Edmonton (Alta.) - 1979 - Northeast light rail transit evaluation study_final report (1979-08)

SD LIBRARY

4383

T074/8999/1979

NORTHEAST EDMONTON -PLANNING-D

Northeast Light Rail Transit Evaluation Study

•.4

el THE CITY OF

t n

4403.1a 5H4 979

PLANNING DEPARTMENT

-

NORTHEAST LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT EVALUATION STUDY FINAL REPORT

The City of Edmonton Planning Department Transportation Planning Branch August, 1979

TO 74 89991979 C.2.

A.C. 4383

11

111

NORTHEAST LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT

2.

EVALUATION STUDY

Some reductions in transit fleet size have been attained due to the LRT.

SUMMARY 3.

The level of transit service to the northeast area has increased significantly due to the LRT service, particularly in terms of

The construction of the first leg of a Light Rail Transit (LRT) system for the City of Edmonton was approved by City Council in 1973. Construction of the 7.2 km line, serving the northeast sector of the City,

transit travel time reductions to the outlying areas.

4.

was started in 1974 and revenue service commenced on April 24, 1978.

Direct operating costs of the transit system serving the northeast area have not increased significantly especially when the higher level of service provided and the new ridership out of high growth

The evaluation study of the Northeast LRT line was initiated in 1979

areas are considered. Total operating costs have increased con-

to monitor the operation of the line and to satisfy the stipulation of

siderably due to the added cost of maintaining the LRT facilities.

the Province of Alberta that the Northeast Line be proved operational before further LRT capital funding would be considered by the Province.

5.

The primary objectives of the evaluation study involved the gathering

ship from the established communities in the study area. Ridership

of sufficient information to evaluate the operational effectiveness and impacts of the Northeast LRT Line

The LRT line has not attracted a noticeable amount of new rider-

increases and new riders have come primarily from the newly developed

Secondary objectives involved communities which receive most of the benefits of LRT service and

the use of the data collected for the planning of future LRT lines where new residents were able to develop their travel patterns around in Edmonton and other cities.

The evaluation study was structured to determine the effectiveness and

the LRT system.

6.

impacts of the Northeast LRT Line through the investigation of five

The implementation of LRT service has made no noticeable impact on roadway volumes in the northeast area.

major areas: Transit System Operation, Travel Demand, Transit System Costs, Land Use Impacts and Special Events. The data collection program

7.

started in March 1977, one year prior to the LRT opening, and was com-

Traffic management techniques have assured no significant deterioration of roadway performance due to at-grade LRT operations.

pleted in March 1979. The following conclusions and recommendations have been made on the basis of the data analysis presented in this

8.

Parking impacts around LRT stations have been minimal.

9.

The LRT line has shown itself capable of handling both normal

report.

CONCLUSIONS

daily volumes as well as "crush" volumes which approached the theoretical capacity of the system.

1.

Due to the presence of the LRT line bus movements into the downtown have been reduced significantly even though total transit

RECOMMENDATIONS

ridership has increased.

1.

That the programs necessary to monitor changes in LRT and bus ridership in the northeast area be maintained as part of the annual counting program.

iv

2.

a)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

That the factors affecting schedule reliability of the LRT system be reviewed in detail to allow better interaction with the at-grade crossing and traffic control systems.

b)

That roadway travel time studies in the northeast area, par-

Page SUMMARY TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES

11

vii ix

ticularly at the major arterial/LRT level crossings, be 1.0

INTRODUCTION

1

maintained on an annual basis.

3.

That annual monitoring of parking in the vicinity of LRT stations be maintained.

4.

1.1 1.2 2.0

passenger survey in the northeast area in 1984 to allow determin-

General Transit Transit Transit

Background Service System Operation System Costs

ation of long term effects of the LRT line on trip patterns and/or 2.4.1 2.4.2

user characteristics.

5.

That the costs of maintaining the LRT stations, track, and right-

3.0

economies of scale can be achieved.

6.

Introduction Transit Ridership Volumes Transit Trip Characteristics 3.3.1 3.3.2 3.3.3 3.3.4 3.3.5

That the knowledge and information gathered from this evaluation study be applied as a basis for future LRT design and implementation.

3.4

Trip Purpose and Time Origin - Destination Distribution Choice of Transit Mode Access Mode to. Transit Previous Mode of Travel

Transit User Characteristics 3.4.1 3.4.2 3.4.3

4.0

Development of Unit Costs Before and Fater System Costs

TRANSIT RIDERSHIP 3.1 3.2 3.3

of-way be reviewed to determine where cost reductions and/or

1 1

TRANSIT SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4

That consideration be given to carrying out a second on board

Study Background Study Objectives

Age/Sex Distribution Automobile Ownership and Availability User Comments

ROADWAY IMPACTS 4.1 4.2

Traffic Volumes Automobile Travel Times

5.0

PARKING IMPACTS

6.0

SPECIAL EVENTS

3 3 8 9 13 13 22 25 25 25 31 31 34 37 37 39 42 42 42 44 48 48 48 54 58

vii

vi Page 7.0

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 7.2

Conclusions Recommendations

APPENDIX APPENDIX APPENDIX APPENDIX

A B C D

61 61 62 64

REFERENCES Transit System Characteristics Transit Counting Program Vehicle Counting Program Automobile Travel Time Data

LIST OF TABLES

Al Bl Cl D1

TABLE

PAGE

2.1

Transit Vehicle Screenline Volumes (Two-Way)

10

2.2

Northeast Area Peak Hour Transit Fleet

11

2.3

Northeast Area Transit Service, Average Maximum Vehicle Loadings

2.4

14

Northeast Area Transit Fleet, Average Weekday Operating Cost Characteristics

15

2.5

Bus System Operating Costs and Service Characteristics

19

2.6

Summary of LRT Operating Costs and Service Characteristics

21

2.7

Comparison of Direct Operating Costs, Northeast Area Transit Fleet

2.8

23

Comparison of Administration and Overhead Costs, Northeast Area Transit Fleet

24

3.1

Transit Passenger Screenline Volumes (Two-Way)

27

3.2

Transit Trip Productions (One-Way)

27

3.3

Inbound Trip Distribution By Trip Purpose

32

3.4

Inbound Transit Trips, Factored Origin-Destination Data (All-Day, All-Purpose)

35

3.5

Transit Trips by Mode of Travel

38

3.6

Mode of Access to Transit

40

3.7

Previous Mode of Travel (All-Day, All-Purpose)

40

3.8

Automobile Availability of Transit Travellers

45

3.9

Autmobile Ownership of Transit Travellers

45

3.10

Summary of Transit Patron Comments

47

4.1

Average Daily Vehicle Volumes

50

4.2

Average Changes in Auto Travel Time at LRT Level Crossings

53

6.1

LRT Special Events Patronage

60

A-1

Northeast Transit System - 1977, Average Weekday Operating Characteristics

A-2

Northeast Transit System - 1978, Average Weekday Operating Characteristics

B-1

A2

Transit Count Summary

A3 B4

ix

viii

LIST OF FIGURES C-1

Traffic Count Summary

D-1

Auto Travel Times

D-2

Auto Travel Times on Links With LRT Crossings

C4 D4 D5 FIGURE

PAGE

2.1

Northeast Edmonton

2.2

Northeast Area, Transit Routes (1978) and Screenlines

2.3

1977 Average Travel Time By Transit to Central Business District

2.4

4 12

16

1978 Average Travel Time By Transit to Central Business District

17

3.1

LRT Passenger Volumes, November 1978

28

3.2

Distribution of Transit Trips

29

3.3

Distribution of Transit Trips

30

3.4

Composition of Inbound Transit Trips

33

3.5

Distribution of Total Transit Trips

36

3.6

Age/Sex Composition of Transit Users

43

4.1

Northeast Area Vehicle Screenlines

49

5.1

Stadium Area Parking

55

5.2

Coliseum Area Parking

56

5.3

Belvedere Area Parking

57

2

1 NORTHEAST LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT EVALUATION STUDY

objectives involve the use of the data collected for the planning of future LRT lines in Edmonton and other cities. Specifically, the study objectives are as follows:

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.

providing transit service.

1.1 Study Background

The construction of the first line of a Light Rail Transit (LRT)

To evaluate the effectiveness of the Northeast LRT line in

2.

To measure the effect of the Northeast LRT line on land use, travel and mobility, and on other forms of transportation in

system for the City of Edmonton was approved by City Council in

the area served.,

1973. Construction of the 7.2 km line, serving the northeast sector of the City, was started in 1974 and revenue service commenced on April 24, 1978. The LRT line is integrated with the

3.

To gather information to guide management in the day to day operation of the system.

bus network, using interchangeable fares and transfers, at stations located at major load generating points.

4.

To compare the integrated system of LRT and feeder buses to the previous transit system utilizing buses only.

The evaluation study of the Northeast LRT line was initiated for two primary reasons: 5.

1.

To identify areas of operation requiring further study or monitoring.

When a new service is initiated good operating practice calls for careful monitoring of the system to gather information that can be used to determine operational problems and impacts

6.

guidelines for the planning, design and management of possible

of the system, and to provide guidelines for the planning of

future LRT lines.

extensions to the system.

2.

A stipulation of the use of Provincial Public Transit Capital Incentive funding for the Northeast LRT project was that "The

To use the experience of the Northeast LRT line to develop

7.

To document the experience of the Northeast LRT line for use by other cities contemplating similar systems.

City of Edmonton is to assure the Province that the Northeast leg of the rapid transit system is operational before another leg of the system is considered or approved by the Province" (1).

The study was structured to determine the effectiveness and impacts of the Northeast LRT line through the investigation of five major areas: Transit System Operation, Travel Demand, Transit System Costs, Land Use Impacts, and Special Events. The data collection program started in

1.2 Study Objectives

March 1977, one year prior to the LRT opening, and was completed in March 1979.

The primary objectives of the evaluation study lie in the area of gathering sufficient information to evaluate the operational effectiveness and impacts of the Northeast LRT line. Secondary

3

2.0 TRANSIT SYSTEM CHRACTERISTICS

2.1 General Background

Figure 2.1 illustrates the general location of the Northeast LRT line and stations. In the downtown area the line is located within a 1.6 km tunnel with two underground stations, Central and Churchill.

