DOCSLIB.ORG

The Oregon Modeling Improvement Program: an Overview

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Oregon Modeling Improvement Program: an Overview The Oregon Modeling Improvement Program: An Overview prepared by Oregon Department of Transportation Transportation Planning Analysis Unit MW Consulting PB Consult, Inc. June 2002 The Oregon Modeling Improvement Program: An Overview Prepared by: Oregon Department of Transportation - Transportation Planning Analysis Unit MW Consulting PB Consult, Inc. Copyright @2002 by the Oregon Department of Transportation. Permission is given to quote and reproduce parts of this document if credit is given to the source. This project was funded in part by the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. The contents of this report reflect the views of the Oregon Department of Transportation, Transportation Analysis Unit, which is responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification or regulation. For copies or more information about this report contact: William J. Upton Transportation Modeling Program Manager Oregon Department of Transportation 555 13th Street N.E., Suite 2 Salem, Oregon 97301-4178 Telephone: (503) 986-4106 Fax: (503) 986-4174 E-mail: [email protected] The Oregon Modeling Improvement Program: An Overview prepared by Oregon Department of Transportation Transportation Planning Analysis Unit MW Consulting PB Consult, Inc. June 2002 The Oregon Modeling Improvement Program June 2002 Table of Contents Table of Contents..............................................................................................................................i List of Figures .................................................................................................................................ii List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................ii Appendixes.......................................................................................................................................ii List of Abbreviations and Symbols.................................................................................................iii Oregon Modeling Improvement Program Strategic Elements Chart..............................................iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................ v INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1 OREGON MODELING IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM...................................................2 RESOURCES ..................................................................................................................................3 OUTREACH....................................................................................................................................5 THE OREGON MODELING STEERING COMMITTEE.................................................5 PEER REVIEW PANEL.....................................................................................................6 STATEWIDE MODELING USER GROUP.......................................................................6 TRAINING AND EDUCATION........................................................................................6 INFORMATION SHARING...............................................................................................7 COMMUNICATION ..........................................................................................................7 FORMAL EDUCATION ....................................................................................................8 DEVELOPMENT............................................................................................................................9 RESEARCH.........................................................................................................................9 JOINT MODEL DEVELOPMENT...................................................................................10 RURAL JOINT MODEL ESTIMATION.........................................................................10 URBAN JOINT MODEL ESTIMATION.........................................................................10 MODEL ENHANCEMENTS............................................................................................11 DOCUMENTATION ENHANCEMENT.........................................................................11 TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE MODEL INTEGRATION PROJECT............11 Design of First Generation TLUMIP Models........................................................13 UrbanSim...............................................................................................................16 Statewide Model.....................................................................................................22 Model Simplifications............................................................................................26 Second Generation Statewide Model`....................................................................31 TRANSIMS .......................................................................................................................32 IMPLEMENTATION....................................................................................................................33 STANDARDS....................................................................................................................33 CASE STUDIES................................................................................................................34 UrbanSim - Eugene/Springfield.............................................................................34 First Generation Statewide Model - Willamette Valley Livability Forum............35 First Generation Statewide Model - House Bill 3090............................................37 General Conclusions ..............................................................................................38 The Oregon Modeling Improvement Program i June 2002 Table of Contents (continued) DATA.............................................................................................................................................39 HOUSEHOLD ACTIVITY AND TRAVEL SURVEY....................................................39 RECREATION/TOURISM ACTIVITY SURVEY ..........................................................39 OREGON TRAVEL BEHAVIOR SURVEY...................................................................40 LONGITUDINAL PANEL SURVEY..............................................................................40 FREIGHT DATA COLLECTION ....................................................................................40 Commodity Flow Data Collection.........................................................................40 Freight Shipper and Carrier Survey.......................................................................40 Truck Intercept Survey...........................................................................................40 Truck Generation and Distribution Survey............................................................41 THE FUTURE OF OMIP..............................................................................................................43 List of Figures Figure 1. Schematic Representation of the Statewide Model.......................................................12 Figure 2. UrbanSim Model Structure........................................................................................... 