California's new ambitious greenhouse gas reduction targets.

flickr photo shared by Malingering under a Creative Commons ( BY-NC-ND ) license

Yesterday California Governor Jerry Brown issued an executive order establishing the state's greenhouse gas reduction target 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (Executive Oder B-30-15).  This new executive order is another step reducing California's greenhouse gas emissions after the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) which set reduction targets to 1990 levels by 2020. LBNL models predict we're on target to meet the 2020 goals but will need more effort ot meet the ultimate 2050 goals. 

Research in this area demonstrates that to achieve 80% greenhouse gas reductions by 2050 that moving to low-carbon and renewable energy will be important, but also investment in carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology. Integrated climate protection into planning and land use policies, such as smart growth planning, will also help California meet its targets. Much of the technological innovations to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 hinges on the role of electricity to move away from carbon based fuels across economic sectors. And yes, high-speed rail could also be part of the solution

New article: Impact of Parking Prices and Transit Fares on Mode Choice at the University of California, Berkeley

creative commons licensed ( BY-NC-ND ) flickr photo shared by stevejin

A new article from the Transportation Research Record is especially close to home, examining what it would take to reduce the rate of single-occupancy vehicle community here to UC Berkeley. In "Impact of Parking Prices and Transit Fares on Mode Choice at the University of California, Berkeley," Frank Proux, Brian Cavagnolo, and Mariana Torres-Montoya use data from a campus-wide survey and discrete choice models to investigate. They find:

The University of California, Berkeley, and the City of Berkeley sought to reduce single-occupancy-vehicle commute trips to the campus as a means to reduce negative transportation externalities and to fulfill their environmental emissions reduction goals. This paper reports on the evaluation of policy scenarios to assess the potential impact of parking pricing and transit fare subsidies on the overall mode share of the University of California, Berkeley, community. A mode and parking choice model was developed on the basis of a biennial campuswide transportation and housing survey; policy alternatives were tested with a sample enumeration. The discrete choice model selected for policy analysis was a nested logit model calibrated on a randomly selected subsample of n 5 3,371 individuals and validated against the remaining 814 campus commuters. Factors found to influence mode choice significantly in this model included travel times and costs, gender, student status, age older than 70, and home location topography. Campus affiliates also appeared to have a predisposition to walk, which likely reflected the large student population that lived close to campus. A drive-alone value of time of approximately $30 per hour was calculated. Policy scenario tests suggested that, to spur a significant mode shift away from that of driving alone, parking pricing reforms would need to be used in tandem with incentives to use alternative modes. Such an approach might garner additional political support, especially if commuters who drove alone received the indirect benefits of transit subsidies, such as reduced congestion and a less competitive parking market. Policies designed to mitigate the regressive impacts of parking fees were tested also.

The full paper can be found here. If parking pricing and demand is of interest to you, then you should check out the rest of the issue. One of the other articles covers residential parking permits in the city of Berkeley

How to deal with parking at UC Berkeley

creative commons licensed ( BY ) flickr photo shared by neil conway

Campus parking at UC Berkeley, like many universities, is a hot comodity. The only people who get free and easy parking on campus are Nobel Laureates, though even they have to renew their permits. Recently a case study about parking on campus was published in Case Studies on Transport Policy. William Riggs from Cal Poly San Louis Obispo descibes how balancing transit incentives and parking pricing can shift travel behavior, and how social incentives can be as effective as fiscal incentives. Here is the article

William Riggs, Dealing with parking issues on an urban campus: The case of UC Berkeley, Case Studies on Transport Policy, Volume 2, Issue 3, December 2014, Pages 168-176, ISSN 2213-624X,


Bike/Ped Data, Bike/Ped Planning

Catch up

Here are a couple of Berkeley bike/ped related things to start off your week.

First, this month NCHRP Report 797: Guidebook on Pedestrian and Bicycle Volume Data Collection has been published, which included some Berkeley researchers on the team that compiled the guidebook. You can read about their methodology here

Second, on Saturday 31 January, 2015 from 10:00am to noon the city of Berkeley hosts the Adeline Corridor Redesign Community Meeting at the South Berkeley Senior Center (2992 Ellis Street). Many of the proposed design ideas focus on improving access and safety for pedestrians and cyclists in the area. In 2010, a UC Berkeley Design Studio examined the area, and you can see their designs here. Are they going to be implemented? Time will tell. 

Let's play Cards Against Urbanity!

After a successful Kickstarter campaign,  the folks at Greater Placers have launched Cards Against Urbanity. It's basically Cards Against Humanity for urbanists (and somewhat more SFW). We have a deck in the library, so come on over before the semester gets too busy and play a game. 

What's the difference between people who use taxis and people who use ridesourcing in SF?

Proposed CPUC regulations improve consumer protection for Uber, Lyft and Sidecar

It seems like every week the two largest ridesourcing/TNC/ridesharing companies, Uber and Lyft, are in the news. This week featured stories about the two companies opposing a California state legislature bill mandating insurance for drivers, Uber's efforts to sabbotage Lyft with burner phones, and that both operations are now basically commodoties and not really that different from one another. 

Which makes this new UCTC paper all the more timely. 