These stations are in close proximity to the major office buildings and retail stores of the downtown. Outside the downtown the LRT line surfaces within the Canadian National Railway (CNR) right-ofway which it follows, at-grade, for about 5.6 km to its existing

C-1

terminus. There is a short subway section under the east-west transcontinental CNR line. On the surface portion of the LRT line there are three stations:

1.

-

Stadium Station

This station is located adjacent to the new 42,000 seat Common,

wealth Stadium and sports complex. At this station a six bay

,COLISEUM

bus transfer facility is provided and there is also a surface parking lot for bus use during stadium events and free public parking at other times.

TA D 1111rr'--

2.

Coliseum Station /

"ril41,ITiirt ILI

This station is located on the railway overpass structure at 118 Avenue. It is connected to the 16,000 seat Edmonton

I ON

Coliseum and the Exhibition Grounds. An eight bay bus transfer facility is provided as well as a direct connection between the station and bus stops serving the east-west routes on 118

1 MID-CORRIDOR NEIGHBOURHOOD

Avenue.

2 INNER CITY NEIGHBOURHOOD 3 NORTHEAST INDUSTRIAL AREA .

4 OUTL INE PLAN AREA

--r_ IL,

ILL_L__L.

e g;-.4

ELT-11:

NORTHEAST EDMONTON FIGURE 2.1

6

5

3.

Belvedere Station

1.

Inner-City Neighbourhoods

Belvedere station is the present terminus of the Northeast LRT

These areas, due to their proximity to the CBD, are coming

line. At this station a major bus transfer facility with 11

under increased redevelopment pressure. They are character-

bays has been provided as well as a 325 vehicle park-and-ride

ized by a gradual decrease in single family housing and some

lot.

deterioration of housing stock. Transit service to the area is primarily provided by line-haul bus routes running on

The Line's rolling stock consists of 14 articulated light rail

the major arterials which border the district although the

vehicles developed by Siemens/Duwag. The passenger capacity of

northern part of the area also encompasses a mixture of walk-

each vehicle is rated at 64 seated plus 162 standing. The LRT

up and high rise apartments which are within walking distance

currently provides a service frequency of 5 minutes in peak periods,

of the Stadium LRT station.

10 minutes during mid-day, and 15 to 20 minutes in the evening.

Vehicles normally operate in two car trains although three car

2.

Mid-Corridor Neighbourhoods

trains are used for service to some special events.

The areas designated as mid-corridor neighbourhoods on Figure Operational control of the LRT line is provided by wayside signals

2.1 encompass a wide variety of neighbourhoods of different

on a block system. Operators are advised of block occupancy

ages and socio-economic characteristics. In general, however,

conditions by a red or green signal, with violation of a red signal

the neighbourhoods are relatively stable residential areas

causing automatic braking of the vehicle. The surface portion of

with predominantly single family housing which require a

the line has nine level roadway crossings, some carrying traffic in

fairly constant level of transit service. Transit service to

excess of 20,000 vehicles per day, with crossing closures achieved

these areas is provided by feeder bus routes to the LRT

by warning lights and railway gates. To ensure safe and efficient

stations as well as line-haul bus routes along the major

operation of the roadway and LRT facilities, a traffic control

arterials.

strategy has been devised (2) to coordinate traffic movements of adjacent intersections with crossing closures.

3.

Outline Plan Areas

The northeast area of the city served by the LRT line and the

Outline plan areas are the new development areas of the city

associated feeder bus network encompasses a variety of neighbour-

characterizied by a high rate of growth requiring constant

hood types which can be grouped into five broad categories (3)

increases in transit service. The outline plan areas are

which are shown on Figure 2.1:

predominantly single family low density developments, although they are generally designed around the town centre concept and medium to high density residential as well as retail/commercial developments are planned for the areas. Of the outline plan areas shown on Figure 2.1 only the Clareview and Hermitage areas are currently served by the LRT line via feeder bus service

8 7 5.

to Belvedere station. These areas have been the major bene-

Industrial Land

ficiaries of the LRT service as they were faced with excessive Most of the Northeast Industrial area developed in historical (45 minute plus) bus travel times to the CBD prior to LRT association with the Canadian National Railway line. Much of implementation. Construction approval has already been the industry in the area is associated with the meat-packing granted for a 2 km extension of the Northeast line to the industry including packing plants, stockyards and rendering Clareview town centre. Transit service to the Castle Downs I plants. There are also many other commercial and industrial outline plan area is still entirely by bus service along the businesses scattered throughout the area. None of the in-

97 Street Corridor. Long range plans call for the proposed

dustrial uses are large enough or close enough to the LRT line

Northwest LRT line to extend into this area.

for the area to be considered as a major transit trip at4.

tractor.

Sports/Entertainment Centres

There are two major sports/entertainment centres located along

2.2 Transit Service

the Northeast LRT line - the Commonwealth Stadium complex and Prior to implementation of LRT service the northeast area was the Edmonton exhibition grounds. The Commonwealth Stadium served by twenty-one bus routes, fifteen of which were oriented complex is major attractor of transit trips as it contains the primarily to the CBD while the other six were essentially crossnew Commonwealth Stadium (42,000 seats), used primarily for town routes connecting the area with the Northern Alberta Institute professional sports (football and soccer), a gymnasium complex, of Technology (NAIT) and the airport industrial area, or the and the old Clarke Field (22,000 seats) which has been reUniversity of Alberta. With the initiation of LRT service the tained for use by amateur sports. There is virtually no . Four of these total number of routes was reduced to nineteen'

parking on the complex grounds, and in most of the nearby

still run through the CBD and another three provide cross-town

residential areas parking is restricted during special events.

service. Two of these routes also connect to the LRT line. The remaining twelve routes operate primarily as feeders to the LRT

The Edmonton Exhibition grounds is located on a 122 acre site

line, although three provide peak hour CBD service, three provide

and hosts a variety of activities in the Coliseum (a 16,000

cross-town service to the NAIT area, and one also serves the CBD

seat multi-purpose sport and entertainment facility) and the

and the University. Details of the bus routes studied are given in

Exhibition Grounds facilities which include the Sportex,

Appendix A, and Figure 2.2 shows the layout of bus routes in the

Edmonton Gardens, the Sales Pavilion, the parking/midway area

northeast area.

and the Northland Race Track Complex.

1.

Routings discussed are for the November, 1978 sign-up to coincide with passenger counts and surveys. Some route changes have been effected since that time.

10

9 In addition to the changes to route structures with LRT imple-

TABLE 2.1

mentation, the service frequencies on many routes were also in-

TRANSIT VEHICLE SCREENLINE VOLUMES (TWO-WAY)

creased (Appendix A). For example, on an overall basis, headways in the AM peak period decreased by 25%. The rationale behind this move was to encourage ridership on the LRT line by providing a high level of service on the feeder bus routes.

2.3 Transit Operation

VEHICLE SCREENLINE

TYPE

Outer

Bus

YEAR 1976

1977

1978

1,088

1,272

1,348

LRT'

229

The implementation of LRT service had three major impacts on transit operation in northeast Edmonton. First, with the majority of

Intermediate

routes in the area serving primarily as LRT feeders, bus movements

Bus

1,458

1,528

LRT

1,238 227

from the area into the downtown have been reduced by more than 20% even though overall ridership has increased. Table 2.1 shows

Inner

Bus

transit passenger and vehicle volumes across the three screen lines

1,300

LRT

shown on Figure 2.2. Daily bus volumes across the intermediate and inner screenlines have been reduced by approximately 300 movements representing about 150 fewer vehicles travelling on the downtown street system.

The second major impact has been a reduction in bus fleet requirements in the northeast area. Elimination of some routes and shortening of others resulted in a total saving of 22 buses between the November 1977 and November 1978 sign-ups (Table 2.2). However, extensions to two other routes in conjunction with the LRT service reduced the net saving to 18 vehicles (exclusive of vehicle requirements for outline plan areas). These vehicle savings are not, however, truly representative of the potential savings due to the previously discussed general increase in service frequencies. One measure of the impact of the general increase in frequencies is found in Table 2.3 which shows the very significant decrease in average maximum vehicle loads out of the stable mid-corridor

NOTES:

1.

Two-Car LRT Trains

1,482

1,171 227

11

12

TABLE 2.2 73 87

NORTHEAST AREA PEAK HOUR TRANSIT FLEET

19 ,25,30,31,33, 34,35,66,73,86,87

PEAK HOUR VEHICLES' COMMENT

ROUTES

1977

A emingnnaren

1978 -., 35

1.

Mid-Corridor Routes 2 1, 3, 5, 6, 10 , 19

same number or fewer

20, 23, 28, 29, 30

buses after LRT start-up.

Routes requiring the 149

127

31, 32, 33, 34, 1 65- 66, 80 66 -P

Routes requiring additional buses due to

11

15

co-ordination with LRT. 11, 30,31,32,33 34,66,70,74,80

SUB-TOTAL

160

142 23.74

2.

29

Outline Plan Area 19..

Routes 70, 74

Clareview/Hermitage

4

8 18,20,28

Outline Plan Area

og0m$1 5,11,18,20.23,28,66 , 75,80

TOTAL

164

LRT 101

NOTES:

150

14 1.

November Sign-Up.

2.

Underlined routes deleted when LRT implemented

3.

Routes 65 and 66 combined with no change in vehicle

21 26 27

requirement at time of LRT implementation.

Sherwood Pat h

50,51,55,69, 75,77,79,82

, 8,32,

477

NORTHEAST AREA TRANSIT ROUTES (1978) & SCREENLINES FIGURE 2.2

13

14

neighbourhoods in the north-central and eastern portions of the

TABLE 2.3

study area. Average loads out of the outline plan areas have

NORTHEAST AREA TRANSIT SERVICE

increased dramatically due to the high rates of population growth.

AVERAGE MAXIMUM VEHICLE LOADINGS

Similarly, Table 2.4 shows that although most bus routes now feed the LRT line rather than the CBD the decrease in bus operating

1977

hours and kilometers has been minimal.

A.M.

P.M.

PEAK

PEAK

North-Central

43.7

Eastern

1978 A.M.

P.M.

