Prepared for Edmonton (Alta.) - 1963 - Estimate of usage of the proposed Edmonton rapid transit s...

SD UBRARY

3053 ESTIMATE OF USAGE OF THE

T07418830/1963

TRAFFIC-RESEAR00R

ESTIMATE OF USAGE OF THE PROPOSED EDMONTON RAPM TRANSIT SYSTEM

Prepared for the Commissioner of Planning and Development, Edmonton, Alberta

by Traffic Research Corporation Limited Toronto, Ontario

January 29, 1963

4403.1a .E3 :5H4 1963

U

I

•

• •

4 ImIls MEM

amEr •

•=•

MICC

a

I 1.1

'5

1.11 ' 8

a

1

II•IIIF •I

Ili

r

I a hi

1111

in I 11 i ii

a

I

r IP

III

d'

I Au 1.11.11 Now

hip

11111

P 11 1 10 1 II

!Mum' I I II

a

Vail gimp 1111101.1

•

II I

'3

1.1WrE TM •

a

a

P

rTM FIT ! :II zu IT

I I'M 1' la •

7.

I •

MIN

i

'11. LIAM' 11.

1."•

a

1114111111 e

gni? mad

' 1" 1.11 AV 11.

a

a

•

I PIN •1

•

• •

• •

.1

mL •

••

I•••

I

•

C.) The City of Edmonton PLANNING DEPARTMENT TRAFFIC RESEARCH CORPORATION LIMITED

a division of KCS Limited 20 Spadina Road Toronto 4, Ontario, Canada Telephone WA. 4-3381

January 29, 1963

Mr. Geoffrey C. Hamilton, Commissioner of Planning & Development, City Hall, EDMONTON, Alberta.

Planning Department The City of 1:La.:wawa

Dear Mr. Hamilton: We are pleased to submit herewith the report on our study of relative transit usage in Edmonton.

The work carried out during the course of this project was in accordance with Stage 2 of our letter of proposal dated December 5, 1962.

In order to arrive at estimates of patronage of the proposed Edmonton Rapid Transit System, we have made a detailed study of the factors which influence Edmonton residents in the way they chose to travel to work. We hope that the results of this study will prove useful to you in the process of the design of the Rapid Transit System.

We are most grateful to you, and to Mr. D. L. MacDonald for providing the data required to execute this project.

Yours sincerely,

1

H. G. von Cube Vice President HGvC:bmw Enclosure

7-22_ -ro‘L

_

,P. 4 -!L / _

I

I 1:0 p 1 I I ._ I 1 VII

-_ - .

--.-'

: I i_ =. _

-

_ _

'

7/7.3 0:1 Traffic Research Corporation

ii16- 'City of ;j_

Ecirm-, 710,1,-

DEPAtril7V;i:IVE

ESTIMATE OF USAGE OF THE PROPOSED EDMONTON RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM Table of Contents Page 1.

INTRODUCTION

2.

ESTIMATES OF PATRONAGE 2.1 2.2

3,

••

••

2

1980 Travel Mode Choice in Edmonton Passenger Volumes •• •

•• 1 •

3 4

.•

4

••

EDMONTON MODAL SPLIT RELATIONSHIPS 3.1 3.2

Factors Determining Choice of Travel Mode..

•• Sources of Data .• •• •• Travel Time Ratio • • 3.2.1 Travel Cost Ratio •• .• 3.2.2 •• Service Time Ratio • • 3.2.3 •• •.

•.

Economic Status 3.2.4 •• Observed Travel Mode Choice in Edmonton 1961 Determining Modal Split Relationships 3.3.1 Observed Relationships •• 3.3.2 •• 3.3.3 Comparison of Modal Split Relationships 3.3.4 Extrapolation of Edmonton Relationships •

3.3

4.

1

••

••

a

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS..

•

•

•

A

e•

Illustrations (see list of illustrations) APPENDIX - PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF USAGE OF THE PROPOSED EDMONTON RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM Illustrations (see list of illustrations)

4 8 9 9 10 11

11 11 12 14 14 15

;

-

T WW4'5iL7.x- Jlir r1 i _

.0?-1.:3•11

cfr

44

.

