1. Research & Analytics Modeling Initiatives: Using REMI TranSight Model

2. O UTLINE Purpose Introduction to REMI PI+ and TranSight Model Uses for ARC – Linking models – General concepts – Model applications Model Demonstration

3. ARC O BJECTIVES Purpose – Produce local long-range demographic, employment and economic forecasts for the 20-county ARC region Intent – Dedicated to informing public and private policy decisions – Focused on research based analysis – Orient stakeholders and decision makers on socio- economic and transportation impacts to our Region Goal – Continue to lead in regional economic forecasting and policy analysis – Provide economic development impact plans and assess travel demand changes to the region’s transportation network

4. I NNOVATIVE A PPROACH Collaborating and create linkages for model application and compatibility New methods for rebranding and financing our transportation system Bold decisions demand creative, sophisticated and robust tools capable of supporting these processes ARC engagement in performing scenario planning and economic analysis to consult, measure and capture specific impacts to our Region – Economic impact analysis to assist and inform benefits to investment endeavors Business relocation and major developments in the Region – Assess projects of regional impact

5. M ODEL D ATA D EVELOPMENT O BJECTIVES Conduct potential project prioritization plans – Assist in developing a project list Perform sensitivity tests of the model and projects – Determine the model’s effectiveness for further consideration – Measure the reasonableness of economic activity and transportation efficiencies of qualified projects Develop an economic impact study and analysis report on LPA projects; economic developments; projects selected for the TIP and RTP; and various regional market studies – Final documentation of findings and benefits of local and regional impact studies Produce small area control totals; SE data for TDM and regional long-range forecasts Produce data for inter-departmental work programs and external ARC counterparts

6. REMI M ODELS The next generation Policy Insight ® model Comprehensive tool for evaluating the total economic effects of changes to transportation systems Comprehensive modeling estimating economic and demographic effects Up to 169 industry sectors across 3,089 U.S. counties including 6,000+ fully adjustable policy variables updated yearly Integrates travel demand data, data on emissions, safety valuation factors, etc, and 3 additional transportation-related cost matrices with PI +

7. D ISTINGUISHING M ODEL F EATURES Incorporates transparent and robust economic linkages built on proven methods and theory Each model is custom built to match regional client specificity Measures economic impacts and responsive demographic and economic changes over time Model incorporates four unique quantitative methodologies IntegratedDynamic StructuralCustomized

8. I NTEGRATED M ODEL Input/OutputEconometric Computable General Equilibrium New Economic Geography REMI PI+

9. D YNAMIC M ODEL

10. S TRUCTURAL M ODEL

11. E CONOMIC I MPACT M ODEL

12. T RAN S IGHT -S PECIFIC F EATURES [I NPUTS ] Travel demand data: Region-to-Region VMT, VHT, and Trips Cost matrices: transportation, commuting, accessibility Simulation parameters: emissions (5 types), value of time, gov’t funding, fuel efficiency (up to 79 MPH), safety (3 types), operating costs, occupancy Multimodal

13. T RAN S IGHT -S PECIFIC F EATURES [O UTPUTS ] Benefit-Cost Analysis: – Customizable – Use different Discount Rates – Evaluate in different years Transportation Summary: Commodity and labor Access Indices, relative cost factors Domestic Trade: Flows and Shares All Economic and Demographic Indicators: all outputs (as well as inputs) from REMI PI+ built into model

14. T HE N EED FOR D YNAMIC E CONOMIC A NALYSIS Economics and demographics of a region are changing over time – Projects effect today much differently than the future Scoring projects based on travel demand and economics is a complete system Every region’s travel network and economy is different

15. ARC M ODEL L INKAGES Speed deltas by househld/commer cial travel mode Network changes Ridership Travel Demand Model No-build & Build TDD Files Transportation Matrices Travel Demand Module Policy variables Assumptions Calibrations Analysis Simulations

16. F RAMEWORK AND A SSUMPTIONS Each project required two model runs Establish a base network; projects added to base Generate travel demand runs; produce TranSight model runs Assume an opening year for projects Assume network conditions are the same for all projects until opening year Identify study and/or affected region(s) for evaluation

