Model Characteristics

Transcription

1 1

2 General Model Design Highway Network/Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) Development of Synthetic Trip Tables Validation Procedures & Results Model Application (2003 & 2030) Review 2

3 Model Characteristics Address Major Corridor Movements Relatively Easy to Maintain and Update Uses Existing Data Resources Uses Existing Software for Application Links to Existing GIS Databases/Software Sensitive to Shifts in Socioeconomic/Land Use Patterns Assess Impacts of Shifts in Travel Modes Assess Freight Movements 3

4 Potential Methodologies Traditional Four Step TDM Procedures Trip Generation Trip Distribution Mode Choice Traffic Assignment Trip Table Expansion (FRATAR) Preparation of Base Trip Table(s) Development of Expansion Factors 4

5 Steps In Model Development Development of Highway Network & TAZs Selection of Detail for Highway Network Definition of TAZs TAZ/Network Compatibility Synthetic Matrix Estimation (SME) Development of Seed Matrices Matrix Estimation Traffic Assignment 5

6 Network/TAZ Definition Incorporate All Roadways in TRIMS 1,283 Miles of Interstate/Freeways 4,300 Miles of Principal Arterials 8,271 Miles of Other Subset of TRIMS Interstate and Freeways Principal Arterials 6

7 TRIMS/Model Comparison ROUTE MILES DVMT NATIONAL FUNCTIONAL NFC Travel Model/TRIMS Travel Model/TRIMS CLASSIFICATION CODE Model TRIMS Ratio Model TRIMS Ratio RURAL INTERSTATE ,901,049 12,901, RURAL OTHER PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL ,693,621 13,693, RURAL MINOR ARTERIAL ,973,803 12,973, RURAL MAJOR COLLECTOR ,940 7,756, RURAL MINOR COLLECTOR , RURAL LOCAL NA NA- URBAN INTERSTATE ,535,171 44,535, URBAN FREEWAY OR EXPRESSWAY ,834,901 10,834, URBAN OTHER PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL ,938,821 51,938, URBAN MINOR ARTERIAL ,744,441 19,718, URBAN COLLECTOR ,203, URBAN LOCAL NA NA- TOTAL 9, , ,262, ,575,

8 REGION 1 Network/TAZs LEGEND: Rural Interstate Rural Principal Arterial Rural Minor Arterial Rural Local Urban Interstate Urban Freeway/Expressway Urban Principal Arterial Urban Minor Arterial TAZ Boundary 8

9 REGION 2 Network/TAZs LEGEND: Rural Interstate Rural Principal Arterial Rural Minor Arterial Rural Local Urban Interstate Urban Freeway/Expressway Urban Principal Arterial Urban Minor Arterial TAZ Boundary 9

10 REGION 3 Network/TAZs LEGEND: Rural Interstate Rural Principal Arterial Rural Minor Arterial Rural Local Urban Interstate Urban Freeway/Expressway Urban Principal Arterial Urban Minor Arterial TAZ Boundary 10

11 LEGEND: REGION 4 Network/TAZs Rural Interstate Rural Principal Arterial Rural Minor Arterial Rural Local Urban Interstate Urban Freeway/Expressway Urban Principal Arterial Urban Minor Arterial TAZ Boundary 11

12 National Network LEGEND: Rural Interstate Rural Principal Arterial Rural Minor Arterial Rural Local Urban Interstate Urban Freeway/Expressway Urban Principal Arterial Urban Minor Arterial 12

13 Background Trip Tables Are One of the Basic Elements of Travel Demand Models Origin-Destination (O-D) Surveys Traditional Method for Trip Table Development Developing Trip Tables Using Traffic Counts has been Source of Research for Past 30 Years 13

14 Required Inputs Traffic Counts Traffic Assignment Network Seed Trip Table 14

15 Required Inputs Traffic Counts Sample should come from widely dispersed parts of the network Counts on Selected Links and on Screenlines/Cutlines Counts Need to be Directional 15

16 Required Inputs Traffic Assignment Network Traffic Assignment Network MUST Produce Realistic Results Equilibrium Assignment Process 16

17 Required Inputs Seed Matrix Potential Sources of Seed Matrix Default matrix Prior estimate based on survey measurements Synthetically generated (e.g., from a doubly-constrained trip distribution model) 17

