A COMPARISON OF HIGHWAY AND TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES USING AN INTEGRATED LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION MODEL IN THE SACRAMENTO REGION

Abstract

In this study, we apply an integrated land use and transportation model, the Sacramento MEPLAN model, to evaluate transit investment alternatives combined with supportive land use policies and pricing polices in the Sacramento region. Highway investment alternatives are simulated as well for purposes of comparison. The application of the Sacramento MEPLAN model is relatively advanced because the model represents a number of induced travel effects, including land use, destination, mode choice, and route choices. A number of conclusions are made for the case study. First, transportation investment in both highway and light rail may allow for greater decentralization of regional development. Second, new highway capacity projects, even if they include HOV lanes, may increase VMT and emissions. Third, transit investment with supportive land use policies or pricing policies may be very effective in reducing VMT and emissions. Fourth, transit investment with supportive land use or pricing policies may provide congestion reduction that is as great, if not greater, than highway investment policies. Fifth, transit investment combined with land use policies may provide greater benefits (i.e., change in travel time and cost) than highway investment. Rodier, Abraham, and Johnston 3

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 9 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.