Fi fr"4-g

C601-11:11ki -Uk

.17

(t

T r y • - j 9-E fikinurs

refiksuzp 1:13-3-!nrcorl_-Ritnit 1r -7, ¶ - Jr!zi

J-1-'4 -61•1 C-01:1 4-

r

ci_,)

ri

z

'47f*

flJ 1--_ • 7%-ut L 13.r-hey Fro*--coArD.r{c-s

•

vc)ii.ca.puteak

Traffic Research Corporation

List of Illustrations

Figure 1

Expected Transit Share of Work Trips in Edmonton, 1980

Figure 2

Map of Analysis Zones

Figures 3-8

Modal Split of Work Trips based on 1961 Edmonton Data

Figure 9

Comparison of Edmonton and Toronto Modal Split Relationships

Figure 10

Modal Split of Work Trips based on 1961 Edmonton Survey Data and Data of other North American Cities.

Illustrations (Appendix) Plate 1

Proposed Edmonton Rapid Transit System

Plates 2a, 2b Design Speeds on E. T. S. Rapid Transit Plate 3

Edmonton 1961, Local Vehicle Speed Contours

.;_

. F_,T`•7

bT

- ' L_;

P

r

iii :

'I -3, 7"i '

•

74

,

17,17.rz

ckg3corT

•.,

u a I .L•

T 7 '7,- =J ..!

ciLTJ

V-7_111.1-. ).J‘FiKj

_ L:i_,

•

' '17- A,S;)

• -; DT"- •

•.y.1

r

&t

e

Tq

j

I

1,:1-,76:0,

L_J

AoL,

y4 T

nq 1/4-3 o

; -

•II TL.oJl

T4341) 3

7.1.r

-- T.

• I'E'

_

7T:

Traffic Research Corporation

ESTIMATE OF USAGE OF THE PROPOSED EDMONTON RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM 1.

INTRODUCTION

Submitted in this report are revised estimates of the transit share of work trips destined for downtown Edmonton in 1980, The estimates are based on observations of travel mode choice in Edmonton and in other North American cities. Since they are based primarily on transit usage actually observed in Edmonton, they differ from the preliminary estimates reported in the Appendix, which were based entirely on data from other cities, In this case, observations of travel mode choice in other cities have been employed as corroborating evidence, and have been guide lines in the extrapolation of trends observed in Edmonton.

1961 Origin and Destination survey data for Edmonton, and supplementary information regarding the transit system and the general economic status, were analyzed during the course of our study. The findings of the analysis demonstrate the relative importance of time, cost, service, and economic status in travel mode choice. They show that time and service are the major determinants, while cost is less important.

Nevertheless, it is observed that the sensitivity to service shown by trip makers increases as the transit trip becomes more expensive relative to the trip by private car.

The estimates of patronage are reported in Section 2 of the report, and the procedures of derivation are discussed in Section 3. The techniques used involve the analysis of data reporting how people actually

:r •

Traffic Research Corporation

travelled, and are similar to those developed for the Metropolitan Toronto Planning Board and extended for the National Capital Transportation Agency to explain travel mode choice in Toronto and Washington,

D. C. respectively.

We wish to gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Mr. D. L. MacDonald and his staff of the Edmonton Transit System, who provided the necessary background information for the study.

2.

ESTIMATES OF PATRONAGE

We submit the following estimate of the transit share of work trips destined for downtown Edmonton in 1 980.

Between 55 and 65 percent of the workers employed in downtown Edmonton can be expected to use the proposed Edmonton Rapid Transit System.

The assumptions employed in making this estimate are similar to those described in our preliminary report, which is included in the Appendix.

However, they have been modified somewhat in view of more recent and more complete information available. The primary basis for making the estimate is the observed transit usage in Edmonton today, supported by observations made in other North American cities. To avoid reiterating what has already been stated in our preliminary report, we will discuss here only those assumptions which have been altered.

