IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/itsdav/qt4rf5t53t.html

Updated Default Values for Transit Dependency and Average Length of Unlinked Transit Passenger Trips, for Calculations Using TAC Methods for California Climate Investments Programs: Technical Report

Author

Listed:
  • Barbour, Elisa
  • Handy, Susan
  • Kendall, Alissa
  • Volker, Jamey

Abstract

This report addresses aspects of the California Air Resources Board (CARB)’s current quantification methods for estimating GHG emission reductions from projects that expand transit facilities or service. A number of California Climate Investments programs fund transit projects, including the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program, the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program, and the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program. CARB has developed technical documents for each program, called “Quantification Methodologies,” and associated spreadsheet calculation tools, called “Benefit Calculator Tools,” for program applicants to use in estimating project-level GHG emission reductions and co-benefit estimates for projects proposed for funding. To measure GHG emission reductions from transportation projects, including transit projects, CARB relies on ”CMAQ” computation methods, published by CARB in 2005 with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for evaluating motor vehicle fee registration projects and congestion mitigation and air quality improvement (CMAQ) projects, specifically transit and connectivity (TAC) features. This report addresses how and whether CARB might update default values for two adjustment factors employed in the TAC methods that apply to transit facility and/or service expansion projects. View the NCST Project Webpage

Suggested Citation

  • Barbour, Elisa & Handy, Susan & Kendall, Alissa & Volker, Jamey, 2019. "Updated Default Values for Transit Dependency and Average Length of Unlinked Transit Passenger Trips, for Calculations Using TAC Methods for California Climate Investments Programs: Technical Report," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt4rf5t53t, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdl:itsdav:qt4rf5t53t
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/4rf5t53t.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Manville & Benjamin Cummins, 2015. "Why do voters support public transportation? Public choices and private behavior," Transportation, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 303-332, March.
    2. Mizuki Kawabata & Qing Shen, 2006. "Job Accessibility as an Indicator of Auto-Oriented Urban Structure: A Comparison of Boston and Los Angeles with Tokyo," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 33(1), pages 115-130, February.
    3. Kristin Lovejoy & Susan Handy, 2008. "A case for measuring individuals’ access to private-vehicle travel as a matter of degrees: lessons from focus groups with Mexican immigrants in California," Transportation, Springer, vol. 35(5), pages 601-612, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lovejoy, Kristin, 2012. "Mobility Fulfillment Among Low-car Households: Implications for Reducing Auto Dependence in the United States," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt4v44b5qn, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    2. Martens, Karel & Golub, Aaron & Robinson, Glenn, 2012. "A justice-theoretic approach to the distribution of transportation benefits: Implications for transportation planning practice in the United States," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 684-695.
    3. Yan, Xiang & Bejleri, Ilir & Zhai, Liang, 2022. "A spatiotemporal analysis of transit accessibility to low-wage jobs in Miami-Dade County," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    4. Singer, Matan E. & Cohen-Zada, Aviv L. & Martens, Karel, 2022. "Core versus periphery: Examining the spatial patterns of insufficient accessibility in U.S. metropolitan areas," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    5. Julene Paul, 2026. "A wider view of shared transportation: Assessing the socioemotional costs and benefits of sharing in and sharing out," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 63(4), pages 621-640, March.
    6. Anne Christine Lusk & Xin Li & Qiming Liu, 2023. "If the Government Pays for Full Home-Charger Installation, Would Affordable-Housing and Middle-Income Residents Buy Electric Vehicles?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-26, March.
    7. Delmelle, Elizabeth Cahill & Casas, Irene, 2012. "Evaluating the spatial equity of bus rapid transit-based accessibility patterns in a developing country: The case of Cali, Colombia," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 36-46.
    8. Albrecht, Maxwell & Brown, Anne & Lederman, Jaimee & Taylor, Brian D. & Wachs, Martin, 2017. "The Equity Challenges and Outcomes of California County Transportation Sales Tax," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt39q2758w, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    9. Jen-Jia Lin & Chi-Hau Chen & Tsung-Yu Hsieh, 2016. "Job accessibility and ethnic minority employment in urban and rural areas in Taiwan," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 95(2), pages 363-382, June.
    10. Tanya Suhoy & Yotam Sofer, 2019. "Getting to Work in Israel: Locality and Individual Effects," Bank of Israel Working Papers 2019.02, Bank of Israel.
    11. Adam Millard-Ball & Purva Kapshikar, 2024. "How land use patterns keep driving cheap: Geographic support for transportation taxes," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 61(7), pages 1345-1370, May.
    12. Mizuki Kawabata, 2009. "Spatiotemporal Dimensions of Modal Accessibility Disparity in Boston and San Francisco," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 41(1), pages 183-198, January.
    13. Schouten, Andrew & Blumenberg, Evelyn, 2024. "License to drive: State driver’s licensing laws and the travel of unauthorized immigrants," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    14. Pronello, Cristina & Camusso, Cristian, 2011. "Travellers’ profiles definition using statistical multivariate analysis of attitudinal variables," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 1294-1308.
    15. Robbennolt, Dale & Beliveau, Anna & Bhat, Chandra R., 2025. "An investigation of physical participation dissonance and virtual activity participation in the United States," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    16. repec:osf:socarx:8x7d2_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Zou, Tianqi & Aemmer, Zack & MacKenzie, Don & Laberteaux, Ken, 2022. "A framework for estimating commute accessibility and adoption of ridehailing services under functional improvements from vehicle automation," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    18. Barbour, Elisa & Handy, Susan & Kendall, Alissa & Volker, Jamey, 2019. "Updated Default Values for Transit Dependency and Average Length of Unlinked Transit Passenger Trips, for Calculations Using TAC Methods for California Climate Investments Programs: Summary Report," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt4mk5q4hf, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    19. António Ferreira & Els Beukers & Marco Te Brömmelstroet, 2012. "Accessibility is Gold, Mobility is Not: A Proposal for the Improvement of Dutch Transport-Related Cost-Benefit Analysis," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 39(4), pages 683-697, August.
    20. Miwa Matsuo, 2020. "Carpooling and drivers without household vehicles: gender disparity in automobility among Hispanics and non-Hispanics in the U.S," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 1631-1663, August.
    21. Kelobonye, Keone & Zhou, Heng & McCarney, Gary & Xia, Jianhong (Cecilia), 2020. "Measuring the accessibility and spatial equity of urban services under competition using the cumulative opportunities measure," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdl:itsdav:qt4rf5t53t. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/itucdus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.