Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
N A T I O N A L C O O P E R A T I V E H I G H W A Y R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M NCHRP REPORT 722 Assessing Highway Tolling and Pricing Options and Impacts Volume 2: Travel Demand Forecasting Tools Parsons Brinckerhoff, inc. New York, NY University of texas Austin, TX northwestern University Evanston, IL University of california Irvine, CA resoUrce systems GroUP White River Junction, VT mark Bradley research & consUltinG Santa Barbara, CA Subscriber Categories Highways ⢠Finance ⢠Planning and Forecasting TRANSPORTAT ION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2012 www.TRB.org Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective approach to the solution of many problems facing highway administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local interest and can best be studied by highway departments individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation develops increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials initiated in 1962 an objective national highway research program employing modern scientific techniques. This program is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of the Association and it receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of Transportation. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies was requested by the Association to administer the research program because of the Boardâs recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research practices. The Board is uniquely suited for this purpose as it maintains an extensive committee structure from which authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; it possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, state and local governmental agencies, universities, and industry; its relationship to the National Research Council is an insurance of objectivity; it maintains a full-time research correlation staff of specialists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of research directly to those who are in a position to use them. The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified by chief administrators of the highway and transportation departments and by committees of AASHTO. Each year, specific areas of research needs to be included in the program are proposed to the National Research Council and the Board by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Research projects to fulfill these needs are defined by the Board, and qualified research agencies are selected from those that have submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Research Council and the Transportation Research Board. The needs for highway research are many, and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program can make significant contributions to the solution of highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement rather than to substitute for or duplicate other highway research programs. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America NCHRP REPORT 722 Project 08-57 ISSN 0077-5614 ISBN 978-0-309-25828-9 Library of Congress Control Number 2012940832 © 2012 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The members of the technical panel selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturersâ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report.
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, on its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academyâs purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transporta- tion Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Boardâs varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individu- als interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org
C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 722 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Crawford F. Jencks, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Lori L. Sundstrom, Senior Program Officer Megan Chamberlain, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Margaret B. Hagood, Editor NCHRP PROJECT 08-57 PANEL Field of Transportation PlanningâArea of Forecasting Johanna Zmud, The RAND Corporation, Alexandria, VA (Chair) Lisa E. Shemer, Maryland State Highway Administration, Baltimore, MD Kenneth R. Buckeye, Minnesota DOT, St. Paul, MN Xuehao Chu, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL Ilona Ottilia Kastenhofer, Virginia DOT, Charlottesville, VA Lori G. Kennedy, Kennedy Engineering & Associates Group, LLC, Atlanta, GA Matthew R. Kitchen, Puget Sound Regional Council, Seattle, WA Gregory D. Krueger, SAIC, Holt, MI Matthew E. MacGregor, Texas DOT, Mesquite, TX Harlan Miller, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC Chris Schmidt, California DOT, San Diego, CA Eric Pihl, FTA Liaison Supin Yoder, FHWA Liaison Carl N. Swerdloff, US DOT Liaison Martine A. Micozzi, TRB Liaison
