Lec 5. Ch.3P1 UT and TP system characteristics

1. Lec 5. Ch.3P1 UT and TP system characteristics Ch. 3 Part 1 (3.1): Topics • Relationship between Transportation trips and facilities/services • System hierarchy and transportation facility classification • System purpose • System boundary for analysis • System components (niches for different modes) • System performance • System capacity

2. Transportation trips • Facilities • Services • Modes Transportation is a trip from an origin to a destination taken primarily to accomplish some purpose.

3. Transportation system? • A system is a group of interdependent and interrelated components that form a complex and unified whole intended to serve some purpose through the performance of its interacting parts.

4. System hierarchy • Functionally, the transportation system is just one of many systems that allow urban areas to exist. • How does the transportation system interrelate with the other systems to provide livable communities? • What is the cause and effect of relative investment in transportation as compared to other infrastructure systems as it relates to community development? • What are the demands placed on transportation systems by changes in the urban system?

5. System purpose: two perspectives • Transportation function itself: • Mobility: The ability and knowledge to travel from one location to another in a reasonable amount of time and for acceptable costs. • Accessibility: The means by which an individual can accomplish some economic or social activity through access to that activity. Telukbetung • “Enabler” of other system activities as well as an important cause of negative impacts: 600 km highway project • e.g., transportation enables economic activity to occur or community interaction to happen, while at the same time, it could be a major source of air pollutants Tanjungkarang Slamat sian! (Examine Portland’s TP system purposes.)

6. System boundary: it must be set before analysis begins! Example case • The boundaries of the system being analyzed must be set first. • The level of technical analysis within the system boundary is much more detailed than that associated with the area outside. System boundary for a GA-based land use & transportation system optimization by Balling, Saito, et al.

7. 5 system components System users Transportation modes Infrastructure (facilities & services) Niches of modes Intermodal connections Stakeholders Intermodal connections are emphasized by ISTEA/TEA-21.

8. Stable flow SFE Unstable flow E F Flow D C SFA B A Density System performance & capacity • System performance and capacity are related. Performance is often evaluated in relation to system capacity. Capacity Level of service: a measure that describes performance conditions in terms of operational characteristics of interest to users. A broader definition of system performance should also reflect the impressions and concerns of the customer or user of the system.

9. Planning applications of system performance and capacity

10. Planned, designed, built, operated, and maintained by organizations and individuals with different objectives, mandates, constituencies, and problem definitions – e.g. Recall Mr. Hales presentation; see the diagram to the left • Increasingly, private sector groups and organizations are playing a major role in providing transportation services and funding – e.g. public-private partnership in providing better mobility and access, like the developer shares the cost of improvements of intersections affected by the traffic from the development; a toll road maintained by a private organization System control SL Co WFRC Div. Of Public Safety SLC

11. System feedback: two feedback mechanisms • The feedback loop that relates the implementation of transportation strategies to their impact on community vision, goals/objectives, and on the operational characteristics of the system itself • The market, that is the general interaction between the demand for transportation services and the supply of these services  Transportation users (the consumers of transportation facilities and services) seek the least cost options if given choices. Captive users have less options

12. Dr. Saito’s travel mode choice logic: economic and community concern • Commuting: Commuting by UTA is more economical (comparison without the Ecopass program) • His house is located 2 miles from the Y campus. • Bus stops of the route serving BYU are ½ to 1 block away from his house. Buses come every 30 min. (considered convenient even for an Asian man’s standard, who did not own a car in his country and used public transit exclusively) • The monthly pass is now $40. Since he rides 20 days/mo for commute, his expense for bus is $2.00/day. The Y stop is close to CB. Can read during commute. Bus commuting time is 100% HIS. It takes about 15-20 min door-to-door. • If he drives, 4 miles x 50 cents/mile (true cost of operating a vehicle) = $2.00/day. Parking is away from CB unless he comes very early! A bit stressful. Less use of his car prolongs his car’s service life. It takes about 15 min d-t-d. • Shopping/recreation: Using his car is more economical • Multiple destinations in a shopping/recreation tour is done more economically (time-wise) by his car. Ever since he saw the Provo/Orem area covered by a thick smog (see it from Saratoga Spring if you want to check), he tries to do his best to reduce his auto trips.