DAILY

PEAK

PEAK

DAILY

39.3

20.5

28.6

22.4

11.2

39.8

46.2

14.9

32.1

19.7

11.5

Clareview/Hermitage 12.5

36.5

6.8

46.0

33.0

15.2

Castle Downs

11.3

12.1

53.4

49.9

20.9

AREA The third major impact of the LRT line has been a significant reduction in transit travel time to the CBD from the northeast

Mid-Corridor Areas

area. Figures 2.3 and 2.4 show that the major change has been in the outline plan areas served by the LRT line. In 1977 these areas were at least 45 minutes by bus from the CBD (the maximum recommended by City policy) and have now been brought to within the 35 minute range. Significant travel time reductions have also occured

Outline Plan Areas

in the mid-corridor areas close to the LRT line.

Close operational monitoring of the bus route system has resulted

22.5

in minimal problems in bus arrivals at LRT stations. At Belvedere, for example, over 70% of bus arrivals occurred before LRT departure during the AM peak hour, while in the PM peaks, approximately 80% arrived before LRT arrival (8). Schedule adjustments are made on an on-going basis by Edmonton Transit to account for changes in travel time and to minimize transfer time. r)..7•7!.

2.4 Transit System Costs The 2.4.1 Development of Unit Costs

Unit operating costs have been determined for both the bus system and the LRT system, based on 1978 operating experience and, in the case of LRT, on 1979 budget projections.

The methodology used for developing unit bus operating costs is based on three categories of expenditures:

L

15

TABLE 2.4 NORTHEAST AREA TRANSIT FLEET AVERAGE WEEKDAY OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS

1978

1977 Hours of Operation

Routes

Kilometers of Operation

Hours of Operation

Kilometers of Operation

1. Mid-Corridor Routes 1, 3, 5, 6, 10,

1569.77

26237

1445.61

23832

153.63

2537

182.43

2969

1723.40

28774

1628.04

26801

19, 20, 23, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 65, 66, 80

11, 18

SUB-TOTAL

pui.

LLTE Ho -11

16E 2' 111!

MI LO NEI [14 'O U LJnOu blEDEWLIETEE MEODELIDEEU se; so ILl j..iECOCEREEFLI LEET:= '2LJ I

..„

2. Outline Plan

11 tb

Area Routes 70, 74

BUS TOTAL

48.07

1130

83.80

1667

1771.47

29904

1711.84

28468

66.20

1872

LRT 101

NOTES:

1.

November Sign-ups.

2.

Train Kilometers.

2

1977 AVERAGE TRAVEL TIME BY TRANSIT TO CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT FIGURE 2.3

18 i)

overhead and administration (based on peak period fleet size)

ii) iii)

hourly costs (based on hours of operation) mileage costs (based on total service mileage).

Table 2.5 summarizes the actual operating expenditures and operating characteristics which formed the basis for the following bus system unit costs:

MN R.2.6 WO&

i)

overhead and administration: $24,321 per peak hour bus per year.

ii) iii)

hourly costs: $11.14 per operating hour mileage cost: $0.2675 per vehicle kilometer

The methodology used for developing unit LRT operating costs is similar to that for the bus system, except that station and track operation and maintenance costs are not adequately reflected by the single parameter of fleet size. As a result, five categories have been identified.

i)

administration and vehicle overhead (based on total fleet size)

ii) iii) iv)

hourly costs (based on hours of operation) mileage costs (based on total service mileage) station overhead and maintenance (based on number of stations)

v) 1

„

1

track overhead and maintenance (based on track mileage)

Table 2.6 summarizes actual operating expenditures and operating characteristics for the eight month 1978 operating period, as well

V4VP`r

as the corresponding figures forecast for 1979. There is a general MU OM,01.

reduction in each unit cost from 1978 to 1979 because of initial expenses related to start-up operations. The 1979 figures are more representative of existing unit costs, and are as follows:

' 1978 AVERAGE TRAVEL TIME BY TRANSIT TO CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT FIGURE 2.4

20

19 TABLE 2.5

i)

BUS SYSTEM OPERATING COSTS AND SERVICE CHARACTERISTICS

per year (excluding depreciation and interest charges) ii) iii)

1977

1978

iv) v)

A.

Peak Hours Buses

2.

Hours of Service

3.

Kilometers (Miles)

4.

System Speed

hourly costs: $15.63 per train hour mileage costs: $0.511 per veh-km station costs: $285,000 per station per year track maintenance: $125,000 per km. of double track per year

System Characteristics

1.

administration and vehicle overhead: $45,221 per vehicle

447

496

1,479,503

1,622,574

26,440,198

28,880,155

(16,422,483)

(17,937,984)

17.87 km/h (11.1 mph)

17.80 km/h (11.06 mph)

In comparison to the unit bus operating costs, the LRT unit costs for administration and overhead, and hourly and mileage costs are higher, but are not difficult to rationalize. The higher per vehicle overhead cost reflects the capital-intensive storage and overhead requirements; the higher vehicle-kilometer charge reflects the higher maintenance standards and costs for the LRT vehicles; and the higher operating hour charge reflects the higher proportion

B.

of inspectors and senior operators involved in operating the LRT

System Costs

system. $9,440,536

$12,063,274

Hourly

$15,766,853

$18,078,029

Mileage

$6,093,563

$7,588,390

1.

Overhead/Admin

2.

3.

The unit costs for station overhead and maintenance, and for track and right-of-way maintenance, are expected to decrease because of economies of scale. Nevertheless, these maintenance costs are high

C.

and negate any savings achieved from the direct operating costs.

Unit Costs

This is emphasized by the fact that the station maintenance unit 1.

Overhead (per bus)*

$21,120

$24,321

cost does not reflect 1979 budget allocations for contract work or

2.

Hourly (per bus-hour)

$10.657

$11.14

mezzanine maintenance.

3.

Mileage per km (per mi)

$0.230

$0.268

($0.371)

($0.423)

Further, it is estimated that changing the fare-handling system to a proof-of-payment system could reduce the per station costs by $50,000 to $100,000 per station per year. An additional factor is

*Includes Interest on City Balance and on Debentures issued on previous

that space provided in the underground stations for lease has not

capital expenditures. Without interest costs, the 1978 unit cost is

been a source of revenue.

$18,062 per bus.

It is estimated that the track and right-of-way maintenance costs can be reduced with expansion of the system, since the same manpower and equipment could be used to maintain twice the existing track mileage. Other factors which have been identified are problems with the type of ballast, and the use of welded track.

22

21

G

M

0 U

More work is required on an on-going basis to determine where

• 0 C`‘.1 CO N CO

111

economies can be achieved in these maintenance costs.

0 if) •

h CO .1- CO N N

-CA-

(1)- <JD- <f)-

2.4.2 Before and After System Costs

Provided

A comparison of system operating costs in 1977 (before LRT) and in C)

1978 (after LRT) is useful to point out the effect of LRT operations ‘.0 •

• N.

NJ

C,1 N

C)

NJ

CCI

on transit operating costs. It is useful to make this comparison

CC

NJ

$./N

r-•-•

in two categories: first, direct operating costs (i.e. hourly and mileage costs); second, administration, overhead and maintenance costs.

Table 2.7 compares 1977 and 1978 direct operating costs of the

0 U

•

1-4

Lf") N

S

W

N

Lf"

NJ N.

CO

m

oN if)

N

.1h

$—$

CO

01

‘.0

oo

1.(-)

N.

00

,C

'-1"

01

in

Vehicle-Km

>

k 0 • U

Lf1 01 01

-‹C —$ • (NI

if)

0

*Service Co st

0

C')

Service Prov ided

M

Provided

G

12/8 to accoun t for 8 mon th operating period.

total northeast area transit fleet. These costs are all based on 1978 unit costs (1978 dollars), and on the operating characteristics summarized in Table 2.4. The increase in total direct operating cost is approximately 6.8%, which is similar to the system-wide ridership increase. It is important to note that the level of service has been increased significantly, both related to increased bus route frequencies and decreased travel times. Thus, the superior level of service has been provided with little or no increase in direct operating costs.

Table 2.8 compares the estimated administration, and overhead expenditures required to support transit services to the northeast area. The increase in these costs is approximately 65.6% from 1977 to 1978. The reasons for this increase have been cited previously and more work is required to achieve cost reductions in these areas.

23

24

TABLE 2.7

TABLE 2.8

COMPARISON OF DIRECT OPERATING COSTS

COMPARISON OF ADMINISTRATION AND OVERHEAD COSTS

NORTHEAST AREA TRANSIT FLEET

NORTHEAST AREA TRANSIT FLEET

ANNUAL ADMINISTRATION & OVERHEAD COST

AVERAGE WEEKDAY

1977

OPERATING COST'

1.

SERVICE TYPE 1.

SERVICE TYPE

1978

1977

Bus Mid-Corridor Routes 2 3 Outline Plan Areas

BUS TOTAL

$26,900

$25,300

800

1,400

$27,700

0

LRT

SYSTEM TOTAL

$27,700

$2,900

All costs based on 1978 unit costs.

2.

Routes 1, 3, 5, 6, 10, 11, 18, 19, 20, 23, 28, 29, 30, 31,

3.

Routes 70, 74.

Mid-Corridor Routes

$3,892,000

$3,454,000

Outline Plan Areas

$

$

BUS TOTAL

$3,989,000

97,000

195,000

$3,649,000

LRT Vehicles

0

$

Track & Stations

0

$2,325,000

LRT TOTAL

0

$2,958,000

$3,989,000

$6,607,000

633,Q00

$29,600

1.

32, 33, 34, 65, 66, 80.

Bus

$26,700 2.

2.

1978

SYSTEM TOTAL

25

3.0 TRANSIT RIDERSHIP

26 be more than accounted for by ridership increases out of the outline plan areas of Clareview/Hermitage and Castle Downs, Be-

3.1 Introduction

tween 1977 and 1978 two-way transit ridership from these areas increased by approximately 4,900 passengers per day, while the

Transit ridership data was collected through two programs. In the

increase across the outer screenline over the same period was 4,600

first program transit passenger and vehicle volumes in the north-

passengers per day. The implication from this data is that transit

east area were monitored through counts conducted in 1976, 1977 and

patronage increases are due to residential growth rather than

1978.

increased ridership from the established mid-corridor neighbourhoods due to the presence of the LRT line and the higher level of

The second program consisted of a survey of transit patrons con-

service provided. This conclusion is reinforced by the transit

ducted on November 14, 1978. In this survey bus drivers handed out

trip production figures for representative sections of the study

questionnaires to all passengers boarding buses in the northeast

area shown in Table 3.2. The north-central and eastern areas (both

area. Forms were also handed out at the LRT stations. Of the

outside the outer cordon) show no significant change in transit

19,600 forms distributed 30% were returned in usable condition.

trip production between 1977 and 1978. All of the increases come

The survey form was designed to gather information on transit trip

from the outline plan areas.

and transit user characteristics.

