PLT Meeting 12 July 17, 2013 1 Introduction to the Meeting Public - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

PLT Meeting 12 July 17, 2013 1

 Introduction to the Meeting  Public Comment  Ridership Modeling  Statement of Financial Information (SOFI) Update  Cost Estimate Update  AGS/ICS/Co-Development Project Coordination  Conclusion, Final Remarks and Next Steps 2

 Website Update  Media Outreach 3

 The public is invited to make brief comments 4

5

1. Overview 2. Ridership and Ticket Revenue Forecasts 3. Demand Forecasting Methodology 4. Intercity Travel Market • New Data Collection: Auto Trip Table Development • New Data Collection: Stated Preference Survey 5. Other Travel Markets 6. Next Steps in Ridership Modelling 6 6

1. Overview 2. Ridership and Ticket Revenue Forecasts 3. Demand Forecasting Methodology 4. Intercity Travel Market • New Data Collection: Auto Trip Table Development • New Data Collection: Stated Preference Survey 5. Other Travel Markets 6. Next Steps in Ridership Modeling 7 7

 Open, non-proprietary forecasting models  Network model-based forecasting tool  Use of DRCOG and other MPO models and data to represent • Connectivity with RTD • Socio-economic and transportation characteristics of urban areas  New local data collection to • Address gaps in available data • Allow development of models that reflect the study area characteristics  Information exchange and documentation • Interactions with stakeholders and modelers • Modeling Framework Report - circulated • Level 2 Analysis Report including Technical Appendix on modeling - circulated 8

Stat ation Pair air Trav ravel l Trav ravel l Ti Time: e: Ti Time: e: I-76 76 US 6 US 6 DIA-Eagle 94 96 Fort Collins- 174 143 Eagle Colorado 190 160 Springs-Eagle Fort Collins- Colorado 93 93 Springs Fort Collins- 102 75 DIA Co. Springs- 119 92 DIA 9

Stat ation Pair air Trav ravel l Trav ravel l Ti Time: e: Ti Time: e: I-76 76 US 6 US 6 DIA-Eagle 94 96 Fort Collins- 155 156 Eagle Colorado 175 176 Springs-Eagle Fort Collins- Colorado 94 94 Springs Fort Collins- 37 37 DIA Co. Springs- 57 57 DIA 10

Stat ation Pair air Med ed- Hig igh- Hig igh- Spe Speed d Speed Spe d Spe Speed d Hyb ybrid rid Bas ase Hyb ybrid rid DIA-Eagle 125 99 93 Fort Collins- 185 159 153 Eagle Colorado 205 179 173 Springs-Eagle Fort Collins- Colorado 94 94 94 Springs Fort Collins- 37 37 37 DIA Co. Springs- 57 57 57 DIA 11

Stat ation Pair air Trav ravel T l Tim ime DIA-Eagle 128 Fort Collins- 171 Eagle Colorado 206 Springs-Eagle Fort Collins- Colorado 186 Springs Fort Collins- 101 DIA Co. Springs- 55 DIA 12

Stat ation Pair air Trav ravel T l Tim ime DIA-Eagle 112 Fort Collins- 179 Eagle Colorado 124 Springs-Eagle Fort Collins- Colorado 94 Springs Fort Collins- 37 DIA Co. Springs- 57 DIA 13

Stat ation Pair air Trav ravel T l Tim ime DIA-Eagle 109 Fort Collins- 119 Eagle Colorado 196 Springs-Eagle Fort Collins- Colorado 94 Springs Fort Collins- 37 DIA Co. Springs- 57 DIA 14

Stat ation Pair air Trav ravel l Ti Time: e: I-70 70 West Suburban-Eagle 71 Breckenridge-Eagle 70 Georgetown-Eagle 55 Silverthorne-Eagle 39 Vail Station-Eagle 23 15

1. Overview 2. Rider ership an and T Tick cket Rev even enue F Forecasts 3. Demand Forecasting Methodology 4. Intercity Travel Market • New Data Collection: Auto Trip Table Development • New Data Collection: Stated Preference Survey 5. Other Travel Markets 6. Next Steps in Ridership Modeling 16

Scenar ario io I-70 70 I-70 70 Total al Total al Ridership Reven enue e Ridership Rev Revenue (millio illions) (millio illions) (millio illions) (millio illions) A-1 (I-76) 3.2 $103.8 12.2 $293.8 A-1 (US 6) 3.9 $126.8 13.2 $323.1 A-5 (I-76) 3.4 $114.4 13.0 $305.0 A-5 (US 6) 3.1 $103.6 13.1 $306.8 C-1 2.2 $75.5 10.8 $242.7 B-2a 4.3 $137.4 13.8 $319.0 B-4 3.9 $124.8 13.7 $310.3 S tand-alone AGS 3.0 $72.9 3.0 $72.9 A-5 (I-76) High S peed Maglev Base 3.3 $114.7 12.9 $306.0 A-5 (I-76) Medium S peed Maglev Hybrid 2.9 $93.4 12.5 $284.7 A-5 (I-76) High S peed Maglev Hybrid 3.6 $123.7 13.2 $315.0 All revenues in 2012 $ 17