In App-Based, On-Demand Ride Services: Comparing Taxi and Ridesourcing Trips and User Characteristics in San Francisco, Lisa Rayle (a 2014 Eisenhower Graduate Fellowship recipient) et al examine who uses these ridesourcing apps, and how they relate to more traditional taxi or transit riders. 

The rapid growth of on-demand ride services, or ridesourcing, has prompted debate among policy makers and stakeholders. At present, ridesourcing’s usage and impacts are not well understood. Key questions include: how ridesourcing and taxis compare with respect to trip types, customers, and locations served; whether ridesourcing complements or competes with public transit; and potential impacts on vehicle miles traveled. We address these questions using an intercept survey. In spring 2014, 380 complete surveys were collected from three ridesourcing “hot spots” in San Francisco. Survey results are compared with matched-pair taxi trip data and results of a previous taxi user survey.

The findings indicate ridesourcing serves a previously unmet demand for convenient, point-to-point urban travel. Although taxis and ridesourcing share similarities, the findings show differences in users and the user experience. Ridesourcing wait times are markedly shorter and more consistent than those of taxis, while ridesourcing users tend to be younger, own fewer vehicles and more frequently travel with companions. Ridesourcing appears to substitute for longer public transit trips but otherwise complements transit. Impacts on overall vehicle travel are ambiguous. Future research should build on this exploratory study to further understand impacts of ridesourcing on labor, social equity, the environment, and public policy.

The full paper can be found here

SB-743, CEQA, and moving away from LOS

Saturday in LA

Yesterday the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) released Updating Transportation Impacts Analysis in the CEQA Guidelines. It's the draft discussion SB-743 Environmental Quality: transit oriented infill projects, judicial review streamlining for environmental leadership development projects, and entertainment and sports center in the City of Sacramento. As the bill's name hints, the impetus for the legislation is the contentious proposed new arena for the Kings in downtown Sacramento though the effects will be felt statewide. 

Many of the concerns and questions raised by SB-743 lie in the proposed changes to litigation windows to CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act). The proposed reforms could make it easier for projects to obtain exemptions from the full CEQA project, potentially making the development of previously contested projects easier. 

From a transportation standpoint, the biggest change to CEQA is the use of level of service (LOS) in evaluating the impact of projects. Instead of relying solely on LOS to determine the significance of transportation impacts, OPR proposes:

In developing the criteria, the office shall recommend potential metrics to measure transportation impacts that may include, but are not limited to, vehicle miles traveled, vehicle miles traveled per capita, automobile trip generation rates, or automobile trips generated.

Engineering groups like Western ITE suggested using vehicle miles traveled (VMT) instead of LOS to measure impact as it focuses only on automobile congestion at the expense of other modes. So now that it looks like we're moving away from LOS, what comes next? Researchers have already begun looking at how this will affect models and traffic studies. Fehr & Peers have developed an concise website describing the impacts of SB-743

Transport Infrastructure and the World Cup

III Congresso SIBRT

Last week the 2014 FIFA World Cup kicked off in Brazil. Mega sporting events, like the World Cup and the Olympics, often require mega infrastructure projects for the hosts. For this World Cup, preparations include building five new stadiums, including the much talked about Arena Amazônia in Manaus which almost wasn't ready for the first match, and several transport projects. Airports were considered a headache early in planning, and lots of money and time has been invested in airport upgrades for an already overtaxed civil air system. On the other side, several planned public transport projects, such as monorails in Sao Paulo and Manaus, were cancelled because they could not be delivered in time for the tournament. One of the few public transport projects that succeeded was Belo Horizonte's MOVE BRT, which launched in March 2014. 

Some researchers have called these projects a "missed opportunity" to improve urban mobility in Brazil. Others have focused on how these projects could have reduced transport greenhouse gas emissions if only they were built. (Some of them were quite sustainable.)

For a good roundup of World Cup transport projects winner and losers, NextCity provides a good overview

New NCHRP Synthesis: Response to Extreme Weather Impacts on Transportation Systems

345/365 Flood

This week a new NCHRP Synthesis was published by TRB that covers the effects of extreme weather incidents, such as Hurricane Sandy, on transportation systems. NCHRP Synthesis Report 454: Response to Extreme Weather Impacts on Transportation Systems provides background on the issue and the current state of the practice. The full report can be read here

Examining Electric Vehicle Parking

Electric Vehicle Parking

Electric vehicle (EV) public parking has been rolling out in Berkeley but got a boost recently with station installed at both Whole Foods. The city is slated to get more municipal charging stations soon, including a pilot to look at curbside charging stations

There are mixed opinions about EV public parking options, with concerns about location and demand. Researchers are looking at activity models to overcome public perception and be more effective in urban areas. A new article from Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice continues the discourse. "Electric vehicle parking in European and American context: Economic, energy and environmental analysis," by Marta V. Faria, Patrícia C. Baptista, and Tiago L. Farias, applies a methodology for the placement of EV parking to Lisbon, Madrid, Minneapolis and Manhattan. They conclude:

This research confirms that the success of deploying an EV charging stations infrastructure will be highly dependent on the price the user will have to pay, on the cost of the infrastructure deployed and on the adhesion of the EV users to this kind of infrastructure. These variables are not independent and, consequently, the coordination of public policies and private interest must be promoted in order to reach an optimal solution that does not result in prohibitive costs for the users.

The full article can be read here.  


Syndicate content