18 Figure 3. Modeling Changes Over Time ..................................................................................... 20 Figure 4. Land use-Transportation Sequence .............................................................................. 20 Figure 5. Sequence of Activity and Transportation Modeling......................................................23 Figure 6. Schematic Representation of an Input-Output Model...................................................23 Figure 7. Substate Modeling Framework......................................................................................26 Figure 8. Geographic Activity Zones............................................................................................27 List of Tables Table 1. Capabilities to Address Policy Issues.............................................................................14 Table 2. Decision-Makers and Choices Affecting Urban Development ..................................... 18 Table 3. Model Economic Sectors................................................................................................27 Table 4. Statewide Model Data Requirements.............................................................................31 Table 5. Study Scenarios with Policy Variables...........................................................................35 Appendixes Appendix A. Transportation and Land Use Model Integration Project Generation 1...............A-1 Goals & Objectives, May 9, 1996 Appendix B. Transportation and Land Use Model Integration Project Generation 2 ...............B-1 Goals & Objectives, June 22, 1998 Appendix C. References ............................................................................................................C-1 The Oregon Modeling Improvement Program ii June 2002 List of Abbreviations and Symbols ATF Alternative Transportation Futures study by
Load more

Recommended publications
  • State of the System 2016 Report on Oregon's Transportation System
    STATE OF THE SYSTEM 2016 REPORT ON OREGON’S TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PHOTO CREDITS All photos: ODOT Photo and Video Services or ODOT staff. TABLE OF CONTENTS A INTRODUCTION 2 Transportation System Infrastructure Map 3 An Overview of Oregon’s Transportation System and Why it’s Important for Oregon 3 Purpose of the State of the System Report 3 The Oregon Department of Transportation and its Role in the System 4 Trends Affecting Oregon and its Transportation System 5 The Oregon Transportation Plan and its Implementation 7 The Seven Oregon Transportation Plan Goals B THE STATE OF THE SYSTEM 8 Mobility and Accessibility 14 Management of the System 20 Economic Vitality 28 Sustainability 32 Safety and Security 38 Funding the Transportation System 42 Coordination, Communication and Cooperation C MOVING FORWARD 48 Where to Find Additional Information PAGE 2 STATE OF OREGON State of Oregon TRANSPORTATIONTransportation System SYSTEM Infrastructure INFRASTRUCTURE ? September 2016 Port of Astoria p Port of St. Helens Port of Morrow Port of Umatilla ? Port of Hood River ? Port of Cascade Locks Port of Arlington ? Port of Nehalem ? Port of The Dalles Eastern Oregon THE NUMBERS Port of Portland Regional at Pendleton Portland International ? ? ¨¦§84 ? o ? o ? 73,933 total miles of Port of Garibaldi ? ? highways, streets and Port of Tillamooik Bay roads 8,032 miles of state highways 32,907 miles of county roads ? 11,029 miles of city streets Port of Newport ? Port of Toledo ? 21,965 miles of “other roads” miles of "other
    [Show full text]
  • Grain, Flour and Ships – the Wheat Trade in Portland, Oregon
    Grain, Flour and Ships The Wheat Trade in Portland, Oregon Postcard Views of the Oregon Grain Industry, c1900 Prepared for Prosper Portland In Partial Fulfillment of the Centennial Mills Removal Project Under Agreement with the Oregon SHPO and the USACE George Kramer, M.S., HP Sr. Historic Preservation Specialist Heritage Research Associates, Inc. Eugene, Oregon April 2019 GRAIN, FLOUR AND SHIPS: THE WHEAT TRADE IN PORTLAND, OREGON By George Kramer Prepared for Prosper Portland 222 NW Fifth Avenue Portland, OR 97209 Heritage Research Associates, Inc. 1997 Garden Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97403 April 2019 HERITAGE RESEARCH ASSOCIATES REPORT NO. 448 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Figures ......................................................................................................................... iv List of Tables ........................................................................................................................... v 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 2. Historic Overview – Grain and Flour in Portland .............................................................. 4 Growing and Harvesting 4 Transporting Grain to Portland ................................................................................... 6 Exporting from Portland ............................................................................................. 8 Flour Mills .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Ridership Per Capita
    Transit Rides Average number of transit rides each year per Oregonian Our strategy Oregon’s transportation system supports the increased ridership throughout Oregon. This • Expand services to better serve state’s quality of life and economy across a Key Performance Measure will assist ODOT low-income Oregonians and students in diversity of geographies and people. Public in assessing the impact of the new funds. grades 9 – 12. transportation is a key piece of the transportation system for those who cannot With more money, transit providers will: About the target or choose not to drive. The demand for • Increase service levels in both urban and The target is an annual goal of 32 rides per public transportation in Oregon is rural areas Oregonian. The goal will need to be re- anticipated to increase as population grows. • Offer more intercity and regional route evaluated in two to four years. The target service was set by evaluating transit ridership trends Starting in 2019, an influx of funds from the • Improve transit supports such as and population growth over the five-year Statewide Transportation Improvement improved passenger facilities, and period of 2011 to 2016. Fund (STIF), created as part of the 2017 technologies such as electronic fare and transportation funding package, Keep other integrated fare systems. Oregon Moving, will fund new and expanded • Procure low- and no-emission vehicles. public transportation service, resulting in Facts • 18.9% of households report having a person who regularly uses transit (at least once a week) • 5.0% of workers report normally using transit to get to work * • 4.6% of students report normally using transit to get to school & to work September 2019 Transit Rides, cont.