Average transit speeds were changed from 22 miles per hour to 17 miles per hour, to account for the change in specifications from high performance equipment to PCC-type equipment. Automobile running times were traced in detail from each trip origin to each downtown destination, and thereby eliminating the need for the blanket penalty of five minutes on bridge crossings.

2

pErtla-F-1C AZ% 2- 4 Elit0

Tug [var. izr 2._ 1/2 i ? ;17u-CAT ft'

z_

• f1 A-L e L }Id:

fa.

TrA--'4.rr V.-c.1•11 E"J ry

çir.urmcb

gal 4.0)i in, I

Lisuce

porn -

.•

; oz.

Ir

:-14-13 Fr u %i7C13 1 4 "1.4 " -L3 Lk; g“trorr i

-pkbp udiT2'nfgA34-6

nbc , -r-, e

w urc.3

Lnuirralt DLL,.

wribs r

i•

VAGLRtu

p.trtt

Lt_r_T3 71;

cy-l-reGq

bvt

Lu.ryci

plep

F.-daL rn IAI

ri.araubp u.4.7 4 i2i.prl

Llzst.51.1•

pV*0 MG9

L,t;b1-1 r n r,r41-5 qp!ctrsti j'c rtopi Oro fi G

743711:71-6 tIJ arFfS L. L-4.0 L41..1

Ci

re

WS

r7W-r7

cp7 A.'

1-al

TC) in,ihiel itk

rc,, • j : I

perpvorpv - ire

iTucrl#

C

S

J'

L1L

.4ruWI; Vhb.CLiCrpM

r

'Fr.r.

id, fs.:1_qr•Fla

.3 CAT

• 2,Jibit:4.c•-q- !kr

6.L1.0 •

ryi

er,74,hirr5

4:1 g}7

Ji

t9-c 01 pakoz,fe rt.rb

LC 1 , -.E.IVC 12

r1Y1..""aC

-

>71

,i..f7.1111;114 3.17kt-1:UL

ag p7

4-:2 Or_ ciir

wos _sp7.01.•

j_1.73:r.9 f ?Az ,-_Me+' Argo bf..0:14.1444

5i-LaRrtrTurig jbp. t

13F

Lip x..!r_TTI

73r•JIE:.

151/113rirt VO9:-.4 giln7 aar_0‘ oty as

1

g r.wAsfireqs

-;

z

c... mr -rirk Lye- .rr

1413 arilio.ion- :::^,qi-o-c_ru

kart

1.3_11?1(4-0P ryir‘

• 11 41) :1 a -4 ri- .4•1 LT ç

r-49t firi:

u. Gatb 1'1

ir.r2gX AIM103/0

,vh;,

TN.711JErv. , .7

A R

:Fs UCcAHREr"..r..A

Prr L0-

,77

Ti - +.1.1

Vg 311.a3f1:01.

e-g

ni!

8LL1.

po , Li

j_pe via

riecrwms of

TST _1/1 tip

174.

14.13d1 1 -0 OL'. WO-

e:a I..Txrc.-Li

clrGLErcElig'

nil

COUZI*Orn

CIr1 ir“-+ .jtii

•

9 Eig Sag triVis-,L

;0 1, 474 141G

IV? /1,Pfybr-q

per irpr: FAO-04

r.

C" ZUltrira-C:crASTIL•

Its•ty abiLtr§-grov obi

azic-X

OLOVick

Traffic Research Corporation

The estimates of transit patronage are based on the assumption that today's road speeds will be maintained in the design year. For example, the speeds on the bridges were taken to be: 32 m.p.h. on the Groat Bridge, 13 m.p.h. on the High Level Bridge, 16 m.p.h. on the 105th Street Bridge, 23 m.p.h. on the Low Level Bridge, 20 m.p.h. on the East End Bridge.

The average automobile service time was reduced to 4 minutes, thereby eliminating the 2 minute "unparlcing" time at the residential end of the trip. This is a more conservative figure and it is in better agreement with values used in the other North American cities.

