Bring Back the Tram Again! - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Bring Back the Tram Again! PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: b03b2-ZGU4N



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Bring Back the Tram Again!

Description:

To update the Emme/2 community on a project's evolution; ... VISSIM photo - BAYLIS ROAD / WATERLOO ROAD- Work in progress. Current State of Models : ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:184
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 41
Provided by: gas102
Category:
Tags: again | back | bring | tram

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Bring Back the Tram Again!


1
Bring Back the Tram Again!
  • Steve Miller
  • Transport for London

2
Why Bring Back the Tram Again!?
  • To distinguish from Bring Back the Tram! - my
    presentation to the 20th International Emme/2
    User Group Meeting (Oct. 2006 Seattle)
  • To update the Emme/2 community on a projects
    evolution
  • Not a cry for a nostalgic panorama of pre-war UK
    trams!

3
Transport for London
  • Transport for London (TfL) is the integrated body
    responsible for London's transport system.
  • Its role is
  • to implement the Mayor's Transport Strategy for
    London
  • To manage the transport services across the
    capital for which the Mayor has responsibility.
  • TfL manages
  • London's buses, the Underground, the Docklands
    Light Railway (DLR), Croydon Tramlink and London
    River Services
  • Victoria Coach Station and London's Transport
    Museum
  • The red route network, Congestion Charge, and
    London's 4,600 traffic lights
  • A range of alternative transport initiatives
    including walking and cycling

4
Public Transport Issues for London
  • Limited investment in new rail infrastructure
  • Limited potential to increase rail capacity
  • Sweat the Assets i.e.
  • Spread the Peak (demand and supply)
  • Increased crowding
  • Need to demonstrate Value for Money
    Cost/Benefit Analysis

5
The Tram SchemeOld Tram or New Tram?
6
Why a Tram?
  • Relieve tube crowding
  • Stimulate regeneration
  • Improve accessibility
  • Increased reliability
  • Better connection between mainline stations
  • Environmentally friendly mode of transport
  • Cost efficient
  • Connect target areas south of river
  • Improve overall system efficiency of highway
    based public transport

7
A Tram is Efficient
  • Trams can move passengers far more efficiently
    than other vehicles
  • 1 tram 2 - 4 buses 220 cars

8
Possible Route
  • New 16.5 km tramway
  • Core alignment
  • Euston to Waterloo
  • 30 trams per hour
  • Branches
  • North to Kings Cross and
  • Camden Town
  • South to Peckham and Brixton
  • 15 trams per hour each branch

9
Initial Assessments
  • Started in 1997 Intermediate Modes Studies
  • Then further Studies
  • Tram v high-quality bus services
  • Tram was feasible and beneficial
  • Ruled out bus option due to capacity and
    attractiveness
  • Refined Progressively to demonstrate
  • Sound Business Case (BCR 2.641)
  • Road Traffic Impacts can be managed

10
Models available to TfL
  • LTS (London Transportation Studies) Model
  • Railplan
  • SALT (SATURN Assignment of London Traffic)
  • SALT-C (Congestion Charging)
  • Micro-Simulation and Junction Models

11
LTS (London Transportation Studies) Model
  • Strategic 4 Stage Model, based on legacy software
    and TRIPS/Cube
  • Covers London and South East England
  • Network representation is not that detailed
  • 1016 zones
  • Run for 2001, 2006, and then every 5 years to 2031

12
The Railplan Model
  • Runs on EMME/2 usually under UNIX
  • Public Transport Assignment model of London
  • Underground
  • Rail
  • Tram
  • Bus
  • Docklands Light Rail (DLR)

13
The Railplan Model
  • Uses Size 16 licence
  • 1,500-3,000 Zones
  • 50,000 Links
  • Distribution-Mode Split model outside Railplan
    usually reliant on LTS

14
Railplan Features
  • Developed since 1988
  • Initially for the AM Peak Period only
  • All Public Transport sub-modes
  • Congestion in Route Choice
  • Quantifies social benefit of reduced crowding
  • Forecasts station flow patterns to aid station
    planning

15
Standard Railplan Model Demand
  • Derived from LTS Model
  • Year Trips (3 Hrs)
  • 2001 1,836,318
  • 2011 2,195,962
  • Growth 2 p.a.

