Title: Bring Back the Tram Again!
1Bring Back the Tram Again!
- Steve Miller
- Transport for London
2Why 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!
3Transport 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
4Public 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
5The Tram SchemeOld Tram or New Tram?
6Why 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
7A Tram is Efficient
- Trams can move passengers far more efficiently
than other vehicles - 1 tram 2 - 4 buses 220 cars
8Possible 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
9Initial 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
10Models available to TfL
- LTS (London Transportation Studies) Model
- Railplan
- SALT (SATURN Assignment of London Traffic)
- SALT-C (Congestion Charging)
- Micro-Simulation and Junction Models
11LTS (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
12The 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
14Railplan 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
15Standard Railplan Model Demand
- Derived from LTS Model
- Year Trips (3 Hrs)
- 2001 1,836,318
- 2011 2,195,962
- Growth 2 p.a.
16Standard Railplan Model Dimensions
- Network (2001 Base)
- No. Zones 1,571
- No. Nodes 14,648
- No. Links 49,596
- No. Services 1,836
17Network 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
18SALT (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
19SALT-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
20Micro-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
21New 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)
22CRISTAL Models Overview
Railplan PT
Mode Share / Dem
SATURN Strategic Highway
Flow Changes
Flow Changes
TRANSYT Junction
VISSIM Microsimulation
Revised Signal Timings
Revised Signal Timings
23Demand across the Thames
24Current 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
25AM Peak Hour Demand (PCUs/hr)
26Highway traffic flows (AM Peak Hour)
27Current 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
28Public 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
29Current 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
30Current 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
31Current State of Models CRISTAL-M VISSIM
photo - BAYLIS ROAD / WATERLOO ROAD- Work in
progress
32Current 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)
33Convergence
- 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
34Future Year Modelling Results2026 IBC RUN,
SC359 Iteration 3Post-Demand Model Results
Compared to the Fixed Matrix Assignment
35Model Operation
- Operation Platform DOS / Windows
- Batch File to operate
- 3 to 5 iterations to converge
36Model 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!
37Scheme 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
38Conclusions
- 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
39A Vision of the Tram
40www.tfl.gov.uk