18 Seed Matrix Serves Two Purposes Set the dimensions for the output matrix Provide initial values for the estimated trip table O-D Matrix Estimation only accounts for trips between zones (diagonal cells will be ignored trips within a zone) Every cell that is expected to have a positive flow must have a positive number in the base matrix 18

19 Seed Matrix Three Trip Purposes Used Work Other Non-Home Based Used Trip Rates and Lengths From National Household Survey Urban Rural 19

20 Seed Matrix Trip Generation 2001 NHTS Database Purpose Percent HBO 4,341 42% HBW 2,296 22% NHB 3,588 36% Grand 10, % HBW 1.70 trips/household HBO 3.20 trips/household NHB 2.65 trips/household 7.55 trips/household 20

21 Seed Matrix Trip Distribution 2001 NHTS Trip Length Distribution - HBW 20% 18% 16% NHTS Average Trip Length = Min. GM Average Trip Length = Min. 14% Percent of Trips 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% Travel Time (in minutes) 21

22 Seed Matrix Trip Distribution 2001 NHTS Trip Length Distribution - HBO 30.0% 25.0% NHTS Average Trip Length = Min. GM Average Trip Length = Min. 20.0% Percent of Trips 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% Travel Time (in minutes) 22

23 Seed Matrix Trip Distribution 2001 NHTS Trip Length Distribution - NHB 30% 25% NHTS Average Trip Length = Min. GM Average Trip Length = Min. 20% Percent of Trips 15% 10% 5% 0% Travel Time (in minutes) 23

24 Seed Matrix Initial Matrix Not Person Trips; Merging of HBW, HBO, NHB, Internal-External and External-External Trip Tables; Seed Matrix represents Passenger Cars and Light Commercial Vehicle Trips Only; and, Additional Intercity (MPO to MPO) vehicle trips were added in relation to 2000 CTPP Place of Residence and Place of Work Information. 24

25 Traffic Counts Traffic Assignment Network Seed Trip Table Application of TransCAD Matrix Estimation Program 25

26 Application Application of of TransCAD TransCAD Matrix Matrix Estimation Estimation Program Program Trip Trip Table Table Evaluation Evaluation Good?? NO Input Input Adjustments: Adjustments: Network Network Seed Seed Table Table Counts Counts YES Base Base Year Year (2003) (2003) Trip Trip Table Table 26

27 27

28 28

29 29

30 Matrix Evaluation Parameters Trip Length Goodness of Fit Screenlines 30

31 VMT Area National TDOT Synthetic Relative FHWA Type Functional Class TRIMS db (1) Model (1) Difference 2001 (2) Rural Interstate Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Major Collector NA Minor Collector NA Local NA Urban Interstate Freeways/Expressways Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Collector Local NA TOTAL VMT Notes: -NA- denotes that calculation is not applicable for that cell. VMT in millions miles of travel. (1) Includes passenger cars and single unit trucks. (2) Includes all vehicles including multi-unit trucks. 31

32 Screenline Region

33 Screenline Results Region 1 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Orientation Number Volume Volume Difference Allowable EW 8 92,568 95, % 24.7% EW , , % 18.3% EW , , % 20.2% NS 64 87,594 90, % 24.7% NS , , % 18.3% NS 82 39,678 44, % 33.3% NS , , % 20.2% NS 94 6,020 6, % 44.9% 1,191,528 1,219, % 18.3% 33

34 Screenline Results Region 1 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Number Route Volume Volume Difference Allowable U27 4,916 4, % 47.1% S58 1,378 1, % 76.1% I75 32,680 31, % 23.0% U11 3,572 3, % 53.1% 8 S72 4,726 5, % 47.8% U411 15,588 18, % 30.4% U129 3,932 3, % 51.2% FOOTHI 3,168 2, % 55.6% U441 5,488 6, % 45.1% I40 17,120 17, % 29.4% 92,568 95, % 24.7% U27 3,792 4, % 51.9% S61 7,030 7, % 41.1% S62 22,870 17, % 26.3% S95 22,722 22, % 26.4% U25W 16,898 24, % 29.5% S131 13,990 13, % 31.7% I75 49,314 47, % 19.7% S33 41,650 45, % 21.0% I640 47,520 43, % 20.0% 12 U11W 13,688 15, % 32.0% U11E 18,664 19, % 28.4% S92 9,274 6, % 37.0% U70 6,074 8, % 43.4% U70 3,724 4, % 52.3% I40 19,488 20, % 28.0% U25E 7,072 7, % 41.0% U321 2,010 2, % 66.0% S70 2,214 2, % 63.6% I26 6,490 6, % 42.4% 314, , % 9.4% 34