 Auto diversions in the study region are from 5.9% to 7.6% • These are quite high intercity auto diversion percentages based on established standards • We typically observe percentages in the range of ~3% to 5% on other studies  These percentages are even higher when both origin and destination are located on the East West corridor: 8% to 11.4%  However, the diversion percentages are lower for travel between I-70 & I-25 North and I-70 & I-25 South • Between I-70 and I-25 North: 1.5% to 6.4% • Between I-70 and I-25 South: 1.0% to 6.8% 18

Percent nt Chang ange in AGS/Tr Train Volume me 250% 200% 150% 100% 50% 0% -100% -90% -80% -70% -60% -50% -40% -30% -20% -10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%100% -50% -100% Percen entage e Change e from Base HSR IVT HSR Fare HSR Frequency Auto IVT Auto Operating Cost 19

2026 Intercity Ridership ~3.5 million 2030 Intercity Ridership ~2.5 million 2011 visitors: Orlando 55 million Tampa 14million Miami 13million 2010 visitors: Colorado 55 million 2011 overnight visitor trips to Denver 13 million 2035 I-70 Ridership ~ 2.2 ~ 4.3 million 20

2012 Actual Ridership (Acela + NER) ~11.5 million 2040 B/F Plan Ridership Forecast ~43.5 million 2011 tourists: Colorado 30 million Denver 13 million 2035 I-70 Ridership ~ 2.2 ~ 4.3 million 21

1. Overview 2. Ridership and Ticket Revenue Forecasts 3. Dema mand Fore orecasti ting Meth thodolo ology 4. Intercity Travel Market • New Data Collection: Auto Trip Table Development • New Data Collection: Stated Preference Survey 5. Other Travel Markets 6. Next Steps in Ridership Modeling 22

Intra-Urban Travel Market Local MPO Models and Data Appropriate Finer Level Local Modifications Final Intra- of Connectivity Urban Geography and Access Model Station Area Long Range Incorporation of Impacts Plans the AGS/Train Ridership & Mode Revenue Induced Diverted AGS/Train Intercity Travel Market AGS/Train Proposed AGS/Train Ridership Ridership Service Characteristics Modal Trip Modal Model Operating Station Development Tables Service Data Total Final Plans Locations AGS/Train Intercity Modal O&D & Ridership Fare Train Model Competitive Behavioral Policies Consists Response Data Total Ticket Revenue Airport Choice Market Possible Model Air Mode Airline Development Final Service Data Connections Airport Choice Airlines’ Transfer Model Competitive Options Response Capacity Check Financial Check 23

 The intercity forecasting model is based on average daily conditions, accounting for: • Highway congestion • Average daily frequencies for the common carrier services • Origin-destination specific travel demand  Both the intercity and airport choice models forecast annual ridership  The intra-urban model forecasts daily ridership, which is then converted to an annual value 24

25

1. Overview 2. Ridership and Ticket Revenue Forecasts 3. Demand Forecasting Methodology 4. Inte tercity ty Trav avel Marke ket • New Data Collection: Auto Trip Table Development • New Data Collection: Stated Preference Survey 5. Other Travel Markets 6. Next Steps in Ridership Modelling 26

Auto Bus Base Year O/D Base Year O/D Travel Travel Stage 1 Auto direct Auto direct demand models demand models Growth Model Future Year O/D Future Year O/D Travel Travel Total Future Year Total O/D Travel Total Future Year Total O/D Travel Stage 2 Auto Mode Choice Model Bus Diversion Choice Model Mode Choice Model Auto Modes AGS / AGS / Untolled Tolled Bus Train Train Lanes Lanes AGS/Train Shares from auto Stage 3 AGS/Train Shares from bus AGS/Train Induced AGS/Train Trips Ridership Forecasts Inter-City AGS/Train Trips 27

 No ready source of good data on intercity auto travel  Anonymous location tracking data from Sprint (processed by AirSage ) • For 3 monthly periods in 2011  February – typical winter  July – typical summer  October – typical other • For 4 day types  Mondays-Thursdays  Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays separately • For 3 traveler classifications  Resident  Visitor  Through  Supplemented by CDOT monthly traffic count data 28

Total trips were assigned to the  highway network to get the number of trips crossing 6 links at selected rural locations on I- 25 and I-70 The assigned vehicle trips were  within 7% of CDOT AADTs at all traffic locations considered: Count unt CD CDOT T AirS irSag age Per erce cent Loc ocation on AADT AAD AADT AAD Diff. I70 A 43,000 45,048 4.8% I70 B 29,000 30,952 6.7% I70 C 22,000 20,519 -6.7% I25 A 68,000 63,688 -6.3% I25 B 60,000 61,299 2.2% I25 C 31,000 31,722 2.3% We removed non-divertible trips  from the intercity auto trip table 29

 AADT of 29,000 in 2012 on I-70 West of Georgetown – approx. 34,000 in 2035  Annual vehicular trips: approx. 12.5 million in 2035  Annual person trips: approx. 30 million in 2035  Annual person trips excluding truck and through trips: approx. 24 million 30