At the present time the LRT line is carrying approximately 18,000 3.2 Transit Ridership Volumes

passengers per day with the maximum load point being between Stadium and Churchill stations where loads average about 16,000

Transit passenger and bus volumes were monitored through the use of

passengers per day. All day and peak period ridership details of

three screenlines (Figure 2.2) established between the central

the LRT line are shown in Figure 3.1. Although the line currently

business district and the northeast residential areas as well a

carries a maximum of about 2,500 passengers in the PM peak hour at

system of counting stations throughout the northeast area. Details

an average of 100 persons per vehicle, studies of special events

of the counting program and data are given in Appendix B.

ridership (Section 6) have recorded line volumes of up to 5,300 passengers per hour in one direction with vehicle loadings ranging

The transit ridership volumes recorded across the three screenlines

from 266 to 315 persons.

are show in Table 3.1. The screenline volumes show that with LRT implementation there was a very large increase in ridership across

Figures 3.2 and 3.3 compare bus and LRT ridership distribution by

the outer screenline and more moderate increases across the two

time of day across the three screenlines. The distributions

other screenlines. The increases across the outer screenline can

indicate that the LRT line tends to have somewhat more pronounced peaking, especially in the PM peak period, than the bus system.

This trend is most likely due to the increased accessibility and shorter travel time of the LRT line and is interesting due to its potential implications on the peak hour bus fleet. Further work will be required to see if the trend persists.

27

PEAK RIDERSHIP (SBD 07:00 - 09:00)

ALL DAY RIDERSHIP (05: 30 - 0] :30 )

TABLE 3.1 TRANSIT PASSENGER SCREENLINE VOLUMES (TWO-WAY)

( NBD 16 :00 - 18:00)

YEAR

BELVEDERE

BELVEDERE 1976

1977

1978

21,252

23,436

28,058

1 (10.4%)

(19.6%)

31,496

33,686

(19.1%)

( 7.0%)

34,312

36,769

(10.5%)

( 7.1%)

SCREENLINE

Outer (125 Ave)

Intermediate (118 Ave)

31,070

Inner (105 Ave)

NOTES:

1.

26,448

c‘i c")

CUTER SCREENLINE

Numbers in brackets represent percent change over previous year.

-

INTERMEDIATE SCREEN LINE -

_-

to

TABLE 3.2 TRANSIT TRIP PRODUCTIONS (ONE-WAY)

AREA

394 STADIUM CP- 606

1978

1977 A.M.

ALL

A.M.

ALL

PEAK

DAY

PEAK

DAY

599

81-4' STADIUM 223-3 r ,

Mid-Corridor Areas '

North-Central Eastern

1878

6742

1920

6735

994

3360

932

3205

Castle Downs

OD

co

co

CHURCHILL

CHURCHILL

Outline Plan Areas

Clareview/Hermitage

INNER SCREENLINE

cV

'CP

27

138

460

1356

135

562

590

1410

LRT PASSENGER VOLUMES NOVEMBER 1978 FIGURE

03

i49-4' 0— 134' COLISEUM 1145 1109 ---i,

491 587 ..1E-1 COLISEUM 2838-4 r- 2435

co 0 co

cO

3.1

%

°AD

OF TOTAL TRIPS

3

% OF TOTAL TRIPS

OF TOTAL TRIPS

cn

7:00

7.00

8:00

8 :00

8:00

9:00

9:00

9:00

I IC S

10: 00

10:00

10.00

11 11:

11:00

11:00

11:00

119

12:00

12:00

12:00

-n O11

13:00

13.00

13:00

AVO A O 31N11

7:00

N 0

-1 14:00

14:00

o

15:00

-11

4:00

-1

111 15:00

15:00

0 16:00

17:00

16:00

16:00

17:00

17:00

18:00

18:00

co

21:00

22:00

23:00

19:00

M 0 -= U

19:00

21:00

-i

22:00

0 — -I

2300

in

20:00

20-00

M

0

Z 3

21:00

22:00

23:00

°A) OF TOTAL TRIPS

OF TOTAL TRIPS

% OF TOTAL TRIPS

7.00

7:00

8:00

800

800

900

9:00

900

1000

10:00

10:00

11:00

1100

11:00

12:00

12:00

12:00

13:00

13:00

13:00

1400

CJ 1400

1400

1500

15:00

1500

16:00

16:00

1600

17:00

17.00

17:00

8:00

18:00

1800

19:00

19.00

19:00

20:00

2000 ,

20:00

21:00

21:00

22:00

23:00

Nounsiaisia

21:00

22:00

23:00

22:00

23:00

a3Ple13.1N1

3 N11N33HOS

11SNV8 1

C#3

Xi

5

rrl

insials ia

C4 0

cri

7:00

3 NI1N331:13 S

Nouns iaisia

8

-n

Nolinelaisia

20:00

Cn

<

--f

Nounslaista

19:00

3NI1N3380S

•""i

co rn r-

3 N11N3380S

18:00

31

32

3.3 Transit Trip Characteristics TABLE 3.3 INBOUND TRIP DISTRIBUTION BY TRIP PURPOSE

The on-board transit survey carried out in November, 1978 obtained data relating to five transit trip characteristics: Trip Purpose

SOCIAL-

and Distribution, Trip Origin - Destination, Choice of Transit

% OF

SCHOOL

PERSONAL

RECREATIONAL

TOTAL

1%

20%

2%

1%

64.0%

27%

22%

16%

30%

5%

27.5%

4 - 6 PM

59%

8%

12%

13%

8%

4.9%

The distribution of transit trips by purpose and time of day is

6 PM - Midnight

27%

13%

12%

13%

35%

2.6%

shown in Table 3.3. Over the entire day the recurring type of

All Day

61%

8%

18%

10%

3%

Mode, Mode of Access to Transit, and Mode of Travel Prior to LRT

WORK

SHOP

6 - 9 AM

76%

9 AM - 4 PM

TIME PERIOD

Implementation.

3.3.1 Trip Purpose and Time

trips, such as work and school, account for 79% of the inbound travel with the remainder being primarily made up of personal business trips (10%) and shopping trips (8%). Social - recreational trips comprise a very small proportion of daily transit travel even though they are the major trip purpose during the evening hours.

The morning peak period (6:00 - 9:00 AM) accounts for 64% of the inbound travel in the study area. As shown in Figure 3.4 work trips and school trips account for 96% of the travel within the peak period. Destinations during this period favour the downtown over other destinations within the City. The 40% of total trips not destined to the downtown area is due in part to the large proportion of school trips which are destined to areas within the study area.

During the daytime, 9:00 AM - 4:00 PM, work and school trips account for a high proportion of the travel, 41%, with most of the remainder being distributed between shopping trips, 22%, and personal business trips, 30%. As shown by Figure 3.4 the downtown area attracts fewer trips compared with all other areas of the City during the off peak. This shift away from the downtown during the off peak period indicates that most personal business and shopping trips are made to local destinations.

Source:

Stanley Associates (4)

34

33

DAILY TRAVEL

As previously noted social-recreational trips are the major trip purpose during the evening hours (35%); however they comprise a MIDNIGHT - 6 am 1.0% 6 am. - 9am

64.0%

9 am. - 4 pm

27. 5 %

very small proportion of daily trips (10%).

3.3.2 Origin Destination Distribution

A detailed breakdown of origin - destination data for the four quadrants of the study area is presented in Table 3.4 and a summary of trip destinations for the entire northeast area is shown in 4 pm - 6pm

4.9%

Figure 3.5.

6 pm - MIDNIGHT 2.6%

The established mid-corridor neighbourhoods in the southeast and northwest quadrants generate over 70% of the transit trips from the study area. The inner-city type neighbourhoods in the southwest

OFF- PEAK

PEAK PERIOD

account for most of the remainder, 20%, with less than 10% of the trips originating in the outline plan areas of Clareview and

6am - 9 am

Hermitage.

WORK 33.0% WORK 76.0% --4

SCHOOL 15.0%

PURPOSE

As indicated in Table 3.4 and Figure 3.5, most transit trips are destined to a selected number of the major attractors in the city:

OTHER 52.0%

for example, the downtown alone accounts for one trip end of almost 60% of all trips. The southwest quadrant has a higher than average

SCHOOL 20.0% â&#x20AC;&#x201D;

proportion of downtown oriented trips (70%), as would be expected

OTHER 4.0%

from an inner-city area. The northwest quadrant has a lower than average proportion of trips to the downtown (55%), although this is probably due to its proximity to the Northern Alberta Institute of Technology (NAIT)/Industrial Airport area to which it sends almost DOWNTOWN 60.0%

-

DOWNTOWN 47.0%

I

14% of its trips. Trips remaining within the four main quadrants of the study area (Figure 3.5) account for 13 - 18% of all trips, and many of these local trips are school trips, which generally stay

DESTINATION

within the originating district.

OTHER 53.0%

OTHER 40.0% â&#x20AC;&#x201D;

Destinations external to the Northeast Area and the CBD, account for 23% of the total trips produced. These are, however, concentrated to two major attractors: The University of Alberta and the

COMPOSITION OF INBOUND TRANSIT TRIPS FIGURE 3.4 SOURCE: STANLEY ASSOCIATES ( 4)

TABLE 3.4 INBOUND TRANSIT TRIPS FACTORED ORIGIN - DESTINATION DATA (ALL DAY, ALL PURPOSE) DESTINATION

ORIGIN

OUTSIDE STUDY AREA

WITHIN STUDY AREA

DISTRICTS WITHIN

INDUSTRIAL

OTHER

TOTAL

SE

SW

NE

NW

SW

191

227

17

82

2615

236

342

35

3745

(5.1)

(6.1)

(0.5)

(2.2)

(69.8)

(6.3)

(9.1)

(0.9)

(19.0)

592

283

26

245

4171

442

665

769

7193

(8.2)

(3.9)

(0.4)

(3.4)

(58.0)

(6.1)

(9.3)

(10.7)

(36.5)

SE NE NW ALL

Notes:

DOWNTOWN

UNIVERSITY

STUDY AREA

190

1720

84

45

11

171

1055

56

108

(4.9)

(2.6)

(0.6)

(9.9)

(61.3)

(3.3)

(6.3)

213

250

31

967

3859

448

975

316

7059

(3.0)

(3.5)

(54.7)

(6.4)

(13.8)

(4.5)

(35.8)

1079

805

85

1465

11701

1182

2090

1310

19717

(5.5)

(4.1)

(0.4)

(7.4)

(59.4)

(6.0)

(10.6)

(6.6)

(100.0)

(0.4) (13.7)

1.

