1. 2018/5/14
QUANTIFYING PHYSICAL ACTIVITY USING AN ACTIVITY-BASED TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL
My topic today is---READ
Question try to address is- READ
I want to acknowledge:
SANDAG co-authors--Names
PB, RSG, and Hood Transportation Consulting who worked on various parts of the model.
TRB Planning Applications Conference – May 15, 2017
Wu Sun, Yun Ma, and Clint Daniels
ABM Project Update

2. California SB 375

3. SANDAG Health Atlas

4. SANDAG Mode Choice Nesting
5/14/2018
SANDAG Mode Choice Nesting
Choice
Auto
Drive alone
GP(1)
Pay(2)
Shared ride 2
GP(3)
HOV(4)
Pay(5)
Shared ride 3+
GP(6)
HOV(7)
Pay(8)
Non-motorized
Walk(9)
bicycle(10)
Transit
Walk access
Local bus(11)
Express bus(12)
BRT(13)
LRT(14)
Commuter rail(15)
PNR access
Local bus(16)
Express bus(17)
BRT(18)
LRT(19)
Commuter rail(20)
KNR access
Local bus(21)
Express bus(22)
BRT(23)
LRT(24)
Commuter rail(25)
School Bus(26)
ABM mode choice structure-26 Modes.
Modes involved physical activities:
Walk
Bike
Walk access to 5 transit line haul modes
Walk and bike activities
Walk to transit activities

5. DRAFT - FOR EXPERT PANEL REVIEW ONLY
Scope of Work & Schedule
Develop Software
Develop Bicycle Count Dataset
Revise and Recalibrate Mode Choice Models
Calibrate Bicycle Route Choice Model
Perform Sensitivity Tests
Prepare Documentation
Build Supply Representation
A 7 month tight project:
7 TASKS
Build network:
2010-model base year, consistent with ABM
2012-RTP base year
Software:
bicycle and ped route choices
ABM mode choices changes
Count:
Compare model estimated results with observed counts
Talk more later
Sensitivity tests:
2 sensitivity tests
Uptown/north park projects as test case
DRAFT - FOR EXPERT PANEL REVIEW ONLY

6. Existing Bikeways Facility Type Miles % of Total
Class I: Off-Street Path
159.3
11.9%
Class II: On-Street Lane
890.2
66.4%
Class III: On-Street Signed Route
243.9
18.2%
Freeway Shoulders
47.4
3.5%
TOTALS
1,340.8
100%
There are approximately 1,340 miles of existing bicycleway in the region.
Class I, II, III, read.
Picture.
Class II predominate type 66% of total
Class III 18%
Class I 12%
(SKIP) Although bicycles are allowed on a few select freeway shoulders, this plan does not propose to include those facilities in the regional bicycle network. (SKIP)
The plan propose two new facility types:
Cycle track: like II but with physical barrier
Bike boulevard: like III but with traffic calming and other treatments.
(SKIP) Build out of the regional bicycle network will result in miles of new
Class I facility, 51.6 miles of new enhanced Class II facility, 27.2 miles of new
enhanced Class III, 34.2 miles of bicycle boulevard, and 8.3 miles of cycle
track. The estimated cost for build out of the regional bicycle network is
$419 million (SKIP).

7. Non-Motorized Impedance1
Walk from MGRA 1 to TAP.
Blue line: straight line based, with scaling factor.
Yellow line: the improved with a real walking path.
Only possible with an all street network.
All street network: talk more later.
TAP
Improved walk access path to TAP
Current walk access path to TAP

8. + Bicycle Network Off street path SANGIS all street network
On street lane +
On street signed route
bicycle routes
All street link

9. Bicycle Path Choice Variable Coef. Source Distance terms
Distance, total (mi.)
–0.858
Monterey
Distance on class I bicycle paths
0.610
Portland
Distance on class II bicycle lanes
0.314
Distance on class III bicycle routes
0.085
Distance on arterials without bicycle lanes
–1.050
Distance on “cycle track” class II bicycle lanes
0.120
None
Distance on “boulevard” class III bicycle routes
0.430
Distance wrong way
–3.445
San Francisco
Cumulative gain in elevation, ignoring declines (ft.)
–0.010
Turns, total
–0.083
Traffic signals, excluding right turns and through T junctions
–0.040
Un-signalized left turns from principal arterial
–0.360
Un-signalized left turns from minor arterial
–0.150
Un-signalized crossings of / left turns onto principal arterial
–0.480
Un-signalized crossings of / left turns onto minor arterial
–0.100
Access of interstate, freeway, or expressway –
Constrained
Log of path size
1.000
Distance terms
by facility type
Gain in elevation
These are the variables included in the bike path choice utility function. Think about these as the factors that affects a biker’s choice of which bike route to take.
Distance terms by facility types
Positive gain in elevation
Number of turns
Signal related variables.
From various places:
San Francisco
Portland
Monterey
Signal

10. Count Locations
7 clusters
78 locations
Urban
Regional

11. Quantifying Physical Activity (1)
5/14/2018
Quantifying Physical Activity (1)
Physical activity measures
Daily average time spent on physical activity per capita
% population engaging in physical activity (>20min)
Quantification relies on:
Walk impedance (MGRA pairs)
Bike impedance (MGRA and TAZ pairs)
Walk to transit stop impedance (MGRA to TAP)

12. Quantifying Physical Activity (2)
5/14/2018
Quantifying Physical Activity (2)
Impedance is perceived time that accounts for cumulative elevation gain
Physical activity calculation is database driven

13. Physical Activity in the Plan

14. 5/14/2018
Conclusions
Integrated ABM/AT model allows modeling walk, bike, and walk-to-transit trips explicitly
Physical activity is a quantitative performance measure in San Diego Forward
For future work
add a bike-to-transit mode
apply this methodology in social equality analysis
An advanced model platform with:
full set of mode choices
an all street network
a micro zone system (MGRA)
full integrated between ABM and AT models
Physical activity is a standard PM in San Diego Forward
Add bike to transit model to fully account for transportation related physical activities