16
Standard Railplan Model Dimensions
  • Network (2001 Base)
  • No. Zones 1,571
  • No. Nodes 14,648
  • No. Links 49,596
  • No. Services 1,836

17
Network Usage (2001 Base)
  • Mode Services Serv. Kms Pass. Kms
  • N Rail 949 41,470 9,195,488
  • Underground 125 13,778 2,826,332
  • Light Rail 6 615 67,120
  • Tram 4 471 24,575
  • Bus 752 77,433 998,301

18
SALT (SATURN Assignment of London Traffic)
  • Covers the complete (Greater London) area in
    detail
  • Slow to run
  • No longer directly supported or used difficult
    to find resources to develop and maintain a
    detailed network model over such a large area
  • Demand derived from LTS

19
SALT-C (Congestion Charging)
  • Designed to model the Boundary Route around CC
    Scheme
  • Based on a cordoned SALT model for run-time
    efficiency
  • Matrix Estimation, prior matrix from LTS via SALT
  • Demand externally split between YACS and NACS
    on a sector sector basis
  • 615 zones

20
Micro-Simulation and Junction Models
  • TRANSYT is the normal basis for such models
  • Micro-simulation (VISSIM) increasingly adopted
    for the more complex areas
  • Individual models are developed and validated to
    represent specific junction groups

21
New Models For the Tram
  • A New family of models CRISTAL
  • (Cross River Study of Trams Across London)
  • CRISTAL-H (Highway SATURN)
  • CRISTAL-P (Public Transport EMME/2)
  • CRISTAL-J (Junctions TRANSYT and LINSIG)
  • CRISTAL-M (Micro-Simulation VISSIM)
  • CRISTAL-D (Demand or Mode Shift)

22
CRISTAL Models Overview
Railplan PT
Mode Share / Dem
SATURN Strategic Highway
Flow Changes
Flow Changes
TRANSYT Junction
VISSIM Microsimulation
Revised Signal Timings
Revised Signal Timings
23
Demand across the Thames
24
Current State of Models CRISTAL_H
  • Based on SALT-C
  • 615 zones expanded to 697 zones
  • New treatment of taxi user class
  • AM Peak hour model validated
  • PM Peak Hour model validated
  • IP model not yet developed

25
AM Peak Hour Demand (PCUs/hr)
26
Highway traffic flows (AM Peak Hour)
27
Current State of Models CRISTAL-P
  • Based on Railplan
  • 1571 zones expanded to 1645 zones
  • AM Peak model validated
  • PM Peak and IP models not yet developed

28
Public Transport Demand Transferred
  • Forecast LU Crowding Relief (AM Peak Period)
  • 4-8 reduction in demand on most crowded services
    in central London Northern, Victoria and
    Piccadilly
  • over 400,000 travellers on Tube in AM Peak will
    benefit
  • Slight increase in demand along a stretch of the
    Central line, Bank to Holborn

29
Current State of Models CRISTAL-J
  • 14 Individual local models developed and
    validated for AM and PM Peak hours
  • Forecasts produced on operational aspects of
    traffic flows with or without Tram
  • Mainly using TRANSYT and LINSIG for individual
    signal groups

30
Current State of Models CRISTAL-M
  • VISSIM Model was developed from a series of local
    models used previously
  • Adequate to confirm general principles of scheme
    operation interaction between tram and general
    traffic not readily handled in static models
  • Route corridor being confirmed at this stage
  • Initial model will be expanded and developed for
    the chosen route corridor

31
Current State of Models CRISTAL-M VISSIM
photo - BAYLIS ROAD / WATERLOO ROAD- Work in
progress
32
Current State of Models CRISTAL-D
  • Previous Demand model was developed using EMME/2
  • This has been refreshed for CRISTAL
  • Now complies with DfT Advice (WebTAG)

33
Convergence
  • CRISTAL-D Convergence Criteria
  • WebTAG relative GAP lt 0.1
  • Benefits as of network costs gt 10 GAP
  • Change in CRT demand lt 0.5
  • Change in PT demand lt 0.5
  • Change in highway demand lt 0.5

34
Future Year Modelling Results2026 IBC RUN,
SC359 Iteration 3Post-Demand Model Results
Compared to the Fixed Matrix Assignment
35
Model Operation
  • Operation Platform DOS / Windows
  • Batch File to operate
  • 3 to 5 iterations to converge

36
Model Operation Run Times
  • Highway Model 9.5 hours
  • PT Model lt0.5 hours
  • Demand Model lt0.25 hours
  • Per iteration 10 hours
  • So, a run still takes approx. 30 hours!

37
Scheme Costs and Benefits
  • Costs and Benefits (m PV 2004 prices)
  • Tram Costs (600)
  • Revenue 250
  • User Benefits 1500
  • - Time saving on trips 75
  • - London Buses/Underground relief 25
  • Economic Benefits 500
  • Non-User Benefits (200)
  • Benefit Cost Ratio 2.81

38
Conclusions
  • There seems to be a commercial case for a new
    Tram in central London
  • Congestion Charging has offered some highway
    capacity for the core section
  • The tools and data are available to develop
    robust forecasts of demand, traffic impacts and
    benefits
  • EMME is an important part of the toolkit
  • However, despite the commercial case, there
    remains issues of political risk and availability
    of funds

39
A Vision of the Tram
40
www.tfl.gov.uk
About PowerShow.com