Numbers in brackets are percent of total.

2.

Source: Stanley Associates (4).

(11.1)

(8.7)

38

37 NAIT/Industrial Airport area. University trips account for about 6% of the trips from all quadrants, except the northeast.

TABLE 3.5

As a TRANSIT TRIPS BY MODE OF TRAVEL

1

fairly new area it would not be expected to have many University age families.

The northeast also produces a lower than average

percentage (11%) of trips to the NAIT/Airport area.

Even though

are relatively minor when compared to the downtown.

small proportion of the overall travel demand.

CONNECTION

2

it is hoped will encourage transit use to other areas of the City.

FEEDER 3 BUSES

FEEDER

LRT

BUSES

ONLY

6 - 9 AM

32%

23%

29%

15%

9 AM - 4 PM

34%

32%

19%

15%

4 - 6 PM

41%

30%

10%

19%

6 PM - Midnight

27%

32%

9%

32%

All Day

34%

26%

25%

15%

As the system

expands, LRT will provide service to many more destinations, which

3.3.3

NO LRT TIME PERIOD

Transit trip generation to the rest of the city is a relatively

LRT

BUS ONLY

the University and the NAIT/Aiport areas are major attractors, they

Choice of Transit Mode

Table 3.5 summarizes the distribution of northeast area transit Notes: trips by the combinations of transit modes available.

1.

Unfactored Data, Stanley Associates (4).

2.

Routes with no LRT Connection:

Over the

whole day the LRT line carries 40% of the total transit trips with 25% of these arriving by feeder bus and the remaining 15% accessing the line directly.

This total proportion by LRT is quite reason-

able considering that the line only provides direct service to the downtown (where only 60% of the total trips are destined) and that several parts of the study area, particularly along the major north-south and east-west arterials, have shorter travel times to the downtown by direct bus routes than by transfer to LRT. These types of trips, as well as the trips internal to the study area, also account for the fact that almost the same proportion of total riders, 26%, complete their trip by feeder bus, as transfer to the LRT, 25%.

3.3.4 Access Mode to Transit

A summary of the mode of access to the bus routes and LRT line in the northeast area is shown in Table 3.6.

1, 3, 6, 24, 25, 35, 73, 86, 87

3.

Feeder Buses:

5, 11, 18, 20, 23, 28, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 66, 70, 74, 80.

39

40

As would be expected, most access to the bus routes is by walking,

TABLE 3.6

with minor access by automobile. Some transfers occur from bus

MODE OF ACCESS TO TRANSIT

routes outside the study area to routes within the area, but this component is very small.

Access modes to the LRT stations vary from station to station.

MODE

DROP

PARK-N

WALK

OFF

-RIDE

BUS TRANSFER

Belvedere and Coliseum Stations have nine and six feeder bus routes respectively and this is reflected in the access mode figures.

Bus (No LRT Connection)

89%

5%

1%

Belvedere, with a large park-and-ride lot, also gains a large

Feeder Bus

87%

2.8%

0.2%

proportion of its ridership by auto. Walk-on access is minimal at

Belvedere Station

Belvedere as the station is not located close to major residential

Coliseum Station

15.8%

4.5%

development. Coliseum Station has very little access by park-and-

Stadium Station

66.5%

6.5%

8%

9%

11% 0.7% 17%

5% 10% 72% 79% 10%

ride due to the lack of demand. This is expected in an inner area where most trips have access to the feeder bus system.

Source: Stanley Associates (4) Stadium Station is served by only one feeder bus which is reflected in the low proportion of bus transfer activity. Most of the activity at this station is due to walk-ons from the medium density

TABLE 3.7

development in the station area.

PREVIOUS MODE OF TRAVEL (ALL DAY - ALL PURPOSE)

3.3.5 Previous Mode of Travel PREVIOUS MODE (%) The previous mode of travel question was intended to reveal the

DISTRICT OF

NOT

impact of the introduction of LRT service on encouraging people to

TRIP ORIGIN

MADE

BUS

AUTO

AUTO

DRIVER

PASSENGER

use the transit system. Table 3.7 summarizes the responses of all transit users and indicates that 88% of the patrons previously used

Southeast

5%

91%

3%

1%

the bus system, while 12% were either auto drivers or passengers,

Southwest

5%

91%

3%

1%

or did not make the trip. These total figures, however, must be

Northeast

12%

70%

15%

3%

used with a great deal of caution as it must be remembered that the

Northwest

5%

87%

7%

1%

study area is a high growth area and that only 40% of the transit

TOTAL

5%

88%

6%

1%

riders in the area use the LRT system.

A detailed analysis by route and by trip purpose of the "trip not made" response indicated no significant difference between the response rate for routes with or without LRT connections, or the LRT line for either the total trip, work trip, or school trip

Source: Stanley Associates (4)

41

samples. As it is unlikely that the area labour participation rate or school enrollment would increase due to the presence of the LRT line it is reasonable to assume that most of the "trip not made"

42

patterns are fixed. It is possible, however, that a gradual modal shift will occur in the established neighbourhoods due to population turnover.

responses are from patrons new to the study area who previously made the trip in another area. Some ambiguity has been noted in

3.4 Transit User Characteristics

the way the question was worded on the survey form, and should be amended for any future surveys.

Similarly, route by route analysis also qualifies the aggregate figure that 7% of the total riders were either a previous auto driver or passenger. Even on the bus routes with no connection to the LRT line 3.3% of the passengers indicated that they had previously traveled by automobile. The proportion was somewhat higher (4.8%) on the feeder bus routes out of the established neighbourhoods of the study area.

However, most of the shift has been from passengers boarding directly at the LRT stations (average of 18% former auto users) and arriving by feeder bus from the outline plan areas of Clareview and Hermitage in the northeast quadrant (Table 3.7). The high proportion of former auto users at the LRT stations (predominantly Belvedere and Stadium) reflects walk-in patronage plus ridership attraction due to auto drop-off and park-and-ride facilities. The increase from the Clareview and Hermitage areas is probably because the residents receive most of the travel time benefits of the LRT line. In addition, with the rapid growth in the area, many of the new residents would have found the high level of service provided

3.4.1 Age/Sex Distribution

The age and sex distribution of transit riders in the northeast is presented in Figure 3.6 along with the distribution from the south corridor of the city for comparison purposes. Overall, the 19 - 35 age group is predominant, accounting for 47% of all transit riders, with females accounting for 68% of the total. Females are the dominant sex in each age group and the distributions by sex and age do not vary significantly by time period.

Comparison of the northeast area and south corridor figures indicate that transit ridership in the two different areas of the city is not dissimilar especially in the total male/female split and in the proportion of riders over and under 35 years of age. The northeast does have a higher proportion of ridership in the 0 - 18 age bracket which likely indicates a slightly different average family age causing an increase in school trips (In the south corridor work trips and school trips accounted for 67% and 11% of total trips respectively. In the northeast the proportions were 61% and 18%. The proportions of the other trip purposes were almost identical between the two areas).

by the LRT line already in existence upon arrival, and developed their travel patterns accordingly.

Comparison of the relatively insignificant modal shift in the established areas as compared to the major shift in the high growth areas suggests that a significant shift toward travel due to LRT is best attained by providing the high level of service as an area develops rather than waiting until growth is finished and travel

3.4.2 Automobile Ownership and Availability

Of the total daily transit patrons 69% described themselves as transit captives who are defined as travellers for whom an automobile is not conveniently available. Individual zone analysis indicated that this proportion was fairly consistent in the 60 -

43

44

79% range. As shown in Table 3.8 the incidence of transit captives decreases in the peak period indicating a greater tendency

II 0/0

toward choice use of transit. Comparison of the northeast area and the south corridor shows little difference on an all day basis.

The all bus system in the south corridor attracts more choice

33

transit users in the peak period although this is most likely due to the higher proportion of South Corridor patrons in the 19 - 35 age group and who predominantly work downtown rather than being a reflection on the attractiveness of transit service in the northeast.

Table 3.9 summarizes automobile ownership for the northeast and south corridor areas. The overall proportions of autmobile owner-

NORTHEAST AREA

MALE (32%)

FEMALE (68%)

ship are fairly consistent throughout the study area, except in the southwest quadrant (inner-city type neighbourhoods) where zero car households increase to 30% and two car households drop to 15%.

Comparison of the automobile ownership and automobile availability data would indicate that much of the transit captive ridership must come from households of one or more cars, but the car is not regularly available to the person surveyed.

Very little can be inferred from comparison of automobile ownership in the northeast and south corridor areas, although it is interesting to note that the south corridor, with a slightly higher proportion of choice transit riders, actually has a lower level of automobile ownership.

3.4.3 User Comments

SOUTH CORRIDOR FEMALE (65%)

AGE /SEX COMPOSITION OF TRANSIT USERS FIGURE 3.6

The on-board survey forms also included a space for comments by transit patrons. A summary of the more common comments is given in Table 3.10.

46 45 As specific comments were not solicited, the numbers indicated

TABLE 3.8

cannot be used to derive any definite conclusions on public opinion.

AUTOMOBILE AVAILABILITY OF TRANSIT TRAVELLERS

It is interesting to note, however, that over 70% of the transit patrons who returned a survey form were interested enough to make a TIME PERIOD

CHOICE USERS

CAPTIVE USERS

NO.

TOTAL

comment and that a high proportion of those liked the LRT line even though most of the northeast area transit patrons do not use the

NO.

