similar, travelers will tend to

go to closest
Different methods but gravity model is most
popular
 Trip Distribution

Caliper Corp. Maricopa County

 Gravity Model
Tij = Pi AjFijKij

Qij = total trips from i to j

Σ
Pi = total number of trips produced in zone i, from trip
generation AjFijKij
Aj = number of trips attracted to zone j, from trip
generation
Fij = impedance (usually inverse of travel time), calculated
Kij = socioeconomic adjustment factor for pair ij
Model Step #3…

Mode Choice
 Mode Choice
In most situations, a traveler has a choice of
modes
 Transit, walk, bike, carpool, motorcycle, drive
alone
Mode choice/mode split determines # of trips
between zones made by auto or other mode,
usually transit
 Characteristics Influencing
Mode Choice
Availability of parking
Income
Availability of transit
Auto ownership
Type of trip
 Work trip more likely transit
 Special trip – trip to airport or baseball stadium served by
transit
 Shopping, recreational trips by auto
Stage in life
 Old and young are more likely to be transit dependent

93
 Characteristics Influencing
Mode Choice
Cost
 Parking costs, gas prices, maintenance?
 Transit fare
Safety
Time
 Transit usually more time consuming (not in NYC or DC …)
Image
 In some areas perception is that only poor ride transit
 In others (NY) everyone rides transit

94
 Mode Choice Modeling
A numerical method to describe how people
choose among competing alternatives (don’t
confuse model and modal)
Highly dependent on characteristics of region
Model may be separated by trip purposes
 Utility and Disutility Function
Utility function: measures satisfaction derived from
choices
Disutility function: represents generalized costs of each
choice
Usually expressed as the linear weighted sum of the
independent variables of their transformation
U = a0 + a1X1 + a2X2 + ….. + arXr

U: utility derived from choice

Xr: attributes
ar: model parameters
 Logit Models
Calculates the probability of selecting a
particular mode

p(K) = ____eUk__
 eUk

p: probability of selecting mode k

 Logit Model Example 1
Utility functions for auto and transit
U = ak– 0.35t1 – 0.08t2 – 0.005c
ak = mode specific variable
Do you agree with
t1 = total travel time (minutes) the relative
magnitude of the
t2 = waiting time (minutes) time parameters? Is
there double
counting/colinearity?
c = cost (cents)
 Logit Model Example 1 (cont)
Travel characteristics between two zones
Variable Auto Transit
Do you agree with
ak -0.46 -0.07 the relative
magnitude of the
t1 20 30 mode specific
parameters? How
t2 8 6 much effect does
cost have?
c 320 100

Uauto = -0.46 – 0.35(20) – 0.08(8) – 0.005(320) = -9.70

Utransit = -0.07 – 0.35(30) – 0.08(6) – 0.005(100) = -11.55

 Logit Model Example 1
(cont)
Uauto = -9.70

Utransit = -11.55

Logit Model:

p(auto) = ___eUa __ = _____e-9.70 ____ = 0.86

eUa + eUt e-9.70 + e-11.55

p(transit) = ___eUt __ = _____e-11.55 ____ = 0.14

eUa + eUt e-9.70 + e-11.55
 Logit Model Example 2
The city decides to spend money to create and improve
bike trails so that biking becomes a viable option, what
percent of the trips will be by bike?
Assume:
• A bike trip is similar to a transit trip
• A bike trip takes 5 minutes more than a transit trip but
with no waiting time
• After the initial purchase of the bike, the trip is “free”
 Logit Model Example 2 (cont)
Travel characteristics between two zones
Variable Auto Transit Bike
ak -0.46 -0.07 -0.07
t1 20 30 35
t2 8 6 0
c 320 100 0

Uauto = -0.46 – 0.35(20) – 0.08(8) – 0.005(320) = -9.70

Utransit = -0.07 – 0.35(30) – 0.08(6) – 0.005(100) = -11.55

Ubike = -0.07 – 0.35(35) – 0.08(0) – 0.005(0) = -12.32

 Logit Model Example 2 (cont)
Uauto = -9.70, Utransit = -11.55, Ubike = -12.32 Notice that auto
lost share even
though its “utility”
Logit Model: stayed the same

p(auto) = _____eUa ____ = _______e-9.70 ______ = 0.81

eUa + eUt +eUb e-9.70 + e-11.55 + e-12.32

p(transit) = _____eUt__ __ = ______e-11.55 ______ = 0.13

eUa + eUt +eUb e-9.70 + e-11.55 + e-12.32

p(bike) = _____eUt__ __ = ________e-11.55 ______ = 0.06

eUa + eUt +eUb e-9.70 + e-11.55 + e-12.32
Model Step #4…
Traffic Assignment
(Route Choice)

Caliper Corp.
 Trip Assignment
Trip makers choice of path between origin and
destination
Path: streets selected
Transit: usually set by route
Results in estimate of traffic volumes on each
roadway in the network
 Person Trips vs. Vehicle
Trips
Trip generation step calculated total person trips
Trip assignment deals with volume not person trips
Need to adjust person trips to reflect vehicle trips
Understand units during trip generation phase
 Person Trips vs. Vehicle
Trips Example
Usually adjust by average auto occupancy
Example:
If:
average auto occupancy = 1.2
number of person trips from zone 1 = 550

So:
Vehicle trips = 550 person trips/1.2 persons per vehicle = 458.33
vehicle trips
 Time of Day Patterns
Trip generation usually based on 24-hour
period
LOS calculations usually based on hourly time
period
Hour, particularly peak, is often of more interest
than daily
 Time of Day Patterns
Common time periods
 Morning peak
 Afternoon peak
 Off-peak
Calculation of trips by time of day
 Use of factors (e.g., morning peak may be 11%
of daily traffic)
 Estimate trip generation by hour
 Minimum Path

Theory: users will select the quickest route

between any origin and destination
Several route choice models (all based on
some “minimum” path)
 All or nothing
 Multipath
 Capacity restraint
 Minimum Tree
Starts at zone and selects minimum path to each
successive set of nodes
Until it reaches destination node

2
(3) (2)
(7)
1 5
4
(4) (4)
3

Path from 1 to 5
 Minimum Tree
2
(3) (2)
(7)
1 5
4
(4) (4)
3
1. Path from 1 to 5 first passes thru 4
2. First select minimum path from 1 to 4 See CE451/551
notes for more on
3. Path 1-2-4 has impedance of 5 shortest path
computations –
4. Path 1-3-4 has impedance of 8 several methods are
available
5. Select 1-2-4
 All or Nothing
Allocates all volume between zones to
minimum path based on free-flow link
impedances
Does not update as the network loads
Becomes unreliable as volumes and travel time
increases
 Multi-Path
Assumes that all traffic will not use shortest path
Assumes that traffic will allocate itself to alternative paths
between a pair of nodes based on costs
Uses some method to allocate percentage of trips based on
cost
 Utility functions (logit)
 Or some other relationship based on cost
As cost increases, probability that the route will be chosen
decreases
 Capacity Restraint
Once vehicles begin selecting the minimum
path between a set of nodes, volume
increase and so do travel times
Original minimum paths may no longer be the
minimum path
Capacity restraint assigns traffic iteratively,
updating impedance at each step