Tab 9

Disruptive TrendsIn TransportationRonald T. Milam | AICP, PTPFEHR & PEERSAugust 2018

Trends2017 to 2040 UNCERTAINTY

Trend EffectsTipping Point

Trend EffectsTipping Point

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Perc

ent o

f Veh

icle

Flee

t

Quarles & Kockelman (Conservative) Quarles & Kockelman (Moderate)Quarles & Kockelman (Aggressive) Litman (Conservative)Litman (Aggressive) Goldman SachsTrendline (high) Trendline (low)

Potential Growth in Autonomous Vehicles as Percent of Vehicle Fleet

Trend EffectsTipping Point

95% of Passenger Miles by 2030 Delivered by Transportation as a

Service (TaaS) in Autonomous Electric Vehicles (AEVs)

https://tonyseba.com | 2018 TRB Presentation

Trend EffectsEvidence

Per Capita Vehicle Miles Travelled - California 1.00% 8,820

8r800

8,780 0.50%

8r760

"'C Q,J 8,740 -'ii

0.00%

> ta I..

8,720 t-Ill Q,J - -0.50% ·-~ 8r700 Q,J -u ·-..c 81680 Q,J

> - 1.00%

8,660

8r640 -1.50% - VMT per Capita

8,620 - Percentage

81600 -2.00% Growth 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Source: U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Hi_ghway Statistics

TNC EffectsEvidence

·what11s 1Ub1er Diisp1llacii ng? Ho. ·w . pe- I ·-.. .o- ·p. -. lie' -- ·wou. . . . I ld ·. -· t-. rav- : ·e. -I. . 1 ·11~·r~ the·-: . ·' y - we. : ·re-·- n'·t tak- . ···.·.. 1~1ng ,I_" ILJbe. . . - . ·1I r or . Lyf,_ · -t -

60+ % of TNC TripsAre New Vehicle Trips

2,2o/o

Fewer Trips Walk Bike Rail Carpool Taxi

Sourc 1e: Uniiversity of ca11·tornia. IDaviis lnsititut,e, 1of Transportati 1on ,Studies,

Trend Effects on TransitEvidence

f ri c e e m ■ or e

l lffl 1mc I I lll B d lL C

c.t Eff I C

..... N - -- "!If'"" '!l"""" '!l""""

N N N N N N N N N N N

So ces.: e n ere C: 88

a nd a .. hi t on D.C.

Trend Effects on TransitEvidence

The Washington Post | Falling Transit Ridership Poses an ‘Emergency’ for Cities, Experts Fear | Faiz Siddiqui | 3.24.18

Trend Effects on TransitEvidence New York Chicago

Boston Los Angeles

www.schallerconsult.com | 2018 TRB Presentation

TNCs to AVsFehr & Peers Testing 9

Regional Travel Demand Models

2Freeway Simulations

AV TestsVehicle Results

AV TestsTransit Results

AV EffectsEvidence

Research Findings: Chauffeur Experimen -( arb et ,al.; 2i017)

• 13 Sain Franci1S1CO !Bay Ar1ea1 subjects Cohorts: 4 Millennials, 4 Families~ 5 Retire-4!s • More aiuto travel

- 716'% 'in1crease in VMT - 22'% of ~ncreased VMT were ghost trips

• Ch11ang1e, in1 a11ct·vity p1att1e,rn1s -

194'% 'in 1crease in # lo1ng·er trip1s (:over 2101 miles)1

- 8,0% 'in1crease in # ev·en~ng· trip,s 1(after 6 pm) ,

Retirees increase most

Consistent across cohorts

Retirees increase most

• B,imodal imp1a11Ct 10,n1 miles w·a1lk:ed Consistent across cohorts - !Half decreasied 1(-28% on avera,ge)., half increased! 1(+49% on avera,ge)

v ·rtu1ally no b1ik.ing, t ·a1n1s·t, TN 1C use in1 th 1e, samp1le Consistent across cohorts

Policy ResponseDepends on the desired outcome

Policy ResponsePrivate Sector Motivation = Revenue (Miles, Minutes, Demand Level, and Vehicle Choice)

Policy ResponseTransportation Network Space Allocation

Policy ResponseMarket Assessment

Policy ResponseMicrotransit

VISIION TEAM ADVlSO.RS

City friendly mobility as a service

An on-demand city-integrate1d urban autono,mous transportation system

co

Policy ResponseMicro-Transit or Micro-Vehicles

PerformanceTraditional

VehiclesMicro

VehiclesDelay (seconds) 175 31Fuel consumption (gallons) 422 187

Policy ResponseAutonomous Rapid Transit (ART)

Performance20-passenger

vehicles4-passenger

vehiclesReduced travel delay 46% 49%Improvement in travel time advantage over cars 34% 36%Improvement in travel time advantage over BRT 33% 35%

Disruptive TrendsIn TransportationRonald T. Milam | AICP, PTPFEHR & PEERSAugust 2018

• Tipping Point

Trend Effects

Trend EffectsEvidence

Trend Effects on TransitEvidence

www.schallerconsult.com | 2018 TRB Presentation

Policy ResponseTransportation Network Space Allocation

Policy ResponseTransportation Network Space Allocation

Policy ResponseLand Use