LRT on a regular basis. A sizable number thought the LRT system should be extended city wide.

Northeast Area

6 - 9 AM

1258

34.6

2380

65.4

3638

The bus connection comments were mainly related to buses not being

All Day

1800

31.3

3927

68.7

5747

at the stations when the LRT trains arrived. This situation is difficult to rectify as the LRT is on five minute peak hour headways while the buses are generally on 10 - 15 minute headways. The

South Corridor

comments on extending bus routes related partly to the outline plan AM Peak

1196

39.1

1859

60.9

3055

areas where routes are constantly under revision, and partly to

All Day

1614

32.7

3329

67.3

4943

the LRT where some patrons preferred the previous line-haul routes to downtown rather than being forced to transfer to the LRT line.

TABLE 3.9 AUTOMOBILE OWNERSHIP OF TRANSIT TRAVELLERS

TIME PERIOD

0

1

2

3+

CARS

CAR

CARS

CARS

Northeast Area

6 - 9 AM

15%

46%

29%

10%

All Day

19%

44%

27%

10%

24%

46%

23%

7%

South Corridor

All Day

47

48 4.0 ROADWAY IMPACTS

TABLE 3.10 SUMMARY OF TRANSIT PATRON COMMENTS

4.1 Traffic Volumes

To measure changes in vehicle volumes from the northeast, vehicles Total Survey Forms Returned

were counted crossing the three screenlines shown on Figure 4.1.

Details of the counting program are found in Appendix C.

-

No Comment

1819

-

One Comment

3521

-

Several Comments

963

The vehicle volumes recorded across the screenlines are shown in Table 4.1 along with growth projections based on historical data.

Volumes across the outer screenline increased by 5,000 vehicles per

LRT Service Comments

day more than the historical growth projection. Approximately onehalf of this increase is attributable to accelerated development in 2906

-

Like LRT as is

-

Extend LRT North

69

-

Extend LRT South

119

-

Extend LRT City Wide

762

-

Do Not Like LRT

139

-

Improve Bus Connections

:

636

-

Improve Belevedere Station

:

312

Bus Service Comments

the northeast corridor and carries on through the intermediate screenline. The rest of the increase can be traced to east-west traffic on the Yellowhead Highway Corridor (125 Avenue) which has shifted from 137 Avenue due to roadway improvements. The above average increases across the outer two screenlines do not carry through to the inner screenline which shows no sigificant change in volumes over the study period.

4.2 :

442

-

Extend Routes

-

Increase Frequency

82

-

Improve Reliability

59

-

Improve Comfort

94

Automobile Travel Times

To attempt to determine the impact of the LRT line on automobile travel times in the northeast area travel time surveys were carried out on five different routes between the central business district and the northeast. These routes crossed various combinations of road and LRT intersections and the details of these studies are summarized in Appendix D. Overall travel times did not change significantly for the AM peak period while those in the PM peak period decreased by approximately 11% (about 80 seconds) on trips toward the CBD and by 8% (about 60 seconds) on trips from the CBD towards the northeast.

50

TABLE 4.1 AVERAGE DAILY VEHICLE VOLUMES

Screenline

1977

1978

Actual Growth

Historical Growth

127,900

139,400

11,500

6,500

Intermediate

82,000

85,700

3,700

1,050

Inner

85,500

85,600

100

850

Outer

Avri-nua

ickvenka

â&#x20AC;¢ .11cNall

NORTHEAST AREA VEHICLE SCREENLINES FIGURE 4.1

52

51

There are five major arterials in the northeast which the LRT line

which alter station dwell times, performance of electrified switches,

crosses at-grade: 95 Street, 112 Avenue, 82 Street, 120 Avenue and

vehicle performance, weather conditions, and LRT driver activities.

66 Street. With LRT implementation signals adjacent to the crossings

There is a need to examine all of these factors comprehensively to

were co-ordinated to attempt to reduce queuing at the crossings by

determine how more precise schedule control of the LRT can be

controlling the capacity of upstream traffic signals. The traffic

achieved.

signals were also integrated with the LRT controls to attempt to co-ordinate LRT road crossings with the red phases at the adjoining intersections (2).

Link travel time and queue length studies were carried out at the five level crossing locations (6,7). Significant reductions in queue lengths averaging 35% in the AM Peak and 52% in the PM Peak were observed on 112 Avenue, 82 Street and 120 Avenue. Little change was observed on 95 Street. The reductions indicate that the signal co-ordination measures have been successful in preventing queue build-up due to LRT level crossing closures.

A summary of the results of the travel time surveys across the level crossings is given in Table 4.2. Although there is variation in the results of the two surveys there is general agreement on a travel time increase in the AM Peak and a decrease in the PM Peak.

Given that the increases average only 10 - 15 seconds and the decreases about 20 seconds it is reasonable to conclude the signal integration techniques have assured no significant deterioration of roadway performance due to at-grade LRT operations. In fact, both surveys agree that significant improvements have occurred on the most congested link in the area (112 Avenue during the PM Peak) and that some improvements have occurred on several other links. More improvements had been anticipated at the time of the signal system design, however realization of the full potential of the system is extremely dependent upon being able to attain precise control of LRT scheduling and operation, and this control has not been fully attained. There are many factors which influence the schedule reliability of the LRT, including variations in passenger demand

54

53 TABLE 4.2

5.0 PARKING IMPACTS

AVERAGE CHANGES IN AUTO TRAVEL TIMES AT LRT LEVEL CROSSINGS

Surveys were carried out in March, 1978, immediately prior to the LRT opening, and repeated in March 1979 to detect increases in parking in the vicinity of the three outlying LRT stations which PM PEAK

AM PEAK LOCATION

SURVEY A

1

2 SURVEY B

SURVEY A

SURVEY B

may be attributable to park-and-ride vehicles. Figures 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 show the areas surveyed and the overall parking survey results.

95 Street NB

0%

+31%

+20%

+15%

SB

+28%

+11%

-15%

+ 9%

At Stadium Station curb parking did not increase from 1978 to 1979.

Approximately 50 vehicles regularly use the Commonwealth Stadium

112 Avenue WB

+10%

+ 4%

+27%

+ 3%

bus parking lot which is available for automobile parking when there

EB

+26%

+ 6%

-70%

-21%

are no events at the Stadium. Curb parking in the vicinity of

82 Street NB

+18%

+14%

-19%

-19%

only 23% of the available spaces are regularly in use (compared to

SB

+20%

- 6%

-44%

+ 1.4%

13% in 1978) and the impact is not considered serious.

120 Avenue WB

-13%

+10%

-18%

-19%

At Belvedere Station a significant increase in curb parking from 17,

EB

-38%

-26%

+20%

+31%

to 66 vehicles occurred in approximately a two block radius around

Coliseum Station increased slightly over the study period, however,

the station. Some complaints have been received from area resi66 Street NB

-13%

-22%

dents, although with only 26% of the total curb capacity utilized

SB

+19%

+15%

field checks have shown ample parking available. Additional surveys carried out at the Londonderry Hotel indicated minimal (1

AVERAGE

+23%

+ 3%

-10%

- 5%

2 vehicles) use by LRT patrons. No complaints have been received from Safeway concerning the use of their parking lot by LRT patrons.

NOTES:

1.

Survey A:

May/June 1976 and May/June 1978.

2.

Survey B:

October/November 1977 and November 1978.

The park-and-ride lot at Belvedere station operated at its capacity of 322 vehicles in 1979. The average occupancy rate for vehicles using the lot was 1.12, and a licence plate survey conducted in the lot indicated that 67% of the vehicles were registered to Edmonton addresses while 33% were from outside the city (7). Of the vehicles registered in Edmonton 81% of the addresses were within 3 km of the station. Data gathered from the parking surveys at Belvedere has been used to estimate park-and-ride requirements for the proposed South Corridor LRT Line.

55

114 Ave.

ULJ LIU LJLJ LIRE Lill ••••••••

i113 Ave.

•••••••

^

LJI1

56

122 Ar

••••••••• ^

112 Ave.

COMMONWEALTH STADIUM

117 Ave7—

ILL

116 Ave.

rin

CURB

BLOCK

CURB PARKING

PARKING

Available 1978 1979

Used 1978

1979

BLOCK

Available 1979 1978

1978

1979

29

29

2

2

55

50

9

12

3

3

3

0

0

8

4

4

4

0

6

13

5

35

32

13

32

18

16

6

0

0

100

43

39

7

0

0

0

127

118

1

4

4

0

1

2

13

13

0

1

3

0

0

0

0

4

22

22

19

5

25

29

6

29

TOTAL

93

1

TOTAL Note : Stadium lot Block 3

Capacity 220 vehicles Occupancy 52 vehicles

16

Note: Coliseum •Lot (689 vehicle capacity) Not used by park and ride vehicles.

STADIUM AREA PARKING FIGURE 5.1

Used

COLISEUM AREA PARKING FIGURE 5.2

27

[F1

57

LJ

58

6.0 SPECIAL EVENTS

Patronage on the LRT line was observed during a variety of special 132 Ave.

events to obtain data on performance under heavy load conditions and to gauge the ability of the line to provide service to special events. A summary of patronage data for the various events is shown in Table 6.1. The percentage of patrons arriving at the various events by LRT is quite variable and is most likely affected primarily by the amount of parking available at the time of the event, and the different levels of special bus service provided.

Hockey games, for example, have the use of the Coliseum parking lot and have no extra bus service. On the other hand, almost all access to the Commonwealth Games events was by transit.

The Conullonwealth Games were the only special event which provided continual "crush" loads to the LRT line. In general the high volumes were handled well although on August 10, 1978 Central Station overloaded and buses were used to alleviate the problem.

The line carried a peak hour volume of 8,700 passengers to Stadium Station, split approximately 65% northbound and 35% southbound,

CURB

PARKING

using two car trains on 5 minute headways. Under these conditions train unloading took about one minute and it took up to four minutes

BLOCK

Available 1978 1979

Used

to clear the turnstiles during the peaks. Crush vehicle loads in

1978

1979

the range of 266 to 315 (average 285) passengers per vehicle were

1

36

36

3

10

2

28

25

8

8

3

12

12

0

0

4

12

0

0

5

88

88

6

36

6

42

42

0

0

were over. Firstly, the layout of the underground portions of the

7

51

48

0

12

stations tends to favor one stairwell/escalator over the other. As

269

251

17

66

a result most people would arrive at the top of the one stairwell

TOTAL

observed. After the major events it took approximately one and one-half hours to clear Stadium station.