35 Screenline Results Region 1 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Number Route Volume Volume Difference Allowable U27 6,740 9, % 41.8% U25W 8,268 8, % 38.7% I75 25,044 25, % 25.5% U25W 1,294 2, % 77.9% U25E 19,484 22, % 28.0% S % 147.6% 18 I ,960 24, % 25.5% 11,760 11, % 33.9% I81 20,614 25, % 27.4% U11W 22,988 22, % 26.3% U19 18,692 17, % 28.4% S34 9,232 12, % 37.1% U421 6,342 5, % 42.7% U421 6,510 6, % 42.3% 182, , % 20.2% S52 1,268 1, % 78.5% S62 1,146 1, % 81.5% I40 24,428 24, % 25.7% U27 13,456 13, % 32.2% 64 U70 4,150 3, % 50.2% S58 1,378 1, % 76.1% I75 29,668 29, % 23.9% U11 5,054 5, % 46.6% U411 5,748 8, % 44.4% S39 1,298 1, % 77.8% 87,594 90, % 13.9% 35

36 Screenline Results Region 1 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Number Route Volume Volume Difference Allowable U25W 2,376 2, % 61.9% S63 19,796 26, % 27.8% U441 1,100 1, % 82.8% I75 35,166 32, % 22.4% S61 25,676 20, % 25.2% U25W 17,344 17, % 29.2% S62 10,812 13, % 34.9% 70 S131 8,694 6, % 37.9% 11,496 16, % 34.1% I75 114, , % 13.4% U70 27,792 24, % 24.5% S332 8,950 8, % 37.5% U321 13,222 12, % 32.4% U411 11,850 11, % 33.8% S % 129.3% 308, , % 18.3% S , % 101.4% U11W 8,180 8, % 38.8% 82 U11E 5,568 6, % 44.9% I81 22,150 22, % 26.7% U321 3,136 6, % 55.8% U25 4,980 4, % 46.8% 44,658 49, % 20.5% 36

37 Screenline Results Region 1 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Number Route Volume Volume Difference Allowable U11W 17,820 18, % 28.9% S126 8,360 8, % 38.5% I81 24,040 25, % 25.8% 5,940 8, % 43.8% 88 S75 11,268 17, % 34.4% S36 12,732 9, % 32.9% I181 31,680 30, % 23.3% S354 14,158 12, % 31.6% U321 26,156 25, % 25.0% I26 8,164 8, % 38.9% 160, , % 20.2% U , % 88.6% 94 S67 3,620 3, % 52.8% U321 1,480 1, % 74.0% 6,020 6, % 43.6% 37

38 Screenline Region

39 Screenline Results Region 2 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Orientation Number Volume Volume Difference Allowable EW 0 224, , % 18.3% EW 4 139, , % 20.2% EW 12 80,352 84, % 24.7% EW 18 14,010 12, % 44.9% NS 46 93,110 92, % 24.7% NS 54 98,498 92, % 24.7% NS 62 99, , % 24.7% 749, , % 18.3% 39

40 Screenline Results Region 2 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Number Route Volume Volume Difference Allowable S % 111.9% S % 121.8% U72 12,882 12, % 32.7% I24 32,026 32, % 23.2% I24 44,956 44, % 20.4% U11 5,318 5, % 45.7% 0 S148 1,614 1, % 71.7% S17 11,762 11, % 33.9% U27 24,250 23, % 25.8% I75 74,568 85, % 15.5% S60 5,162 7, % 46.2% U411 4,442 4, % 48.9% S68 6,990 7, % 41.2% 224, , % 18.3% U41 A 10,642 10, % 35.2% I24 23,962 23, % 25.9% U41 2,704 2, % 59.0% S56 3,636 3, % 52.7% S108 1,246 2, % 79.0% S28 6,092 7, % 43.4% U127 1,962 3, % 66.6% 4 S111 6,444 5, % 42.5% U27 18,304 18, % 28.7% S60 4,926 4, % 47.0% I75 28,080 28, % 24.4% U11 5,234 5, % 46.0% S30 10,024 10, % 36.0% U411 11,146 8, % 34.6% S310 4,892 4, % 47.1% 139, , % 20.2% 40

