Travel Characteristics of New Jersey Himadri Kundu Transportation and Land Use, Spring 2016 Edawrd J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy Rutgers University, NJ
Objective of the research paper was to study the demographics, travel characteristics, travel behavior (to a certain extent) and the relationship to land use in New Jersey In particular residential land use, residential choice and how that influences the commuting behavior, mode choice behavior for non-work travel of individuals
New Jersey
Introduction
one of the most diverse states with high immigrant population among the US unique influence of the New York Metropolitan area on the land use, travel behavior and demographics skewed both the population and demographics of New Jersey state in comparison to the rest of the country 4th highest Asian population in the US and 7th highest Hispanic population amounting to almost 9% and 18% respectively of the state’s population (U.S. Census 2011, ACS Estimate)
2
Land Use – Transportation Systems
Built Environment
Transportation
Density
Trip Distance
Accessibility
Mode Choice Trip Time/Cost
Diversity Urban Design
Essential part of modelling techniques is to predict and plan for future Choice of variables established from previous research Complexity of human behavior involved
Demand – Supply model based on Utility function But utilities vary with personal preferences Difficult to account for effects from personal attitudes and self selection
3
Methodology • • •
2009 NHTS data Descriptive Statistics Spatial Analysis
Conventional travel survey analysis - the travel characteristics of the households and individuals Categorized on the basis of household income levels and then according to the residential densities of the census tracts Household family income was classified into 2 groups: < $ 40,000 p.a. - Low Income > $ 40,000 p.a. - Medium to High Income
Residential Densities were grouped into 5 different classes (units/sq. mile) •
Scope to create better models
Very Low: 0 - 99 Low: 100 - 499 Moderate: 500 - 1999 High: 2000 - 9999 Very High: 10000 - 99999
4
Transit Use v/s Residential Density
Results & Analysis
120% 100%
Residential Density (housing units/ sq. mile)
Time to work (mins)
Transit Use
# of Bike trip Last week
Personal VMT/day
Trip Distance
High
Very High
100 - 499 16.0
500 - 1999 8.6
2000 - 9999 5.3
10000 - 99999 N.A.
16.8 28.0
17.2 14.8
16.3 18.3
10.4 N.A.
29.5 0.0
30.7 0.3
29.4 0.1
32.3 2.0
32.8 1.4
3.4 7.2
2.0 2.8
2.3 3.0
3.8 2.6
7.4 4.7
4.3 86%
4.9 100%
3.8 95%
3.9 81%
4.8 0%
97% 0.7
96% 0.9
93% 0.7
87% 0.7
78% 0.2
1.2 0%
0.9 0%
0.8 0%
0.9 4%
0.7 100%
0% 0.3
1% 0.0
3% 0.2
2% 0.0
13% 0.0
0.5 10.5
0.5 7.8
0.4 5.0
0.4 3.6
0.0 2.5
Low
15.9 10.6
11.6 7.0
9.2 5.2
10.0 3.4
7.3 6.2
Medium - High
15.4
13.4
15.6
7.6
6.2
Low Medium - High
# of Walk trips in the past Low week Medium - High
Cars Ownership/HH Size
Moderate
18.9 15.6
Medium - High
# of Transit trips in the past Low week Medium - High
Auto Use (% of all modes)
Low
Low Medium - High Low Medium - High Low Medium - High Low Medium - High Low Medium - High
% of all modes
Distance to Work (miles)
80%
60%
Medium - High Income
40% 20% 0% Very Low
Low
Moderate
RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
High
Very High
Residential Density for Household Income 60% 50%
Relative Frequency
Travel Characteristics
Very Low HH Family Income Level 0 - 99 9.3 Low
Low Income
RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
Very Low
40%
Low 30%
Moderate High
20%
Very High 10% 0% Low Income
Medium - High Income
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration,5 2009 National Household Travel Survey. URL: http://nhts.ornl.gov
Automobile to Work vs Residential Density 120%
% of all modes
100% RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
80%
Very Low
60%
Low
40%
Moderate
20%
High Very High
0% Low Income
# Transit trips past week vs Residential Density 10.00 RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
8.00
Number of trips
Source: 2010 Census Topological Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (TIGER) files for the New Jersey transportation network.
Medium - High Income
Very Low
6.00
Low
4.00
Moderate High
2.00
Very High
0.00 Low Income
Medium - High Income
6
Time to work vs Residential Density 40.00 35.00
Time (minutes)
30.00
RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
25.00
Very Low
20.00
Low
15.00
Moderate
10.00
High
5.00
Very High
0.00 Low Income
25.00
Distance to Work vs Residential Density RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
20.00
Distance in miles
Source: 2010 Census Topological Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (TIGER) files for the New Jersey transportation network.
Medium - High Income
Very Low Low
15.00
Moderate
10.00
High
5.00
Very High
0.00 Low Income
Medium - High Income
7
# Bike Last week v/s Residential Density 0.60 0.50 RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
0.40
Very Low
0.30
Low
0.20
Moderate
0.10
High Very High
0.00 Low Income
Source: Housing + Transportation Affordability Index, url:
8.00
http://htaindex.cnt.org/
6.00
Medium - High Income
# Walk trips vs Residential Density
Number of trips
7.00 RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
Very Low
5.00
Low
4.00
Moderate
3.00
High
2.00
Very High
1.00 0.00 Low Income
Medium - High Income
8
VMT vs Residential Density 18.00 16.00
Distance in miles
14.00 12.00
RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
10.00
Very Low
8.00
Low
6.00
Moderate
4.00
High
2.00
Very High
0.00 Low Income
Source: Housing + Transportation Affordability Index, url:
Medium - High Income
Age vs Residential Density 100.00 RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
80.00
http://htaindex.cnt.org/ Age in years
Very Low 60.00
Low Moderate
40.00
High 20.00
Very High
0.00 Low Income
Medium - High Income
9
Trip Distance vs Residential Density 18.00 16.00
Distance in miles
14.00 RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
12.00
Very Low
10.00 8.00
Low
6.00
Moderate
4.00
High
2.00
Very High
0.00 Low Income
1.4
Number of Cars owned
Source: 2010 Census Topological Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (TIGER) files for the New Jersey transportation network.
Medium - High Income
Cars/HH Size v/s Residential Density
1.2
RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
1.0
Very Low
0.8
Low
0.6
Moderate
0.4
High
0.2
Very High
0.0 Low Income
Medium - High Income
10
Similar trends to other travel behavior studies for New Jersey and others states Built environment has considerable influence but so does other factors
Conclusion
Increase in density & diversity also likely to increase avg. travel time and congestion Difficult to force people to change their preferential modes Restricting further sprawling and providing residential mobility for low income households with a preference for dense urban transit areas.
11
Thank You
Contact information (732)948-3243 himadrishekharkundu@gmail.com
12