Travel Demand Modeling Experience Bellevue-Kirkland-Redmond Travel Demand Modeling Experience Jin Ren, P.E. City of Bellevue, Washington, USA October 19, th International EMME/2 User’s Conference Mexico City, Mexico

Introduction EMME/2 BKR Model Since 1991  MP0 – Base Year Model Platform  MP6 – 6-Year Short-Range MP  MP12 – Mid-Range 12 Year MP  MP20 – Long-Range 20 Year MP  MP30 – Long-Range 30 Year MP

BKR Model Enhancements  Migrating multiple off-model functions to a complete 4-step EMME/2 macro process  Tying trip generation to household cross-classification  Introducing multi-class (SOV and HOV) auto assignments  EMME/2 Network match-up with GIS tiger line file  Calibrating to the 1999 regional household travel survey  Updating with new 2000 census data  Building a transit modeling capability with capacity constrained assignment  Park-&-Ride lot capacity constrained mode splits

BKR Model Application  Annual base year model calibration and validation (MP0)  Street closure/construction traffic diversion analysis (MP0)  Annual Transportation Concurrency Update (MP6)  Development review modeling (MP6)  2015 Transportation Facility Plan Update (MP12)  2004 update of traffic impact fee schedule (MP12 and MP6)  2015 sub-area SOV/HOV traversal matrix (MP12)  2020 Bellevue Downtown Implementation Plan (MP20)  Overlake Hospital Medical Center expansion (MP30)

Table 1:Final Validation of Trip Generation Models for the BKR Study Area 2003 BKR Modified with Census Data 1999 Household Survey for BKR Study Area Model- Survey Difference Model- Survey Percent Difference Home-Based Work % Home-Based College % Home-Based School % Home-Based Shop % Home-Based Other % Work-Other % Other-Other % Total % Base Year Model Trip Generation

Base Year Model Trip Distribution Table 2: Final BKR Area Average Trip Duration by Purpose (minutes ) MP0 R5 (2003)1999 PSRC HH SURVEY DIFFERENCEPERCENT DIFFERENCE HBW+HBC % HBO+HBShop % NHB % HBSch % Average %

Base Year Model Mode Choice Table 3: 2003 BKR MP0 R5 Mode Choice Model Results vs Regional Survey Trip Types and ModesBKR MP0-R5 (2003) PSRC 1999 Household Survey Model-Survey Difference HBW Trips Drive Alone 86.1%85.8%0.3% Shared Ride 5.0%5.2%-0.2% Transit – Walk Access 6.8%7.2%-0.4% Transit – Auto Access 2.1%1.8%0.3% Total 100.0% HBO Trips Auto 99.1%99.3%-0.2% Transit 0.9%0.7%0.2% Total 100.0% NHB Trips Auto 99.1%98.8%0.3% Transit 0.9%1.2%-0.3% Total 100.0%

Figure 2: 2003 Base Year BKR Model PM Peak Hour Auto Traffic Screenlines: Model/Count Ratios

Base Year Model v.s. Actual Counts Figure PM PK Hr. Network Forecast v.s Actual Traffic Counts

Figure 5: 2002 Base Year PM Peak Hour NE 4 th Street Select Link Assignment Street Closure Select Link Analysis (MP0)

Figure 6: 2002 Base Year PM PK Hr. Volume Differences with/without NE 4th Street Street Closure Volume Changes (MP0)

Annual Transportation Concurrency Update (MP6)

Figure 8. City Center II Development PM PK Hour Select Project Trip Assignment Development Review Modeling (MP6)

2015 Transportation Facility Plan (MP12) - Impact Fee Assessment Select link TFP group assignments by 14 Sub-areas, based on MP12 (a downtown example is shown in Figure 9) Select link TFP group assignments by 14 Sub-areas, based on MP6 (2003 Existing + Permitted LU) Select link group trip tables by sub-area for MP12 and MP6 Sub-area traffic growth rates related to TFP select link groups TFP Growth Cost = (Sub-area traffic growth rates) X (TFP total costs by sub-area) Average Cost Per Trip = TFP Growth Costs / Sub-area Trip Growth Cost Per Trip by commercial, non-commercial and city-wide areas

Figure 9: 2015 Select TFP Link Group Identified in Downtown Bellevue Select TFP Link Group in Downtown Bellevue

SOV/HOV Traversal Matrix (MP12) Figure 10: 2015 TFP MP th Pl Sub-area In-Gate and Out-Gate Link ID

Bellevue Downtown Implementation Plan (MP20) Figure 11: 2020 PM PK Hr. Traffic Difference (Preferred Alternative – Baseline) Plot

Overlake Hospital Expansion (MP30) Figure 12: 2030 OHMC Expansion/NE 10 th w/Ramps Select SOV PM PK Hr. Trip Assignment

Overlake Hospital Expansion (MP30) Fig. 13: 2030 OHMC Expansion/NE 10 th w/Ramps Select HOV PM PK Hr. Trip Assignment

Interlocal Agreement Among Bellevue-Kirkland-Redmond BKR Model Platforms Are Shared Among BKR Partners BKR Model Is Annually Maintained and Upgraded through Jurisdictional Partnership Variety of EMME/2 Applications in the Cities of BKR Time Savings, Cost Sharing, Data and Technical Support Enhance Opportunities to Influence Transportation Decision Making at the Local, Sub-Regional and Regional Level Planning These Benefits Are Demonstrated by the Above Discussed Examples