Observations at other special events indicated two problems with passenger flows at Stadium and Coliseum Stations after the events

and would be reluctant to move forward, probably due to uncertainty

Note

Park and ride lot , Block 7 , 322 vehicle

BELVEDERE AREA PARKING FIGURE 5.3

occupancy

59

60

over where the train will stop, or backward due to the congestion between the platform edge and the edge of the stairwell.

TABLE 6.1

This

LRT SPECIAL EVENTS PATRONAGE

requires transit inspectors on the platform to try to keep patrons moving and signs on the lower level encouraging the use of the second stairwell.

The other flow problem was similar in that it

LRT

TOTAL ATTENDANCE

EVENT

% BY

RIDERSHIP

LRT

involved patrons stopping at the top of the stairs, in this case because of uncertainties over which side of the platform they want.

Directional signs have been used to alleviate the problem.

Klondike Days 24/07/78

67,851

14,819

21.8%

26/07/78

61,754

13,553

22.0%

Hockey Game

15,571

1,808

11.6%

25,006

3,224

12.9%

42,000

6,568

15.6%

1

14,674

39.7%

1

6,326

40.0%

1 18,933 1 37,049

8,153

43.1%

15,996

43.2%

Northlands Coliseum 20/02/79

Football Games - Clarke Stadium 17/06/78 - Commonwealth Stadium 29/10/78

Commonwealth Games - Opening: 3/08/78 - Atheletics:

8/08/78

- Athletics:

8/08/78

- Athletics:

10/08/78

36,993

15,815

Ticket Sales, not necessarily total attendance

NOTES:

1.

SOURCE:

City of Edmonton (7)

62

61

7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.

The implementation of LRT service has made no noticeable impact on roadway volumes in the northeast area.

7.1 Conclusions 7.

Traffic management techniques have assured no significant

Based on the data and analysis presented in the preceding sections

deterioration of roadway performance due to at-grade LRT

the following observations/conclusions have been made:

operations.

1.

Due to the presence of the LRT line bus movements into the

8.

Parking impacts around LRT stations have been minimal.

9.

The LRT line has shown itself capable of handling both normal

downtown have been reduced significantly even though total transit ridership has increased.

daily volumes as well as "crush" volumes which approached the 2.

theoretical capacity of the system.

Some reductions in transit fleet size have been attained due to the LRT.

7.2 Recommendations 3.

The level of transit service to the northeast area has increased significantly due to the LRT service, particularly in

The recommendations of this study concern the future monitoring of

terms of transit travel time reductions to the outlying

the LRT system and are as follows:

areas.

1.

4.

That the programs necessary to monitor changes in LRT and bus

Direct operating costs of the transit system serving the

ridership in the northeast be maintained as part of the

northeast area have not increased significantly especially

annual counting program.

when the higher level of service provided and the new ridership out of high growth areas are considered. Total operating

2.

a)

That the factors affecting schedule reliability of the

costs have increased considerably due to the added cost of

LRT system be reviewed in detail to allow better inter-

maintaining the LRT facilities.

action with the at-grade crossing and traffic signal control systems.

5.

The LRT line has not attracted a noticeable amount of new b)

transit ridership from the established communities in the

That roadway travel time studies in the northeast area,

study area. Ridership increases and new riders have come

particularly at the major arterial/LRT level crossings,

primarily from the newly developed communities which receive

be maintained on an annual basis.

most of the benefits of LRT service and where new residents were able to develop their travel patterns around the LRT system.

3.

That annual monitoring of parking in the vicinity of LRT stations be maintained.

63

4.

64 REFERENCES

That consideration be given to carrying out a second on board passenger survey in the northeast area in 1984 to allow determination of long term effects of the LRT line on trip

1.

Transportation Policy (Revised March 3, 1977)".

patterns and/or user characteristics.

5.

6.

That the costs of maintaining the LRT stations, track, and

Province of Alberta, Department of Transportation, "Alberta Urban

2.

O'Brien, W., Schnablegger, J., and Teply, S., "Control of Light

right-of-way be reviewed to determine where cost reductions

Rail Transit Operations in Edmonton", National Conference on Light

and/or economies of scale can be achieved.

Rail Transit, Boston, Mass., 1977.

That the knowledge and information gathered from this eval-

3.

City of Edmonton, Planning Department and du Toit Associates Ltd.,

uation study be applied as a basis for future LRT design and

"Northeast Light Rail Transit Corridor Study - Land Use Plans",

implementation.

Edmonton, 1978.

4.

Stanley Associates Engineering Ltd., "Northeast LRT Evaluation Study - On Board Passenger Survey Summary Report", 1979.

5.

City of Edmonton, Planning Department, Transportation Planning Branch "1978 Unit Operating Costs for Edmonton Transit", Edmonton, 1979.

6.

City of Edmonton, Engineering Department, Traffic Operations, "LRT Crossing Control System Evaluation", Memorandum Report, August 23, 1978.

7.

City of Edmonton, Planning Department, Transportation Planning Branch, "NELRT Evaluation - Data Analysis Technical Report", 1979.

8.

City of Edmonton, Transit Department, Development Section, "Preliminary Evaluation of the Northeast LRT Line and Connecting Bus Routes", June 1978.

STIVIRE WRISASIISNVNI VXIGNaldV TABLE A-1 NORTHEAST TRANSIT SYSTEM -1977 AVERAGE WEEKDAY OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS

DESTINATION

ROUTE 1 3 5 6* 10* 11 18 19 20 23 28 29* 30 31 32 33 34 65 66 70 74 80

Jasper Place Groat Road Westmount Groat Road Beverly 81 St/118 Ave Kingsway Mall Northgate Beverly Kingsway Mall Beverly Belvedere Belvedere Belvedere Steele Heights Londonderry Londonderry Ring Ring Hermitage Clareview Steele Heights

*Peak Period Only

Highlands Cromdale Coliseum 81 St/118 Ave Downtown Jasper Place Beverly University Downtown Montrose Downtown Downtown Downtown Downtown University Downtown Downtown

50 St/112 Ave Belvedere Downtown

A.M. PEAK 5 10 10 10 15 30 15 15 15 15 15 30 15 15 10 15 15 15 15 15 15 10

FREQUENCY P.M. PEAK 5 10 10 10 15 30 15 15 15 15 15 30 15 15 7.5 15 15 15 15 15 15 7.5

PEAK HOUR VEHICLES

OPERATING HOURS

OPERATING KILOMETERS

24 11 11 13 4 6 5 8 4 4 4 2 8 7 11 10 11 4 4 2 2 9

273.3 183.1 198.0 77.0 18.2 75.2 78.4 61.5 57.1 48.4 57.6 9.8 67.9 63.8 112.2 89.7 85.1 52.1 51.0 23.9 24.2 64.2

4301 2463 3241 1126 265 1360 1177 1348 1092 766 1054 183 1164 1094 2103 1611 1420 976 938 478 652 1092

TABLE A-2 NORTHEAST TRANSIT SYSTEM - 1978 AVERAGE WEEKDAY OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS

ROUTE

DESTINATION

1 3 5 6* 11 18 19 20 23 28 30 31 32

Jasper Place Groat Road Westmount Groat Road Jasper Place Kingsway Mall Northgate Beverly Kingsway Mall Beverly Northgate Northgate Steele Heights

33 34

Northgate Northgate

66

Coliseum

70 74

Clareview Clareview

80

Steele Heights

*Peak Period Only

Highlands Cromdale Coliseum 81 St/118 Ave Belvedere Beverly University Coliseum Montrose Coliseum Belvedere Belvedere Belvedere University Belvedere Belvedere Downtown* Northgate N.A.I.T. Belvedere Belvedere Kingsway Mall* Belvedere Coliseum

A.M. PEAK

FREQUENCY P.M. PEAK

PEAK HOUR VEHICLES

OPERATING HOURS

OPERATING KILOMETERS

5 10 10 10 15 10 15 10 15 10 10 10 15

5 10 10 10 15 10 15 10 15 10 10 10 15

24 11 11 13 8 7 6 4 4 4 7 7 9

271.8 183.1 196.8 77.0 102.4 80.1 52.1 56.4 53.4 48.5 58.3 58.2 107.4

4233 2463 3218 1126 1755 1214 1143 1073 844 862 964 965 2013

10 10

10 10

7 7

78.3 53.2

1360 918

15

15

8

102.6

1856

15 15

15 15

2 6

26.8 57.0

528 1139

15

15

5

48.4

794

B2

B.I Transit Passenger and Bus Volumes

B3 A summary of the directional transit volumes across the three screenlines is given in Table B-1. A more detailed breakdown by

Monitoring of transit activity including passenger and vehicle counting is conducted annually throughout the city. Data collection covers normal weekday operations and can be reproduced by time of bus passes and/or by route. Factors derived from fare collection data are used to develop average daily passenger volumes.

Transit passenger and bus volumes in the northeast area were monitored primarily through the use of three screenlines. These screen lines are as follows:

Outer Screenline: Diagonal 97 Street/128 Avenue to 53 Street/112 Avenue.

Count Station Locations

97 Street - 128 Avenue 82 Street - 122 Avenue 66 Street - 118 Avenue 52 Street - 112 Avenue

Intermediate Screenline: Norwood Boulevard - 112 Avenue

Count Station Locations

97 Street - 118 Avenue 95 Street - Norwood Boulevard 82 Street - 112 Avenue

Inner Screenline: 104 Avenue - 103 A Avenue

Count Station Locations

97 Street - 104 Avenue 95 Street - 104 Avenue Jasper Avenue - 103 A Avenue

route and time period is documented by the City of Edmonton (7).

Cl

B4 TABLE B1 TRANSIT COUNT SUMMARY

Inbound to CBD (7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.)

Outer Screenline Passengers Buses

Total Buses LRT

1976 1977 1978 1978 1978

9837 11246 14069 8926 5143

Intermediate Screen Inner Screenlin Passengers Buses Passengers Buse

537 630 780 666 114

13343 15603 16648 9416 7232

722 760 731 618 113

14878 17107 18361 10900 7461

64 74 69 58 11 APPENDIX C

Inbound to CBD (7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.)