41 Screenline Results Region 2 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Number Route Volume Volume Difference Allowable U70 4,666 4, % 48.0% S56 3,842 3, % 51.7% S111 12,872 12, % 32.7% U70N 3,416 2, % 54.0% 12 I40 23,690 27, % 26.0% U127 10,370 11, % 35.5% S298 2,416 2, % 61.5% S101 14,482 14, % 31.3% 2,772 3, % 58.4% 1,826 1, % 68.4% 80,352 84, % 24.7% S % 95.5% S53 2,784 2, % 58.3% 18 S52 2,988 3, % 56.8% S42 4,042 4, % 50.7% U127 3,442 2, % 53.8% 14,010 12, % 44.9% S96 3,412 4, % 54.0% U70S 11,702 10, % 33.9% I24 28,666 27, % 24.2% U41 7,902 6, % 39.3% 46 S55 14,764 14, % 31.1% U41 A 13,978 14, % 31.7% U41 A 7,596 10, % 39.9% U64 3,298 2, % 54.7% S16 1, % 68.9% 93,110 92, % 24.7% 41

42 Screenline Results Region 2 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Number Route Volume Volume Difference Allowable S53 4,750 4, % 47.7% S52 2,988 3, % 56.8% S % 115.5% S85 1,216 1, % 79.7% S111 15,210 12, % 30.7% 0 7,760 7, % 39.6% 54 U70N 8,386 8, % 38.5% I40 27,194 25, % 24.7% U70 11,760 11, % 33.9% S30 1, % 75.9% S111 4,946 4, % 47.0% S28 4,948 4, % 46.9% S283 3,656 3, % 52.6% U41 3,842 3, % 51.7% 98,498 92, % 24.7% S52 1,322 1, % 77.3% S % 102.1% I40 20,866 22, % 27.3% U70 1,822 1, % 68.5% U27 4,916 4, % 47.1% S68 5,218 5, % 46.0% 62 S58 1,840 1, % 68.2% S30 5,636 4, % 44.7% 0 1,826 2, % 68.4% I75 30,040 29, % 23.8% 0 4,950 4, % 46.9% U11 9,526 9, % 36.7% U64 9,304 10, % 37.0% S313 1,682 1, % 70.6% 99, , % 24.7% 42

43 Screenline Region

44 Screenline Results Region 3 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Orientation Number Volume Volume Difference Allowable EW 0 45,998 47, % 33.3% EW 6 73,952 67, % 33.3% EW , , % 18.3% EW , , % 20.2% NS 24 34,816 38, % 33.3% NS , , % 18.3% NS , , % 18.3% NS , , % 24.7% 1,493,260 1,513, % 18.3% 44

45 Screenline Results Region 3 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Number Route Volume Volume Difference Allowable S69 2,050 1, % 65.5% PNA D 2,232 2, % 63.4% S13 2,502 2, % 60.7% U43 8,142 8, % 38.9% 0 S11 2,382 2, % 61.9% I65 10,028 10, % 36.0% U31 6,106 7, % 43.4% U231 10,184 10, % 35.7% S97 2,372 2, % 62.0% 45,998 47, % 33.3% S % 104.8% S48 1,062 1, % 83.9% S20 2,940 2, % 57.1% U43 11,880 11, % 33.7% U31 2,922 4, % 57.3% 6 I65 13,002 13, % 32.6% U431 1,746 2, % 69.6% U31 A 4,648 4, % 48.1% U41 A 9,800 7, % 36.3% U231 21,782 16, % 26.8% S64 3,580 4, % 53.0% 73,952 67, % 33.3% 45