The average income per worker in 1980, is estimated to be between $5500 and $6000. This figure is expressed in 1961 constant dollars and is based on an expected 30 to 50 percent increase in constant dollar income per worker.

2.1

1980 Travel Mode Choice in Edmonton

It is estimated that between 55 and 65 percent of trips made by those who work downtown will be made on the proposed rapid transit system.

This estimate is based on the premise that a convenient ride will be offered, which will be almost comparable to that of the private automobile. For example, there will be at worst a 3 to 1 ratio of the transit to atiomobile service times. Depending on the residential location, the trip time will vary between being the same time as an automobile trip and being 25 percent longer. The out-of-pocket cost of a transit trip will be approximately onethird that of an automobile trip.

Figure 1 demonstrates, for the travel conditions described, how probable, usage is related to the ratio of door-to-door transit and automobile

o

Traffic Research Corporation

times. The shaded area of the curve indicates what variation in the percent usage is possible. A description of the derivation of this relationship is reported in Section 3, 2.2

Passenger Volumes

The estimated passenger volumes are shown in Table I. They were obtained by applying the value of the minimum and maximum usage, as given in the graph of Figure 1, to estimates of total work trips, which were reported in the "Digest of Report on the Estimation of Edmonton's Future Population, Employment and Projected Employment Trips" prepared by Mr. D. L. MacDonald, Superintendent of the Edmonton Transit System.

Because workers in Edmonton are more conscious of time than their counterparts in other cities, the percent transit usage is remarkably sensitive to small variations in travel time. Small differences in time ratio, due to slightly better transit coverage close to the downtown area, manifest themselves in noticeably higher usage by residents of zone 1 than by residents of zone 2 of the same sector.

3.

EDMONTON MODAL SPLIT RELATIONSHIPS

3.1

Factors Determining Choice of Travel Mode

The Edmonton Modal Split Relationships developed as part of this study show in quantitative form, for work trips, how the propensityb travel via public transit is related to four basic determinant factors. The relationships are based on analysis of the data of Origin-Destination (O-D) Surveys carried out in Edmonton during 1961.

The four basic factors considered are:

trin-z psait. xcco-3.d

a1.

!.tc: 90z_ize

qc 017r ;Li T::.:1000-1.

Lrl.priCtiitaplbV. :t

p-,:asq ;..1

Jr-? 15

pArinrc

tE4TACkr fit'pn

(.-01.0)

4 Td rAn-Fr -L p -, '

G tug spi.)/AJIJ di--DruT,14-5-s!..Ne T--'-" 1 -0 1114 xx A, LT!'.." 1 Jr ID

syr- 12,(TY..L.Fxdiaix);:,

i(A;rrtirri33-.i2T.IfE.T.! [1-41Arr1134., 1 r

vegker

rtat4;icarritu:de

f

MYD'Vr s

4..Goqtisr-ra Jot

Tr'LLrzre.ITOPi?Hrizt?

41-10.t

ilMUSXGRi r.-;G7.33 .20r.i%E.s pr

Bet.T O

(ritueA zr.%L lffLUERc =VC I 610112

17:1 Q'T.rkrcTil- JP , 41. c.s:.

X,Z401

4"il

4-0

.111T4T1' 1141f•Ihriroll'aP.

r

Avy tU afQ

r.LIG LN-4/4.)invIl Virguars 124be,,

vUti

45J

p-requiqpIDL7 c

Lip 01. ,

F. E

To

i.'3prs r

r.

pe.-r..,ptew

SreC y 1 bovralpog y cisecrqbr..x.0

Jap

s-r ! warn FM Rra GI I

I- AO t Y El*

brg *2

laiplasOu

-B

050.1:10:zrom,i_

. 051,oxle cmb.R 4 -0:47tcp wirg

1-&-raq pl WhinkTrill rpr-? Asrp-re-

ritiru1€2-ci

ariat;

OT.G CZOiyacip, :re-* Vt rpJlr

Lacotr-.. bi2arrivrw1:31 X ;Sri

?- 117 42270.

hg.T.c.,11p,

kil„,„.5-mr,g-qpk 1.4 4- t r•

aka loW

101....trcti -•i_CT

AriPALLGu-".,

WI

4r, vocAprrt2

r.(91!.. r_i;.

evega-ti exxo- occ

coi. giazIA..prlou 1:kla;pro

RATE X:p3

p

jp6i- Jactx

Traffic Research Corporation

Relative travel time via public transit and private automobile.