Total Buses LRT

1976 1977 1978 1978 1978

4711 5422 7001 4369 2632

118 141 176 152 24

VEHICLE COUNTING PROGRAM 5774 6393 7458 3866 3592

160 179 151 128 23

5559 6909 7991 4257 3734

14 16 14 12 2

13105 15893 17038 9383 7655

736 768 734 620 114

16192 17205 18408 10550 7858

65 73 70 58 11

5969 6803 7268 3414 3854

163 187 143 121 22

7046 7159 7800 3836 3964

15 17 15 12 2

Outbound from CBD (7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.)

Total Buses LRT

1976 1977 1978 1978 1978

11415 12190 13989 8188 5801

551 642 797 682 115

Outbound from CBD (4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.)

Total Buses LRT

-

1976 1977 1978 1978 1978

5351 5162 6070 3227 2843

124 151 166 134 22

Outer Screeline is at approximately 127 Avenue, Intermediate at 112 Avenue, and Inner at 104 Avenue.

Column labelled buses refers to trains when used in conjunction with LRT. 1976 surveys were in March & April, 1977 in March, and 1978 in November and December.

C2 C3 C I Vehicle Counting Program

Arterial roadway vehicle volumes throughout the City are monitored

Inner Screenline: 105 Avenue - 97 Street

Count Station Locations:

on a yearly basis. Data is collected and stored in half hour segements covering 24 hour weekdays. Factors obtained from year

101 Street

round and week long counts are used to calculate average annual

97 Street

daily volumes.

103 A Avenue 102 A Avenue

In the northeast area three screenlines were established and traffic

102 Avenue

volumes monitored using historical and current vehicle counts on

Jasper Avenue

all intersecting roadways. The screenlines were defined as follows: In summary of the directional traffic movements across the screenOuter Screenline: 126 Avenue - CNR right-of-way

Count Station Locations

97 Street 82 Street Fort Road 66 Street 50 Street

Intermediate Screenline: Norwood Boulevard - 112 Avenue

Count Station Locations

97 Street 95 Street 86 Street 82 Street 112 Avenue

lines is given in Table C-1.

C4

TALE C-1

D1

TRAFFIC COUNT SUMMARY Outer Screenline

Intermediate Screen

Inner Screenline 101 St N of 104 Ave 1978 1977 28970 28327 889 907 1225 1230 400

Location Year 24 hour volume A.M. Peak In P.M. Peak Out Growth Rate

97 St S of 127 Ave 1978 1977 42615 45302 2234 2073 2204 2175 2100

97 St N of 111 Ave 1976 1978 18819 20666 742 807 , 1175 1051 150

Location Year 24 Hour Volume A.M. Peak In P.M. Peak Out Growth Rate

82 St S of 127 Ave 1976 1978 33157 39284 2022 2063 2019 1836 2050

95 St N of 111 Ave 1976 1978 13376 13580 737 730 804 730 100

97 St N of 104 Ave 1978 1977 16732 16017 699 645 732 723 200

Location Year 24 Hour Volume A.M. Peak In P.M. Peak Out Growth Rate

Fort Rd W of 68 St 1978 1976 15849 17781 1061 1085 1023 1107 700

86 St S of 114 Ave 1976 1978 10601 12330 814 852 603 639 100

103A Ave W of 96 St 1978 1977 12343 13368 812 792 784 831 250

Location Year 24 Hour Volume A.M. Peak In P.M. Peak Out Growth Rate

66 St S of Fort Rd 1978 1976 20222 18517 877 770 814 713 250

82 St N of 112 Ave 1977 1978 14402 14454 645 760 700 733, 350

102A Ave E of 97 St 1978 1977 5323 5557 629 775

Location Year 24 Hour Volume A.M. Peak In P.M. Peak Out Growth Rate

50 St S of 126 Ave 1978 1977 11166 20502 917 665 1028 647 1400

112 Ave W of 79 St 1976 1978 24633 24070 1105 1142 1432 1261 350

102 Ave E of 97 St 1978 1977 5874 5955 678 0

613

Jasp Ave E of 97 St 1977 1978 16321 16235 679 695 928 911 0

Location Year 24 Hour Volume A.M. Peak In P.M. Peak Out Growth Rate Screenline Totals Year 24 Hour Volume A.M. Peak In P.M. Peak Out Growth Rate

0

1977 127941 6591 6478 6500

1978 139545 7176 7088

1977 81968 4111 4714 1050

1978 85663 4223 4414

1977 85464 3798 4373 850

1978 85558 3724 4282

24 Hour Volume - two way volume A.M. Peak In - peak hour trips towards the CBD P.M. Peak Out - peak hour trips away from the CBD - historical growth rate prior to 1977, vehicles per day per year Growth Rate Screenline Totals - 24 hour volume for 1977 is arrived at by increasing the 1976 volumes by the historical growth rate to estimate the 1977 volumes.

- peak hour totals for 1977 are an addition of the 1976 and 1977 peak volumes.

APPENDIX D AUTO TRAVEL TIME STUDIES

D2

D3

Southbound from Fort Road - 129 Avenue via Fort D.I Auto Travel Time Studies Road - 80 Street - 115 Avenue - 82 Street - Jasper Avenue, to Jasper Avenue - 84 Street.

Five different routes were surveyed crossing various combinations of road intersections with the LRT line between the central business district and the northeast area. Six trips were made in

Route #4:

Northbound from 95 Street - 102 A Avenue via 95 Street - 107A Avenue - Stadium Road - 112 Avenue,

each direction during both the AM and PM peak hours. The routes

to 112 Avenue - 73 Street. surveyed were as follows:

Route #1:

Southbound is the reverse of northbound.

Northbound trips start at 102A Avenue - 95 Street and travel via 95 Street - 107A Avenue - Stadium Road - 86 Street - 115 Avenue - 80 Street - Fort Road, to Fort Road - 129 Avenue.

Route #5:

Northbound from Jasper Avenue - 95 Street via Jasper Avenue - 82 Street - 112 Avenue, to 112 Avenue 73 Street.

Southbound trips were from 129 Avenue - Fort Road via Fort Road - 118 Avenue - 82 Street - 112 Avenue

Southbound is the reverse trip of northbound.

Stadium Road - 107A Avenue - 95 Street, to 102A Avenue - 95 Street.

Table D.1 displays the breakdown of travel time by direction for each of the routes surveyed. Link travel times on arterials which

Route #2:

Northbound from 102 Avenue - 95 Street via 95 Street Norwood Boulevard - 112 Avenue - 86 Street - 115 Avenue - 82 Street - 120 Avenue - 66 Street, to 129 Avenue - 66 Street.

Southbound from 129 Avenue - Fort Road via Fort Road 66 Street - 120 Avenue - Fort Road - 80 Street 115 Avenue - 82 Street - Jasper Avenue, to 95 Street - Jasper Avenue.

Route #3:

Northbound from Jasper Avenue - 84 Street via Jasper Avenue - 82 Street - 120 Avenue - 66 Street, to 129 Avenue - 66 Street.

cross the LRT line at-grade are given in Table D-2.

D5

D4 TABLE D.2 TABLE D.1 AUTO TRAVEL TIMES ON LINKS WITH LRT CROSSINGS AUTO TRAVEL TIMES LINK Route #1

AM Peak Outbound from CBD Inbound to CBD PM Peak Outbound from CBD Inbound to CBD

127 267 189 275

136 219 196 164

704 878 809 964

731 880 829 785

20.2 16.6 17.6 15.1

19.5 16.6 17.2 18.6

#2

AM Peak Outbound from CBD Inbound to CBD PM Peak Outbound from CBD Inbound to CBD

161 202 426 284

169 151 337 277

860 830 1166 884

801 755 1055 893

19.7 17.1 14.5 16.1

21.1 18.8 16.0 15.9

AM Peak Outbound from CBD Inbound to CBD PM Peak Outbound from CBD Inbound to CBD

105 232 174 143

105 214 118 137

509 715 681 712

550 767 575 648

20.5 16.6 15.3 16.7

19O 15.5 18.2 18.3

AM Peak Outbound from CBD Inbound to CBD PM Peak Outbound from CBD Inbound to CBD

52 147 89 133

56 89 61 131

356 459 468 532

398 437 421 487

23.3 18.0 17.7 15.6

20.8 18.9 19.7 17.0

AM Peak Outbound from CBD Inbound to CBD PM Peak Outbound from CBD Inbound to CBD

22 118 69 246

31 114 34 117

291 410 377 536

307 425 330 412

24.7 17.6 19.1 13.4

23.5 16.9 21.8 17.5

#3

#4

#5

ROUTE

Delay Time (Sec.) Travel Time (Sec.) Travel Speed (Mph) Before After After Before After Before

Times are the average of six trips sampled Delay time is the time stopped in traffic Travel time is the total time spent in the traffic stream, including delay time and running time.

Before surveys done October and November, 1977; after surveys done November 1978.

AM (07:00 to 09:00) PM (16:00 - 18:00) Before After Before After

95 St. - 103A to 107A Avenue

1 2 4 Avg.

76 75 65 72

85 99 97 94

81 72 84 79

91 93 88 91

95 St. - 107A to 103A Ave.

1 4 Avg.

81 87 84

87 99 93

87 93 90

99 97 98

112 Ave. - 82 to 86 St.

1 4 Avg.

66 74 70

88 58 73

76 82 79

82 79 81

112 Ave. - 86 to 82 St.

4

68

64

102

81

82 St. - 112 to 115 Ave.

3

64

73

81

66

1 2 3 Avg.

101 84 87 91

83 88 88 86

56 88 72 72

57 82 79 73

2

66

49

62

81

79 55 67

66 82 74

65 83 74

71 48 60

111

97

253

198

61 65 63

66 83 75

71 72 72

70 95 83

82 St. - 115 to 112 Ave.

120 Ave. - Fort Rd. to 72 St. 120 Ave. - 72 St. to Fort Road

2 3 Avg.

66 St. - Santa Rosa to 127 Ave.

2

66 St. - 127 Ave. to Santa Rosa

2 3 Avg.

Time in seconds Before surveys done October and November 1977 After surveys done November 1978

I