F O R E W O R D By Lori L. Sundstrom Staff Officer Transportation Research Board NCHRP Report 722: Assessing Highway Tolling and Pricing Options and Impacts provides state departments of transportation (DOTs) and other transportation agencies that are con- sidering instituting or modifying user-based fees or tolling on segments of their system with a decision-making framework and analytical tools that better describe likely impacts on revenue generation and system performance. This report is presented in two volumes. Volume 1: Decision-Making Framework should be of immediate use to staff responsible for structuring the policy-level evaluation of potential tolling and pricing solutions to exam- ine their policy implications, performance expectations, and financial impacts. Volume 2: Travel Demand Forecasting Tools will provide staff who develop the forecasts of potential revenue, transportation demand, and congestion and system performance with an in-depth examination of the various analytical tools available for direct or adapted use. The continued growth in travel demand, worsening congestion, and the significant reduc- tion in transportation funding available from traditional sources has prompted a number of DOTs and other transportation agencies, including toll authorities and metropolitan planning organizations, to turn to tolling and pricing as a method to fund new capacity and to more effectively manage congestion and improve the performance of their systems. A number of agencies have initiated projects that rely on tolling (the assessment of a fixed fee for the use of a roadway) and/or pricing (varying toll rates by time of day or volume of traffic) as an alternative to traditional funding sources. Several states have enacted legisla- tion that requires new capacity to be funded by revenues derived from tolling and/or pric- ing. Traditional methods and analytical tools used in transportation decision making such as transportation demand forecasting, risk analysis, benefit-cost analysis, financial analysis, market research, and others fall short, however, in addressing the complexities associated with tolling and pricing decision making. Under NCHRP Project 08-57, Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc., was asked to develop a decision- making approach for DOTs and other transportation agencies to use to conduct comprehen- sive, transparent, and technically defensible analyses of a range of likely impacts of potential tolling and pricing solutions. The resulting decision-making framework in Volume 1 can be applied to a variety of scenarios in order to understand the potential impacts of tolling and pricing on the performance of the transportation system, and on the potential to gener- ate revenue to pay for system improvements. Parsons Brinckerhoff conducted a literature review, collected state-of-the-practice information from numerous agencies, and provided five detailed case studies (viewed through the lens of the decision-making framework) that present lessons learned and illustrate a variety of best practices. Volume 2 provides a set of practical recommendations for developing travel models for different pricing studies. The
research team also evaluated travel models and network simulation tools used to forecast travel demand and revenue, and identified short-term and long-term improvements and strategic directions to improve the quality of their results and relevance to decision making. Public and private sector decision makers and practitioners should find NCHRP Report 722 a valuable resource as they review issues associated with tolling and pricing decisions.
C O N T E N T S 1 Chapter 1 Summary 1 1.1 Need for Solid Traffic and Revenue (T&R) Forecasts 2 1.2 State of the Practice and Challenges in T&R Forecasting 2 1.2.1 Main Factors Affecting Reasonability of T&R Forecast 2 1.2.2 State of the Practice and Major Gaps Identified 3 1.2.3 Recommended Short-Term Improvements 4 1.2.4 Recommended Long-Term Improvements and Strategic Directions 5 1.3 Model Features Required for Different Pricing Studies 5 1.3.1 Model Features for Different Pricing Projects 5 1.3.2 Model Features for Different Stages of Decision Making 8 1.3.3 Specific Requirements for Forecasting Tools for Investment Grade Studies 10 1.4 Organization of Volume 2 11 Chapter 2 State of the Practice in Forecasting Methods 11 2.1 Basics of T&R Forecasting 12 2.2 Travel Cost Representation in Demand and Network Models 15 2.3 Models Included in the Synthesis 15 2.4 Conclusions from the Review of Existing Models 20 Chapter 3 Survey Methods to Support Pricing Studies 