17. P RIORITIZATION PROCESS Provide multi-regional and county-level comparative analysis of project results against a baseline or no-build travel scenario Intent is to show transportation and economic investment influences at a regional and sub-regional level Estimate project’s value by each affected county and on the Region

18. S ENSITIVITY A NALYSIS PROCESS Three projects submitted according to its plan, objective and impact on the region Illustrate project’s economic changes from baseline and influences locally Quantify inter-regional and region benefits Standardize policy variables used for evaluating county level economic activity and mass transit investment

19. S TUDY S PECIFICATIONS MARTA Mass Transit Investment – 2 Counties; 1 (10-County) Region – One cent sales tax collection by affected counties – 100% return – 3 regional projects Partnership Gwinnett Strategy Initiative – Target industry cluster analysis – Adding 7,000 high-paying jobs to the county Economic Development – Economic development study – $27M capital investment and $4.3B in sales added to the county and region – 10 year government abatement incentive on real and personal property

20. [Model Demonstration]

21. M ODEL A PPLICATIONS Potential population shifts, migration patterns and employment changes on future investment and housing stock; benefit-cost analysis Economic Development Travel demand analysis; transportation improvements impact and mitigation strategies Transportation Environmental Planning Department storm water analysis Environment Health Care Reform Policy analysis Health Care Analysis of the Regional Transportation Referendum Taxation Visitors and out of region revenue impact/residential burden relief study Tourism Georgia Power economic migration study for projected capital improvement study Energy

22. C ONTACT & R ESOURCE I NFO Colby Lancelin clancelin@atlantaregional.com Principal Planner, Research Division 404.463.3322 office Atlanta Regional Commission www.atlantaregional.com

23. Using REMI TranSight Model

24. Transportation is the lifeblood of the region

25. C HALLENGES W E F ACE Demographic problem – Nearly 3 more million people will call our region home in 30 years – Most of the growth will be people under 35 and over 65 Mathematical problem – Transportation funding deficit from gas taxes paid at the pump – Gas tax revenue declining while cars are more fuel efficient – State’s motor fuel excise tax has not increased since 1971

26. C HALLENGES W E F ACE Transportation problem – Limited ability to expand the existing system has created bottlenecks – Home to seven of the country’s worst freeway bottlenecks Technology advancements – Since 1980, avg. passenger car’s fuel efficiency has increased by 40% from 24.3mpg to 33.8 – Increasing production of electric and CNG cars; more available makes and model choices in hybrid cars

27. S TATE OF R EGION 9 th worst congestion of major metro areas in the country Georgia, 48 th in transportation spending per capita [2003-2009] Worst in access to travel options for older adults – 90 percent of older adults in the Atlanta region do not have adequate access to transit

28. M ETHODOLOGY Atlanta Region REMI Model – 12 region (10 counties, 1 surrounding area plus rest of Georgia); 70 sector model 3 regionally significant mass transit projects of various types submitted for prioritization and economic impact analysis Regional projects simulated over 20 year period and its impact on the affected counties and the 10-county Atlanta Region

29. W HY THE N EED FOR S OLUTIONS ? Fulton County Workers 16 years and over440,231 MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION TO WORK Car, truck, or van80.7% Drove alone72.6% Carpooled8.1% Public transportation (excluding taxicab)7.4% Walked2.8% Bicycle0.4% Taxicab, motorcycle, or other means1.2% Worked at home7.5% DeKalb County Workers 16 years and over323,385 MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION TO WORK Car, truck, or van83.2% Drove alone72.6% Carpooled10.5% Public transportation (excluding taxicab)8.2% Walked1.7% Bicycle0.2% Taxicab, motorcycle, or other means1.7% Worked at home5.0% City of Atlanta Workers 16 years and over198,677 MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION TO WORK Car, truck, or van74.9% Drove alone66.9% Carpooled8.0% Public transportation (excluding taxicab)11.3% Walked4.7% Bicycle0.8% Taxicab, motorcycle, or other means1.4% Worked at home6.9% City of Chicago Workers 16 years and over1,213,901 MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION TO WORK Car, truck, or van59.9% Drove alone50.3% Carpooled9.6% Public transportation (excluding taxicab)26.7% Walked6.4% Bicycle1.3% Taxicab, motorcycle, or other means1.5% Worked at home4.2% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2008-2012 American Community Survey