    [Show full text]
  • ALL COSTS CONSIDERED III — LERC Report on Contracting
    All Costs Considered III: Further Analysis on the Contracting Out of School Support Services in Oregon Gordon Lafer, PhD Bob Bussel, PhD Jaxon Love, MBA Labor Education and Research Center University of Oregon February 2013 Acknowledgement The authors wish to thank the Oregon School Employees Association for providing financial assistance for this report. Table of Contents Introduction . 7 “A Big Impact on Longtime Employees” . 9 Assessing Privatization in Central Point . 17 Conclusion . 55 Appendix: Sources . 57 Introduction to “All Costs Considered III: Further Analysis on the Contracting Out of School Support Services in Oregon” ll Costs Considered III” marks employees working under private an extension of two previous contractors. studies conducted by the Labor “A Education and Research Center Since our previous research in (LERC) that examined the 2004 and 2008, several important transfer of school support services developments have occurred (transportation, custodial, food that have influenced the focus of service) to private operation in the this new study. During its 2009 state of Oregon. In our ongoing session, the Oregon Legislature analysis of contracting out (also passed a law (ORS 279B) known as “privatization”), we requiring that public agencies have been guided by a similar conduct a rigorous cost-benefit set of questions. Does the analysis before they decide to shift from public to private contract out a given service. The management actually deliver law stipulates that budgetary promised or predicted savings savings resulting from this to school districts? What is the administrative transfer cannot This study is an personal impact of contracting come solely from reduced wages extension of two out on workers who provide and benefits for workers employed previous studies school support services, and by a public entity.
    [Show full text]
  • Adjusting ITE's Trip Generation Handbook for Urban Context
    THE JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT AND LAND USE http://jtlu.org . 8 . 1 [2015] pp. 5– 29 Adjusting ITE’s Trip Generation Handbook for urban context Kelly J. Cliftona Kristina M. Curransb Portland State University Portland State University Christopher D. Muhsc Portland State University Abstract: This study examines the ways in which urban context affects vehicle trip generation rates across three land uses. An intercept travel survey was administered at 78 establishments (high-turnover restaurants, convenience markets, and drinking places) in the Portland, Oregon, region during 2011. This approach was developed to adjust the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook vehicle trip rates based on built environment characteristics where the establishments were located. A number of policy-relevant built environment measures were used to estimate a set of nine models predicting an adjustment to ITE trip rates. Each model was estimated as a single measure: activity density, num- ber of transit corridors, number of high-frequency bus lines, employment density, lot coverage, length of bicycle facilities, presence of rail transit, retail and service employment index, and intersection density. All of these models perform similarly (Adj. R2 0.76-0.77) in estimating trip rate adjustments. Data from 34 additional sites were collected to verify the adjustments. For convenience markets and drinking places, the adjustment models were an improvement to the ITE’s handbook method, while adjustments for restaurants tended to perform similarly to those from ITE’s estimation. The approach here is useful in guiding plans and policies for a short-term improvement to the ITE’s Trip Generation Handbook.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Resource Guide
    PORTLAND TRANSPORTATION RESOURCE GUIDE A guide for getting around Portland ST_Transportation_Resource_Guide_2018_0223.indd 1 2/23/18 3:57 PM Table of Contents Walking 1 MAPS AND INFORMATION COMMUNITY WALKS AND HIKES Bicycling 3 MAPS AND INFORMATION COMMUNITY RIDES AND CLINICS BICYCLE RENTALS BICYCLE RIDES AND CLINICS AT A GLANCE Transit 8 Mobility Devices and Accessibility 8 Motorcycles and Motor Scooters 10 Skates and Skateboards 10 Taxis and Pedicabs 10 Sharing 10 BIKE SHARING RIDE SHARING CAR SHARING Getting Out of Portland ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 11 General Transportation Resources ����������������������������������������������������������������������� 13 Important City of Portland Numbers ���������������������������������������������������Back Cover Women-specific rides and clinics offered TABLE OF CONTENTS ST_Transportation_Resource_Guide_2018_0223.indd 2 2/23/18 3:57 PM Walking — Maps and Information City of Portland Active Transportation and Safety Division Walking maps, summer guided walks, safety information, resources, policies and more. portlandoregongov/transportation/at
    [Show full text]
  • White Paper Series Bicycle and Pedestrian Forecasting Tools: State
