[Texgreen] Excellent Austin transpo data; Texas traffic now shrinking; terrorism in perspective

[Roger Baker]

This report is not yet widely known, but it is full of good recent =20
data specifically related to the problems and transportation behavior =20=

responses of Austin area residents.
It doesn't mention the energy crisis, but assuming there is such a =20
crisis, the numbers are useful and the advice to shift behavior fast =20
should be taken all the more seriously.


Austin Commuter Survey:
Findings and Recommendations
by
Dr. Chandra R. Bhat
Aruna Sivakumar
Sudeshna Sen
Jessica Guo
and Rachel Copperman
Research Report SWUTC/05/167240-1
Southwest Regional University Transportation Center
Center for Transportation Research
University of Texas at Austin
Austin, Texas 78712
September 2005

<http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/about/news_items/=20
Austin_commuter_report.pdf#search=3D%22Austin%20Commuter%20Survey%20%2B%=20=

20Bhat%22>

Here is a snip from the Executive summary:

SPECIFIC FINDINGS ON COMMUTER RAIL AND TOLLS

  Commuters have a more positive image of a potential commuter rail =20
transit (CRT)
mode than the current bus mode. In fact, CRT has a =93travel time =20
bonus=94 of about 20
minutes relative to the bus mode.  That is, if all service =20
characteristics except travel
time are equal between the bus and CRT modes, an average commuter =20
will choose
the CRT mode over the bus mode even if the CRT travel time is more =20
than the bus
travel time by up to 20 minutes.

  The percentage of commuters using a potential CRT system will =20
clearly be dependent
upon the service characteristics (travel time, travel cost, =20
reliability, and availability)
of the system. Using assumptions that are not unreasonable about =20
these service
characteristics, a new CRT mode is predicted to capture 1.5% of the =20
overall mode
share if the CRT mode is available to about 10% of the commuter =20
population. The
drive alone mode share reduces by 0.7%, with the remaining 0.8% being =20=

drawn from
the non-drive alone modes (shared-ride, bus, and non-motorized =20
modes). If, however,
the CRT mode is available to about 25% of the commuter population, =20
then it is
predicted to capture 4.1% of the overall mode share. The drive alone =20
mode share
reduces by 2.6% in this case, with the remaining 1.5% of the CRT =20
share being drawn
from the non-drive alone modes. The predictions illustrate the =20
importance of CRT
availability on CRT mode share, an issue discussed in the next point. =20=

It should also be
noted that the numbers projected here should be used simply as an =20
initial guideline in
planning. It is important to pursue a more in-depth simulation of =20
possible CRT
service scenarios (based on the precise locations of CRT stations and =20=

the travel times,
costs, and travel time reliability to be offered by a potential CRT =20
system) to better
understand the full impacts and viability of a potential CRT system =20
for Austin.
  CRT availability to individual commuters is critical in determining =20=

the reduction in
drive alone and the CRT commute mode shares.  Clearly, if a commuter =20
does not
perceive CRT to be available as an alternative, CRT will not be =20
chosen by the
commuter. But within the group of individuals for whom CRT is an =20
available
alternative, we project a shift of the magnitude of 15% from driving =20
to CRT. Earlier
studies suggest that commuter rail stations should be located within =20
1 mile of a
person=92s residence and person=92s work place in order for commuter =
rail =20
to be
considered as an available alternative for the commute. Thus, the =20
initial alignment of
the CRT route and station locations should be carefully designed =20
based on the
residence and workplaces of Austin area commuters so that CRT becomes =20=

a viable
alternative for as large a fraction of the population as possible.  =20
The other side of this
finding is the caution that one should not expect substantial shifts =20
in drive alone mode
shares after the implementation of a =93starter=94 rail system.  The =
real =20
benefits of a
potential commuter rail system from a traffic congestion standpoint =20
will likely accrue
only when the proposed rail system is expanded sufficiently to serve =20
a reasonable
fraction of the commuter population.

  Tolls on highways can be expected to lead to a drop of about 2.5% =20
in the drive alone
mode share on the highways for each $1.00 toll.  Also, a $1.00 toll =20
for the use of all
the major highways (Mopac, IH-35, US-183, US-360, US-71, US-290, and =20
FM-2222)
in the Austin area would lead to about a 1.5% reduction in drive =20
alone mode share
across the entire Austin metropolitan area (it is important to =20
emphasize that we are
not proposing such a blanket tolling system, but simply projecting =20
the order of
magnitude of modal shifts due to tolls). One way to frame the 1.5% =20
reduction in drive
alone share due to a $1.00 toll on all Austin highways is to compare =20
it with the
reduction in drive alone share needed each year to just maintain =20
today=92s congestion
levels into the future. Specifically, with about 25,000 new commuters =20=

in Austin each
year, the drive alone share needs to decrease by about 5% each year =20
if only efforts to
change commute modal shares are pursued.

  The average commuter is willing to pay $12.00 for an hour of =20
commute time savings,
or about $6.00 for a 30-minute time savings, or about $3.00 for a 15-=20
minute time
savings.

                  ******************************************

Build more toll roads on credit??? Look at this.

Texas vehicular travel was down 2.3% in June from the previous year - =20=

down 2.7% in urban areas according to federal data.

You will need the Traffic Volume Trends report for June 2006 for =20
detailed documentation.

I don't have the URL for that one, although somebody sent the PDF file.
Meanwhile, here is the site that eventually archives these latest =20
travel trend reports:

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/tvtw/tvtpage.htm

                 ********************************************

Always remember:

US urban traffic is far more deadly than terrorism:

<http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/11/30/051130231753.72wocvgo.html>=