Case Study:

Sacramento, California

Application

Transit Scenarios: Land Use Model

This section highlights some findings on the individual and combined effects of transit, land use, and pricing scenarios using MEPLAN, an integrated transportation-land use model. Again, a much more detailed discussion and interpretation of results is provided in Johnston, Rodier, Choy, and Abraham (2000); the interpretations given below are drawn from this report.

Land use impacts - Identifying differences in the locations of households and employment between the baseline and evaluation scenarios is the primary reason for applying an integrated land use-transportation model. Some interesting differences can be noted based on the MEPLAN analysis:

Roadway expansion in the HOV scenario allows industry to locate further away from households; distant eastern zones lose commercial employment and become more like "bedroom communities." In the pricing/transit scenario, parking charges in the CBD result in a loss of employment as businesses relocate to nearby zones to avoid parking charges.
The land subsidies and taxes in the transit/TOD scenario have a dramatic effect on development. Almost all of the employment is attracted to zones with land subsidies (Figure 10). Households are also attracted to the subsidized zones (Figure 11), but to a lesser degree than employment. The rents in the subsidized zones go up and the rents in the taxed zones go down, meaning that most of the subsidies and taxes ultimately flow to the landowners.
When pricing policies are added to the transit/TOD scenario, the parking pricing in many of the TOD zones offsets the benefits of subsidies in this zone and tends to dampen the migration of households and employment to the TOD zones.

Travel impacts - Under the HOV scenario, vehicle-trips are reduced slightly due to increased carpooling; however, VMT increases by about seven percent as a result of longer trip lengths made possible by increased highway capacity (Figure 12). The transit scenarios achieve maximum reductions in trips and VMT of roughly 10 percent; transit mode share increases significantly from 1.4 to 6.7 percent for the transit/TOD scenario. The addition of pricing has mixed effects; while it discourages development in TODs somewhat (as noted above), it also tends to reduce trip lengths.

Figure 8. HOV Scenario: Change in Employment

Johnston et al. (2000).

Figure 9 HOV Scenario: Change in Household

Johnston et al. (2000).

Figure 10. TOD, Light Rail, and Advanced Transit: Change in Employment

Johnston et al. (2000).

Figure 11. TOD, Light Rail, and Advanced Transit: Change in Households

Johnston et al. (2000).

Figure 12.
Transit and Land Use Scenarios: MEPLAN Model
Travel: Percent Change from Base Case (2015)

Fig. 12 Transit and Land Use Scenarios: MEPLAN Model Travel: Percent Change from Base Case (2015)

Source: Johnston, Rodier, Choy and Abraham (2000).

[TOP]