    White Paper Series Bicycle and Pedestrian Forecasting Tools: State of the Practice April 2015 Alisar Aoun, Julie Bjornstad, Brooke DuBose, Meghan Mitman, and Mollie Pelon, Fehr & Peers For: Federal Highway Administration DTFHGI-11-H-00024 www.pedbikeinfo.org This material is based upon work supported by the Federal Highway Administration under Cooperative Agreement No. DTFH610110H-00024. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the Author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the Federal Highway Administration. Introduction Transportation forecasting models predict levels of activity, and help inform decisions on issues such as future facility use and the prioritization of projects. Travel and demand forecasting methods have long been used to estimate the number of vehicles traveling on a specific street or network and to estimate ridership for mass transit. Many jurisdictions and metropolitan planning organizations use forecasting methods to determine the potential impact of new development, changes to roadway capacity, or projected ridership for new transit. However, these methods have traditionally excluded pedestrian and bicycle activity. For communities seeking to support walking and bicycling activity, quantifying the use and potential demand of facilities that support active transportation is increasingly important. To meet this need, bicycle and pedestrian forecasting models are being developed and integrated into planning projects focusing on facilitating mobility, managing resources, and improving health and safety. These emerging forecasting approaches vary widely in the amount of data and level of effort required. The type, specificity, and reliability of data also vary between different forecasting approaches. For example, data used in forecasting models can range from readily available U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidebook on the Methods to Estimate Non
    Guidebook on Methods to Estimate Non- Motorized Travel: Overview of Methods PUBLICATION NO. FHWA-RD-98-165 JULY 1999 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Research, Development, and Technology Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center 6300 Georgetown Pike McLean, VA 22101-2296 U.S. Dept. of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration - Research, Development, & Technology Guidebook on Methods to Estimate Non-Motorized Travel: Overview of Methods (July 1999) Table of Contents Title Page Foreword Technical Documentation Page 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Purpose of Guidebook 1.2 The Importance of Forecasting Demand 1.3 How to Use This Guidebook 2.0 Introduction to Non-Motorized Travel Forecasting 2.1 Dimensions of Travel Behavior 2.2 Perspectives on Modeling Travel Behavior 2.3 The Four-Step Urban Transportation Planning Process 2.4 Factors Specifically Influencing Bicycling and Walking 2.5 Differences in Forecasting Bicycle vs. Pedestrian Travel 3.0 Guide to Available Methods 3.1 Overview of Methods Demand Estimation Comparison Studies Aggregate Behavior Studies Sketch Plan Methods Discrete Choice Models Regional Travel Models Relative Demand Potential Market Analysis Facility Demand Potential Supply Quality Analysis Bicycle and Pedestrian Compatibility Measures Environment Factors Supporting Tools and Techniques Geographic Information Systems Preference Surveys 3.2 Key Characteristics and Uses of Each Method 4.0 Conclusions and Future Needs 4.1 Conclusions 4.2 Future Needs Development of a Manual for Bicycle and Pedestrian
    [Show full text]
  • Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines
    2021 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS GUIDELINES LAST UPDATED: JANUARY 2021 BUREAU OF TRAFFIC OPERATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ........................................................................................................................................................... A-1 IMPORTANT NOTICE ........................................................................................................................................ B-1 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS OUTLINE ............................................................................................................... C-1 LIST OF REQUIRED EXHIBITS ............................................................................................................................ D-1 APPENDICES ..................................................................................................................................................... E-1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION & EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................. 1-1 CHAPTER 2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ......................................................................................................... 2-1 CHAPTER 3 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS .......................................................................................... 3-1 CHAPTER 4 PROJECTED TRAFFIC .................................................................................................................... 4-1 CHAPTER 5 TRAFFIC AND IMPROVEMENT ANALYSIS ....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Wasco County Public Transportation Advisory Committee