Relative travel cost via public transit and private automobile.

Relative excess travel time via public transit and private automobile (also known as relative level of service or convenience).

(4)

Economic Status of Trip Makers.

These factors were chosen as a result of earlier studies in Toronto and Washington involving multiple regression analyses, in which were studied the effects of a large number of variables on the propensity to use public transit. The four factors listed above were selected as having more independent significance than any others studied, andwereconsidered to have statistical significance great enough for traffic forecasting purposes.

Usually there are more than two vehicular modes of travel available to most trip makers in urban areas. The division of these travel modes into two main types, public transit and private automobile, is significant, because of the fundamental differences in their properties. Public transit is characterized by fixed routes and schedules, while the use of private automobiles is accompanied by great freedom of choice of routes and departure times. These differences in flexibility and convenience have a marked effect on relative usage, which manifests itself clearly in the relationships described in this report.

Detailed descriptions of the four basic determinants which influence travel mode choice are included below:

5

tiTAX-rff=•tr

AFF '5001 i7,3V-Vilt OVartr;Fi

U.)

010S, trihorilq ktfl ilattst$ twildUct

5ecr:--1

tievritri4

as

oiichrq

vititsPi.M

fro on-if oats) -didorriodura .(e,imirravnco 7 CI N

(S)

has tiaciwA.1 9a 30 isvol fecii 0,r11,0-8 ,5frr,roaor-.0.

J:xileDer,r(0-T cu Lbt.ria 1.-•tte1`f7SEI ti-TOW bAv 111

factitiora

VI/ 1 a t-r

'Dpattas-3s1a3

*krEptif-A7J0. DI'ASV

taw, ra

ge frwt (M1

OW.t 1'141

TT

skpAril ifrz

7.4f,,rm

1,enr

a 'a' 0,1 r

eitstg

L; -.0 •1..i21 yntite 13 Li

C7Z717,1: ttiTtiNtEfrrctirh3

s

Eter

3e-orrs

fliBITT Vri airfs

e-z-17.skieaLL-3.'ilis, .kin:ierm.boulz

i rci ic

to E .11.24)7 =Ad

fl sifd,besiTz.+7iksislia d Irvtaocitt-co-Ne. al atiliackri-oniA

fr+f,

.orti v(-,i

41,6az-xl

Lci ilefx,4--o

1--

..3-purt

dT

j...n3

1! -t b:11/

jj

sista' b3ibuta

ftErti 9-iirsaibriAira irrektneK]eibtri

bt' ri Itive.73 3Pntir

-511.,1v.i lc! lir,

v.ca

-[

tlarul 7a 2 'E.tikt-

f

41103VILKU ENV bfl 5

-1-fcrinua --)rzi At; lo

N--ifecrecio7q rLI rro

bAr71-.111371,70117)115

0 P4151 a a rrr

f: fit? a OA%) .9 iii

trua-,/

1ae4y.lt:

grilli,z:e 114 INN:CPI:9a

(4 )

C+

Nil/1AT

•i-.! i.,16111- :in;

c4;. -- zu

.a5 mit 57 ul Nrrth

AC! tlenn-

Ep3 -41zirr

r.idi /31 .45 dJ11-,41iearlabelaT RI! YE-tliar153.11 -1i.t d

-

çjji

Ev5116,INCJ

11- A 12:1A ‘aTs

&1&)(r 1-ii ii

Traffic Research Corporation

(1)

Relative Travel Time

Relative travel time is expressed as a time ratio: door-to-door travel time via public transit, divided by door-todoor travel time via private automobile. The door-to-door time consists of two components, a running time and an excess or service time.