46 Screenline Results Region 3 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Number Route Volume Volume Difference Allowable S69 2,050 1, % 65.5% PNA D 2,232 2, % 63.4% S13 2,502 2, % 60.7% U43 8,142 8, % 38.9% 0 S11 2,382 2, % 61.9% I65 10,028 10, % 36.0% U31 6,106 7, % 43.4% U231 10,184 10, % 35.7% S97 2,372 2, % 62.0% 45,998 47, % 33.3% S % 104.8% S48 1,062 1, % 83.9% S20 2,940 2, % 57.1% U43 11,880 11, % 33.7% U31 2,922 4, % 57.3% 6 I65 13,002 13, % 32.6% U431 1,746 2, % 69.6% U31 A 4,648 4, % 48.1% U41 A 9,800 7, % 36.3% U231 21,782 16, % 26.8% S64 3,580 4, % 53.0% 73,952 67, % 33.3% 46

47 Screenline Results Region 3 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Number Route Volume Volume Difference Allowable S13 2,874 2, % 57.6% S48 1,674 1, % 70.7% I40 19,188 19, % 28.1% S46 11,650 12, % 34.0% 0 2,940 2, % 57.1% S96 6,626 7, % 42.0% S96 13,188 15, % 32.4% 12 S96 7,546 11, % 40.0% U431 14,804 15, % 31.0% U31 24,028 21, % 25.9% I65 97,530 98, % 13.7% I24 91,962 91, % 13.9% U41 24,454 16, % 25.7% I840 F 15,404 16, % 30.6% U231 7,566 7, % 40.0% S96 2,834 3, % 57.9% 344, , % 18.3% U79 8,826 7, % 37.7% S13 21,160 25, % 27.1% U41 A 16,276 18, % 29.9% I24 31,500 33, % 23.3% U41 14,896 11, % 31.0% S49 5,430 5, % 45.3% 18 I65 41,380 41, % 21.1% U31W 7,694 7, % 39.7% S25 2,188 2, % 63.9% S109 8,418 9, % 38.4% U31E 9,944 10, % 36.1% S10 5,520 4, % 45.0% S56 2,148 2, % 64.3% 175, , % 20.2% 47

48 Screenline Results Region 3 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Number Route Volume Volume Difference Allowable U79 3,696 5, % 52.4% U70 7,084 6, % 41.0% 24 I40 19,564 20, % 27.9% U412 2,246 3, % 63.3% U64 2,226 3, % 63.5% 34,816 38, % 33.3% U41 4,638 4, % 48.1% S49 6,850 6, % 41.5% I24 38,156 37, % 21.7% U41 A 6,584 6, % 42.1% S12 10,780 10, % 35.0% U70 3,900 12, % 51.4% I40 49,216 46, % 19.7% 36 U70S 23,860 24, % 25.9% S100 21,464 21, % 27.0% S96 10,556 10, % 35.3% U31 11,888 17, % 33.7% 23,732 18, % 26.0% U412 13,116 16, % 32.5% S50 8,816 8, % 37.7% U31 A 4,512 4, % 48.6% U31 3,420 3, % 54.0% 241, , % 18.3% 48

49 Screenline Results Region 3 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Number Route Volume Volume Difference Allowable I65 37,860 37, % 21.8% U31W 2,756 3, % 58.6% S25 2,376 2, % 61.9% S386 39,542 38, % 21.4% U31E 35,196 45, % 22.4% S45 31,126 31, % 23.4% U70N 29,058 29, % 24.1% I40 91,280 89, % 13.9% 0 5,880 9, % 44.0% 40 U70S 21,384 26, % 27.0% S254 31,108 25, % 23.5% 0 13,258 12, % 32.4% I24 83,660 82, % 14.3% S96 4,342 4, % 49.3% U41 A 3,066 3, % 56.2% S64 2,990 3, % 56.8% U431 3,478 4, % 53.6% U64 4,834 4, % 47.4% U231 12,184 10, % 33.4% 455, , % 18.3% S52 2,736 2, % 58.7% S % 89.6% S % 113.6% S262 2,308 2, % 62.6% S25 8,556 7, % 38.2% U70N 3,584 3, % 53.0% I40 27,004 26, % 24.7% S53 1,854 1, % 68.0% 48 U70 5,126 4, % 46.3% S96 3,872 3, % 51.5% U70S 11,878 12, % 33.7% U41 1,604 1, % 71.8% I24 30,600 30, % 23.6% S64 2,464 2, % 61.1% U41 A 7,962 9, % 39.2% S55 5,482 5, % 45.2% U64 3,662 3, % 52.6% S97 1,920 2, % 67.1% 121, , % 24.7% 49

