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