(2)

Relative Travel Cost

This variable is also defined as a ratio: the out-of-pocket travel cost via public transit, divided by the out-of-pocket travel cost via private automobile. Transit travel cost in this ratio is defined as the total fare paid during the trip, while automobile travel cost is defined as operating cost (gasoline, oil, lubrication) and parking cost. Automobile depreciation, licensing and insurance costs are not included, on the assumption that most automobile drivers do not consider these costs in connection with each trip made by them. Travel costs via private automobile were considered for this study to be divided evenly among all occupants of an automobile, based on the cost sharing which usually exists in car pool arrangements.

(3)

Relative Travel Service (Convenience)

Obviously, a number of factors affect the level of service offered by each mode of travel. Among these are a clean bright appearance of the vehicle, a pleasant view from the window, a reasonable temperature within the vehicle, a comfortable seat,

31G;i.T

r ovisEis

6-trr isiv iLt .14,

ri

t:PRRROTCPti.

Jays-1$

gisg

orsb yd bablvib Ji1 31.1citrq sky sr:Li-tin:v.1yr? la1/42.--ol-voolb 4 toob--ca-gionb 5-ra •.-Jlictoraolos 03L-tifIc,

Isvgvi Ittob

s t aimAngrcsto owl la tisisaoa

x-4:1 saumcs as bas

i1 93

1000 I3vg7T svilsieS 19,1Jog-lo.tuce

iJr

i

ioL oatc, al

JvvzS 1,$)b-oq..1cf-luo rfi yrif>-...hivib Ea ril

i ems

na .-t Ewa

' alido-racthto

etta

Zthi sr tc 1-v-rrzt

.,liclorricAus stsvl-ari 6.1-v te03 !)./5.&q, .5-751 Istot tz.rit

irw q1-11

ASPZ1 :C/C, as besiii6b zl /sou tavAIS.

,iio 4 Dait•it isg)

birs 411±2.(11)-il

.1t.01 grii;17,2q E.-as

LTOilflaLLJESEE 51II nü ,B9,61.11D-rj

Ssatti

fitiw rtioit:, FraiToi (Ti j1 j

yliquev 4

1•417s-fr

bobivib u4

atacl'), ept-LL-nisni

iJ '1'5b1ervo3 Ics.a ob

atsvrzq Lis gar:1ms

bartilab

.trz5rEt

.41/4:lorrzo1.us 011)E2 (*mt riDsv

tit ybizJe ardi xobtesobiaaa Nzti.Ar

rTi r b

i4

E,Lc1 .rLOjLLA rus

a3n4qtra-io

,.2117-0-.A.rat.1-irtal 11; io Lag Isa al aiaLve 16vsa aviliaqh VC) Ir 1,Nri _via 21)-A:tr. el Vtlithd Mr1'2

iEcrt: •)&511.1 y,proricF 3.rit

. Mot

.[1:1c1-.±-,:d.r.nut-.)

10 • Al G7.1

14-Lse.s34 i f3lriPkv

jri i,,ria.r.PLNi'lril_11 Io

B5711110

1idev &dt ooaxt.entsegrqs

rarti,-,.1 wx.itislaq4:1,1 kakcis..ft.a.sat

Traffic Research Corporation

uncrowded conditions, a smooth ride, flexibility of departure and arrival times to suite the desires of the travellers, and convenient transfers from one vehicle to another if this should be necessary.

Many of these factors cannot be easily expressed in quantitative terms, and therefore, are not included in these relationships.

For our purposes, the relative level of service has been expressed as this ratio: the "excess time" when travelling by public transit divided by the "excess time" when travelling by private automobile. Excess time is defined as the time spent en route but not actually riding in a vehicle. For public transit, this is the sum of the time spent walking from the point of origin to the nearest transit stop, the time spent waiting at this stop for the transit vehicle, the time (if any) spent transferring from one vehicle to another during the trip and the time spent walking to the point of destination from the nearest transit stop. For private automobile the excess time is the time spent walking to or from the parking place at origin and/or destination, plus the time spent parking or "unparking" the automobile at either end of the trip.