    Wasco County Public Transportation Advisory Committee The Dalles Transit Center, 802 Chenowith Loop Road, The Dalles Via Remote Access (Access information attached to agenda) Thursday, December 3, 2020 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. TOPIC TIME ITEM Introductions Minutes 5 minutes Approval Review and Recommend Approval of Wasco 15 Minutes Approval County Coordinated Human Services Public Transportation Plan to BOCC Review STIF Formula 45 Minutes Review • Oregon Public Transportation Goals • Project list (DRAFT) • Selection Criteria • Defining High Percentage of Low-Income Adjourn The meeting location is accessible to persons with disabilities. If you have a disability that requires any special materials, services or assistance, please contact MCEDD at 541-296- 2266 (TTY 711) at least 48 hours before the meeting. MCEDD is an equal opportunity lender, employer and provider. WASCO COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE THURSDAY, OCTOBER 29, 2020 ZOOM TELECONFERENCE COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Jim Holycross, Louise Sargent, Charlotte Sallee, Kris Boler, Lee Bryant STAFF: Brad Houghton (Deputy Director), Kathy Fitzpatrick (Mobility Manager), Lauren Hernandez (Office Administrator) GUESTS: Theresa Conley (ODOT), Krista Purser (Kittelson & Associates) CALL TO ORDER/INTRODUCTIONS Brad Houghton called the meeting to order at 10:07 a.m. A quorum was present. A roundtable of introductions took place. MINUTES Louise Sargent motioned to approve the minutes of August 2020 as presented. Kris Boler seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. KITTELSON CONSULTANTS Krista Purser reviewed steps for the Transportation Development Plan. She noted Angelo Planning Group will be consulted on land use items. Krista explained project goals include considering fixed-route, demand-response, and intercommunity services; considering capital investments and infrastructure; and providing a coordinated vision for transit service.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Transportation Baseline Report
    Transportation Baseline Report Oak Street Refinement Plan Forest Grove, Oregon DRAFT August 2020 Draft Transportation Baseline Report Project Information Project: Oak Street Refinement Plan Prepared for: 3J Consulting 9600 SW Nimbus Avenue, Suite 100 Beaverton, Oregon 97008 Reviewing Agency Jurisdiction : Forest Grove 1924 Council Street Forest Grove, Oregon 97116 Project Representative Prepared by : SCJ Alliance 8730 Tallon Lane NE, Suite 200 Lacey, WA 98516 360.352.1465 scjalliance.com Contact : Anne Sylvester, PTE [email protected] (360) 352-1465 Project Reference: SCJ 1902 .01 Path: N:\Projects\1902 3J Consulting, Inc\1902.01 Forest Grove Oak Street Area Land Use Refinement\04-Dels\01-Baseline\Transp\2020-0808 Draft Oak Street Area Transp Baseline.docx Oak Street Refinement Plan Draft Transportation Baseline Report TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ........................................................................ 1-1 2. REVIEWED DOCUMENTS AND PLANS ....................................................................... 2-1 2.1 State Documents and Plans ................................................................................................ 2-1 2.2 Regional Documents and Plans .......................................................................................... 2-1 2.3 Forest Grove Documents and Plans ................................................................................... 2-2 2.4 Washington County Documents and Plans .......................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Scoring Committee Instructions and Application Summaries
    Regional Public Transportation Advisory Committee (RPTAC) Scoring Committee Instructions and Application Summaries Prepared by Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council February 15, 2020 RPTAC Background COIC’s Regional Public Transportation Advisory Committee (RPTAC) was established in 2010. RPTAC members are appointed by the COIC Board to review, advise, and assist the transportation program in its efforts to: Help identify the transportation needs of Central Oregon residents and educate the communities on the value and offerings of public transportation. Serve as a forum where citizens can provide comments about service expansions, reductions, or alterations. Meet with concerned citizens regarding unresolved issues. Advocate for new and expanded services. Review future plans for services. Consider and make a recommendation on transit issues presented to the committee. Consider and make a recommendation on policy issues presented to the committee. Serve as the forum for a rider to appeal a loss of a ridership privilege and to make a recommendation regarding determination. RPTAC bylaws note the committee shall consist of at least thirteen members, with five members representing Bend, two members representing Redmond, and one member representing each of the following areas: LaPine/Sunriver Sisters Prineville/Powell Butte Madras Culver/Metolius Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs COIC intends to expand the number of committee members to a total of 17 members, which will include Statewide Transportation Improvement Fund (STIF) members from each of the four Qualified Entities (Deschutes, Jefferson, and Crook Counties and Warm Springs) who were designated to serve on RPTAC to enhance regional collaboration for prioritizing STIF projects. Each of these STIF members applied for RPTAC.
    [Show full text]