1. Strategic Plan for the New Connecticut Statewide Model
16th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference
Thomas Rossi, Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Judy Raymond, Connecticut Department of Transportation Matt Cegielski, Connecticut Department of Transportation Dan Tempesta, Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
May 16, 2017

2. Why Does a Small State Need a Statewide Model?
Project evaluation often goes beyond regional boundaries
Air quality conformity done by Connecticut DOT
Travel to/from/through Connecticut is substantial
Rail and other transit investments
Highway improvements
Road pricing/managed lanes

3. Besides… it’s a small state with a greater population than 21 other states (most of which have statewide models)

4. One Other Little Thing to Contend with…

5. 1992 – The Completion of the Previous Connecticut Statewide Model

6. Existing Statewide Model
TRANPLAN-based model
DOS!
Stick network
Aggregate modeling approach
Some model components transferred from elsewhere (e.g. mode choice)
Validation updated by DOT over the years, but not the modeling procedures/programs

7. Developing a New Statewide Model: It Started with a Plan…
Manner of application – Should be applied in a manner similar to an urban model
Which modes to consider – Needs to be multimodal, local and regional transit, commuter rail, walk/bicycle
Spatial level of resolution – Zones similar in size to those in previous statewide model
Smaller towns single TAZ, larger towns cities multiple TAZs
Trip based or activity based approach – Start with trip based, evolve to ABM
Peer Review – representatives from other state DOTs, academia, ABM consultants

8. Model Region
Includes entire state plus key areas outside Connecticut, including Manhattan, Bronx and Queens, and the Springfield, Mass. Area.
Excludes Boston, Providence (but separate Boston-Conn.-NY component included)

9. A Three Phase Approach
Short term – A state of the practice four-step trip based model
Conventional aggregate modeling approach typical of four-step models.
Medium term – Enhanced to use a disaggregate application approach
Synthetic population generator will be introduced
Simulate individual trips made by Connecticut residents
Still a four-step household based approach
Long term – Activity based approach

10. Why This Approach?
Need to have a good planning tool relatively quickly
Model update takes a little longer due to archaic starting point
Phased approach allows DOT staff to have a learning curve
For both modeling approach and software
Resources can be spread out

11. Connecticut Statewide Transportation Study
Statewide household survey
Conducted in 2016 by University of Connecticut/RSG
Over 8,400 complete households
Initial data set ready now, still being finalized
Data use for statewide model
Not ready in time for short term model estimation
Used in validation of short term model
Will be used in estimation of medium/long term models

12. Combined Survey Data Set for Short Term Model Estimation
Massachusetts statewide household survey ( )
Thank you, MassDOT
Used data from counties bordering Connecticut
NYMTC Regional Household Travel Survey ( ) (includes two counties in Connecticut)
Thank you, NYMTC
Used data from New York suburban and Connecticut counties
Surveys found to be sufficiently compatible and consistent
Decent sample of transit users (especially to NYC)

13. Current Status Short term model complete
Validation will be completed by June
Model already used for rail study (new service to open in 2018)
Medium term model development can begin as soon as CSTS data processing is finished (summer)

14. Can Other States/Regions Learn from This Approach?
Of course!
Start by laying out model needs
What are you going use the model for?
Consider resources and constraints
Time
Money
Data (what you have and what you can get)
Staff capabilities and other responsibilities
Hardware/software (and expertise)

15. Lessons
If you don’t try to do everything at once, you can have something usable sooner
Coordinating short and longer term plans in a unified approach works!
Allows you to gather resources that can be used over a long time
More efficient to have a good starting point for each phase
A good path to a robust advanced planning tool while allowing you to improve your analyses in the short run

16. Acknowledgments Connecticut DOT Cambridge Systematics
Judy Raymond
Matt Cegielski
Cambridge Systematics
Dan Tempesta
Brent Selby
Dan Beagan
Marty Milkovits
Chao Wang
CDM Smith, AECOM (subconsultants)
Tom Maziarz
Maribeth Wojenski
Kazi Ullah
Jeff Newman
Nahal Hakim
Tara Rima
Menglin Wang

17. Thank you for not leaving early for the break!