(4)

Economic Status of Trip Makers

Economic status is expressed as the median income per worker.; It might be expected that increases in income would increase the elasticity of demand for transit. Prosperous people expect good service for their money, and will tend to avoid a transit system which does not provide it. However, high income -7-

Traffic Research Corporation

is not necessarily a deterrent to transit usage, provided time, cost and convenience factors are competitive between public transit and private automobiles.

Stratified time ratio diversion curves, showing the relationship between mode choice and the door-to-door travel ratios for each level of cost ratio and economic status, were derived from survey data of Edmonton. The sources of information are briefly outlined in the next section 3.2 and the relationships are described in section 3.3.

3.2

Sources of Data

The following were the main sources of data: (1)

Origin and Destination work trip data summaries from the 1961 census.

(2)

Maps showing the geography of the city and location of major transportation facilities.

(3)

Maps indicating average travel speed on city streets during the peak periods.

(4)

Transit route maps, schedules, and station-to-station transit operating times.

(5)

The interim report on a parking survey of a "Metropolitan Edmonton Transportation Survey Data Report".

(6)

Survey information reporting the average worker income for each traffic assignment zone or district.

The above information was analyzed in order to determine the 1961 transit usage by workers travelling to downtown, and their relative trip time, cost, service and economic status. The area of Edmonton was divided into approximately forty analysis zones, each containing one or more of the original traffic assignment zones of the Metropolitan Edmonton 8

.(71

FF."

rOV!

;

-.-.:161,2_,..xiz'Jgri;

L

.r

' r[Yr

:

z

•ot•Q[. ,.,

• - Li..

•yErFid'I

-0,.ir

f_i•

-

13'.

1-,1

L.

r

fT•

r‘r

4 1 V!!

L

tricorn

t

,? -61

,I =.111.

-

,

'

.1

d • erLd,;:-_

: 1.. it

I

T t7cf.7.1.411,

D 'F.tz

e'

L

1,

.;

-•L

-

14 r

Lr'r

j, IL

C .O rP .

r. .1— T:7_11(. , , LLJ1J'

'ET

'

FAJL7 LI

t

rirq Dr- LJI

'

fAT- flIT

37c,;

,•zIr r,[1.

6• -J

1[":4- Lr rr ,..

. I,

'

,

. 31,

r s

Ur 07V

L

!UT

L

L_.f

74.,Fif;s$

7- -117 CI 71.14u

pQ.C 4V,-, PCIJ 7_1. T4

'17; ! • •

74.

(31T-; , J.-1.

I"Grf

+Jug - T-14-4 CLC-

11:6 Ur .C.r

li

It+

,I .

:Li..

P

4.

crr - -

ft

' teeclii:un Lr-.;

rf -Jr -, •

V--: 4.-rr

!]- .,

5- ' 71-4-:•A

LJ

Traffic Research Corporation

Transportation Survey. Figure 2 demonstrates the connection between our analysis zones

and the traffic assignment zones. All data for

work trips to downtown (zones 0001-0007) were summarized on the basis of origin and destination zones. The transit usage was determined for each origin and destination pair from the summarized data, i. e. the number of transit trips divided by the total number of transit plus automobile trips.

The four determinant factors were derived from the data sources (2) to (6) listed above.

3.2.1 Travel Time Ratio The running time and excess time components of the door-to-door travel time were calculated for each origin and downtown destination interchange. The running time component for transit was determined by summing the scheduled station to station operating times of a likely transit route. Automobile running times were calculated in a similar manner, by summing the travel times on each road section of a likely auto route., They were based on average speeds observed on the Edmonton roads in a 1961 traffic survey.

A description of the excess time follows in section 3.2.3, as the excess time is included in both the door-to-door travel time and the service time ratios.