50 Screenline Region

51 Screenline Results Region 4 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Orientation Number Volume Volume Difference Allowable EW 0 178, , % 20.2% EW 10 58,420 69, % 33.3% EW 18 24,914 29, % 44.9% NS 0 116, , % 24.7% NS 4 304, , % 18.3% NS 8 90,818 98, % 24.7% NS 18 64,464 63, % 33.3% NS 22 52,054 47, % 33.3% 890, , % 18.3% 51

52 Screenline Results Region 4 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Number Route Volume Volume Difference Allowable U61 21,418 24, % 27.0% 0 3,412 3, % 54.0% U51 12,782 12, % 32.8% I55 54,362 56, % 19.4% 0 13,950 20, % 31.7% U78 32,692 34, % 23.0% 0 0 7,440 8, % 40.2% U72 13,348 15, % 32.3% S18 1,738 1, % 69.7% S125 3,620 3, % 52.8% U45 7,588 10, % 39.9% S22 2,610 2, % 59.8% S57 3,700 3, % 52.4% 178, , % 20.2% U51 10,256 10, % 35.7% U45W 9,618 10, % 36.5% U79 10,322 19, % 35.6% U45E 14,458 14, % 31.3% 10 U70 3,840 3, % 51.7% S22 4,708 5, % 47.8% % 111.9% U641 4,326 4, % 49.4% % 121.8% 58,420 69, % 33.3% 52

53 Screenline Results Region 4 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Number Route Volume Volume Difference Allowable S % 110.7% U51 5,404 7, % 45.4% 18 U51 8,436 10, % 38.4% U45E 5,080 4, % 46.5% U641 5,484 5, % 45.2% 24,914 29, % 44.9% I40 42,008 44, % 20.9% 0 I55 38,330 46, % 21.7% 9,500 9, % 36.7% 26,880 27, % 24.8% 116, , % 24.7% 53

54 Screenline Results Region 4 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Number Route Volume Volume Difference Allowable U51 18,262 18, % 28.7% S14 7,556 6, % 40.0% S205 8,168 11, % 38.9% U79 16,366 16, % 29.9% 4 U64 34,160 33, % 22.6% I40 86,210 66, % 14.0% S23 15,840 28, % 30.3% U72 36,920 27, % 22.0% S385 67,074 46, % 16.7% 0 13,860 10, % 31.8% 304, , % 18.3% S78 3,308 3, % 54.7% I155 6,414 7, % 42.6% S88 1,026 1, % 85.0% U51 10,520 10, % 35.3% S19 3,250 3, % 55.0% 8 S54 2,106 2, % 64.8% U70 1,436 1, % 74.9% I40 22,740 22, % 26.4% S59 1,960 2, % 66.6% U64 13,680 14, % 32.0% S57 11,030 12, % 34.7% U72 13,348 16, % 32.3% 90,818 98, % 24.7% 54

55 Screenline Results Region 4 Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. Number Route Volume Volume Difference Allowable S54 2,574 2, % 60.1% S22 7,498 8, % 40.1% U79 5,870 5, % 44.0% U70 A 2,406 2, % 61.6% S % 90.3% 18 U70 3,582 3, % 53.0% I40 14,756 17, % 31.1% U412 9,124 7, % 37.3% S100 9,992 6, % 36.0% U64 4,812 4, % 47.4% S57 2,976 3, % 56.9% 64,464 63, % 33.3% U79 6,612 5, % 42.1% U70 6,774 5, % 41.7% I40 22,246 21, % 26.6% 22 U412 7,634 7, % 39.9% S100 3,416 2, % 54.0% % 116.3% U64 2,724 3, % 58.8% S69 2,200 2, % 63.8% 52,054 47, % 33.3% 55