20 3.1 Overview of Survey Methods to Support Pricing Studies 22 3.2 Summary and Proposed Practice Guidelines 24 Chapter 4 Critical Issues and Directions for Short-Term Improvements 24 4.1 Classification of Model Features Required for Pricing Studies 24 4.1.1 Model Features for Different Pricing Projects 26 4.1.2 Model Features for Different Stages of Decision Making 29 4.1.3 Specific Requirements for Forecasting Tools for Investment Grade Studies 33 4.2 Prototype Structure of Travel Model for Pricing Studies 33 4.2.1 Main Travel Dimensions Affected by Pricing 34 4.2.2 Observed Impacts of Pricing on Different Travel Choices (PSRC Experiment) 39 4.2.3 Prototype Structure of Demand Modelâ4-Step Approach 40 4.2.4 Prototype Structure of Demand ModelâActivity-Based Approach 41 4.2.5 Prototype Structure of Network Assignments 44 4.3 Summary of Key Model Parameters 44 4.3.1 VOT Values in Applied Models 52 4.3.2 Recommended Values for VOT, Travel Time, and Cost Coefficients 54 4.4 Model Validation, Calibration, and Sensitivity Testing 54 4.4.1 Dimensions and Data for Model Validation
55 4.4.2 Region-Level Calibration Procedures 57 4.4.3 Corridor-Level and Sub-Area-Level Calibration Procedures 58 4.4.4 Sensitivity Tests, Risk Analysis, and Mitigation 65 4.5 Adjustment of Travel Cost Inputs and Coefficients for Future Years 65 4.5.1 Model Input and Coefficient Consistency for Different Years 65 4.5.2 Reasons for Adjustment 66 4.5.3 Approaches and Time Horizons for Adjustment 66 4.5.4 Adjustment Strategies for Different Types of Cost Variables 67 4.6 Evaluation of Pricing Projects 68 4.6.1 Benefit and Cost Calculation 71 4.6.2 Criteria for Evaluation of Pricing Projects 73 Chapter 5 Strategic Directions for Improvement 73 5.1 Coordination with the SHRP 2 C04 Project 76 5.2 Breakthrough Directions on the Demand Side 77 5.2.1 Approaches to Accounting for Heterogeneity of Highway Users 78 5.2.2 Travel Segmentation (Observed Heterogeneity) 81 5.2.3 Probabilistic Distribution of VOT and VOR (Unobserved Heterogeneity) 83 5.2.4 Additional Travel Dimensions and Choice Models 84 5.2.5 Incorporation of Travel Time Reliability 86 5.2.6 Modeling Time-of-Day Choice and Peak Spreading 87 5.2.7 Modeling Car Occupancy 88 5.3 Breakthrough Directions on the Network Simulation Side 88 5.3.1 Network Assignment Models and Algorithms in the Context of Pricing 90 5.3.2 Heterogeneity of Users in Traffic Network Assignment and Simulation 92 5.3.3 Perspective of Using TRANSIMS for Highway Pricing Projects 94 5.4 Integration of Demand Model and Network Simulation 94 5.4.1 Essence of Equilibrium and Possible Feedback Options 95 5.4.2 Incorporation of Reliability in Network Equilibrium 97 Chapter 6 Pilot Studies for Demonstration of Improved Tools 97 6.1 Improvement of the San Francisco ABM for Pricing Studies 97 6.1.1 General Model Structure and Phased Improvement 99 6.1.2 Model Structure Improvement for Choice of Tolls 108 6.1.3 Model Estimation and Structural Changes 111 6.1.4 Model Calibration 112 6.1.5 Conclusions 113 6.2 Improvement of the New York ABM for Manhattan Area Pricing Study 113 6.2.1 Objectives of the Study 114 6.2.2 Modeled Options for Area Congestion Pricing 116 6.2.3 Structure of the NYMTC ABM 118 6.2.4 Application Assumptions and Model Adjustments for Area Pricing 120 6.2.5 Application Assumptions and Model Adjustments for License Plate Rationing 121 6.2.6 Aggregation of Model Output for Analysis 122 6.2.7 Technical Lessons Learned 123 6.2.8 Conclusions
123 6.3 Modeling User Response to Pricing with DTA: Baltimore-Washington Corridor 123 6.3.1 Description of the Study 124 6.3.2 Problem Statement 125 6.3.3 Conceptual Framework 128 6.3.4 Multidimensional Dynamic Stochastic User Equilibrium Formulation 128 6.3.5 Solution Algorithm 129 6.3.6 Estimation of Preferred Arrival Time (PAT) Pattern 130 6.3.7 Experimental Results 143 6.3.8 Conclusions 143 6.4 Improvement of the Los Angeles 4-Step Model for Pricing Studies 143 6.4.1 Objectives of the Study and Short-Term Model Enhancements 147 6.4.2 Auto Choices and Utility Functions in Mode Choice 148 6.4.3 Improvements to Highway Assignment 148 6.4.4 Speed Feedback Implementation 149 6.4.5 Time of Day and Peak Spreading Model 152 6.4.6 Calibration and Validation 152 6.4.7 Conclusions 153 Chapter 7 Conclusions and Recommendations for Further Research 153 7.1 Existing Practices and Identified Gaps 154 7.2 Possible Short-Term Improvements 155 7.3 Major Long-Term Improvements and Strategic Directions 156 7.4 Suggestions for Future Research in Adjacent and Related Areas 158 References 163 Appendix A Note: Many of the photographs, figures, and tables in this report have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the Web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.