56 Screenline Results River Crossings Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. River Route Volume Volume Difference Allowable S166 3,684 4, % 52.5% I24 31,618 30, % 23.3% U41 3,920 2, % 51.3% U27 60,560 53, % 18.0% U127 18,396 32, % 28.6% S319 30,478 28, % 23.6% S153 41,386 40, % 21.1% S60 3,402 4, % 54.1% Tennessee S30 1,796 2, % 68.8% S68 5,218 5, % 46.0% S58 11,872 9, % 33.7% I75 36,692 36, % 22.0% U11 7,342 9, % 40.4% U321 10,688 12, % 35.1% N140 41,412 43, % 21.1% U129 45,804 46, % 20.3% U441 41,092 50, % 21.1% 11,880 18, % 33.7% 407, , % 18.3% U79 7,446 7, % 40.2% S13 21,160 21, % 27.1% S49 10,732 9, % 35.0% S155 28,520 21, % 24.2% U41 A 41,514 51, % 21.0% I65 86,258 96, % 14.0% U41 27,030 40, % 24.7% Cumberland I24 111, , % 13.5% S155 44,288 42, % 20.5% S45 20,434 20, % 27.5% S109 16,634 16, % 29.7% U231 6,120 6, % 43.3% S25 8,302 8, % 38.6% S262 1,644 1, % 71.2% S56 2,538 1, % 60.4% S52 5,588 6, % 44.8% 439, , % 18.3% 56

57 Screenline Results River Crossings Screenline Observed Model Relative Max. River Route Volume Volume Difference Allowable U70 12,446 8, % 33.1% I40 35,120 36, % 22.4% S58 11,426 12, % 34.2% Clinch S95 8,070 7, % 39.0% S62 33,948 33, % 22.7% U25W 20,534 13, % 27.4% S61 21,580 20, % 26.9% 143, , % 20.2% I40 62,816 63, % 17.5% U70 39,582 39, % 21.4% Holst S92 4,268 7, % 49.6% U25E 21,376 23, % 27.0% S56 11,780 7, % 33.8% S66 5,588 6, % 44.8% 145, , % 20.2% S66 25,236 25, % 25.4% French S92 2,544 4, % 60.3% Broad U25 21,534 21, % 26.9% 49,314 51, % 33.3% 57

58 RMSE by Vol. Grp. Statewide % ROOT NO. OF MEAN VOLUME VOLUME COUNT SQUARE GROUP RANGE STATIONS ERROR % % % % % % % % % 58

59 Observed/Model Correlation 140, , ,000 R 2 = Model 80,000 60,000 40,000 20, ,000 40,000 60,000 80, , ,000 Observed 59

60 Freight Movement From Reebie Data Data Truck (Tons) Rail (Tons) Trucks Rail Cars 60

61 Commodity Categories Statewide Freight Model Commodity Group Commodity Group Flow No. Name (Annual Tons) Petroleum & Minerals Food Products Chemicals Timber & Lumber Agriculture Machinery Paper Products Primary Metal Waste Materials 511,600, ,100, ,300,000 49,100, ,000,000 49,300,000 43,100,000 78,900,000 20,600, Manufactured Household & Other Miscellaneous & Container 34,000, ,500,000 ALL COMMODITY GROUPS 1,279,500,000 61

62 Mode Share By Distance Commodity Shipped by Distance (Truck & Rail) 100,000,000 90,000,000 Truck Rail 80,000,000 70,000,000 Commodity (Tons) 60,000,000 50,000,000 40,000,000 30,000,000 20,000,000 10,000, ,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 Distance (Mile) 62

63 Commodity Growth (Million Tons) Truck and Rail 1, Waste Materials Timber & Lumber Primary Metal Paper Product Mixed Shipment Machinery Household Goods Food Product Construction & Mining Chemicals Agriculture Product Year 2001 Year

64 Commodity Growth (Million Tons) Trucks (78% of ) Year 2003 Year Waste Materials Timber & Lumber Primary Metal Paper Product Mixed Shipment Machinery Household Goods Food Product Construction & Mining Chemicals Agriculture Product 64

65 2003 Truck Assignment 2030 Truck Assignment 65

66 2003 Volume-to-Capacity Ratio Existing Network 2030 Volume-to-Capacity Ratio Existing Network 66

67 2003 Volumes Existing Network 2030 Volumes 2030 Volumes Existing Network 67