3.2.2 Travel Cost Ratio Transit fares in 1961 were set according to the fare structure of the Edmonton Transit System, i. e. at a rate of 13 per trip. Automobile travel costs consisted of an operating cost which included fuel, oil, and lubrication costs, and one-hall the daily parking charge. The out-of-pocket -9-

-===

-

II

p.

n

E

•

Prosiar

WI 1-_F17:7-

Thillowe olgti WIMP MEIN imam Ammo rig% IR vim rDi trim TR Help 6111 1114 rowittaNI FL

AidroziwegagaTR Th l

Wm% pp; En

'i

In.bidawfishn DM MIMI MN lipfem 141100 • 7

-

07116 NOE IR WES Olidiffi MR MAIM ag FOG INIMMINP 1,461

60 Owl **MIN IP tot

REMO Fig &AA F144

kW. P•Adgefffi

jii. ,hoti;risi Miro

MAP APE &gibs 41Ir AI% 1:+4

Fr Fri 17 miko

IF

r_.

-•-•

Distre maw onair coso pyt

tglierrek 10114111 NEI

•

-•

1114 s

1Pt Lalair4 hriu WarihNo tem sing arg

t-.

II

Itraljn 111111

""ri irrrP4r 1111 I MAW

02~1"DPIIMIA r

I

RAW% np a

"10.44

tit, 7.

-

I 11450 Massimo gpl

Li

•57,,

-"Dia,NRb 157014 WM WORE Ow gelk

fa,

EMI

efilegt IA At GIM violaA

FI L

PRIgnian Bulb 14" dam 'NENWMPII01 Mei 1

41•14r %11 gifdo - fri

,q I

—

-

I1

".

•

<,

-!“

'

I

I

Traffic Research Corporation

automobile costs were divided by the average automobile occupancy rate of 1.35 people per car. Fuel costs were calculated on the basis of trip length and average speed of travel, at a cost of 40 per gallon of fuel.

Oil and lubrication costs were figured at the rate of $2.00 per month. The average auto parking costs were obtained for each downtown zone by reviewing the inventory of parking places, the average rate of utilization and the parking fee. The parking rates were estimated to be the following: metered curb parking at 5 per hour, customer lot parking at lq per hour, and commercial lot parking at 15-2(4 for the first hour and 10-15 thereafter.

Each cost ratio was obtained by dividing the transit fare by the one-way auto travel cost.

3.2.3 Service Time Ratio The service time ratio is the ratio of excess travel times. Transit excess times were determined after a careful review of the transit routing and scheduled headways. Walking times in residential and downtown zones were based on estimates of the average walking distance to the nearest transit stop. Waiting and transfer times were calculated as one-half the scheduled headway time of transit routes in the origin zone and of the transfer routes completing the connection between the origin and destination.

The waits and transfers were based on a likely route or combination of routes connecting each origin and destination zone.

The automobile excess times were estimated to be 4 minutes at the work end of the trip, and negligible at the residelitial end. The 4 minute - 10 -

T •1

.SIAV

r.

r.L 11-0

-1

L3'

rt

,11-r

I-

4V•7

-L;

4_:_pp.of

- 73 , Pr rDZI

p

211:3'ai

1.12

e

R.t

r

..r 1 T.,.1

4-

2z

vp). 2 ,

t_

Ctiii

LIL

443

fi3:10 HT_ 4

.ru l -4;

P

.11 -W4:4•-•:1( 51, 4

2! '..."..2(11-It

J r,.r 1 r'-'•

4. rr,J73

/ ilia.

-

L:F.-

•L rt-T-AT

1•Ys...{

Jii

;

LYE

C

q 4/4

'7.Ek

C - 1-r. I

c.

77,3La

ic•KAIGi!

•qr

1:2 (Pc [.,•., r)

J-L1

10.-/fIca; !.•

LIjr 1'

Lg1Jilitc

r!it

r

• ..t r.'../kA ' I

pX

GIG

_•

Lu; Li •,L1,,] ! '1, 2- .-4 LI,

Ui

jc.r.

VLui i)•- •rvi.

tC., i=orn

t 11,i) -I! • LI.

73-

p_3 1

irri4b

= „Tug

r

pr: Ave

I ; c.

pr d-rit 0

v

t 1,

caboc..:1

b'.-L7 bfc

.-awsrpjf_414 ?

C

.; A t e•Pi:

t, ao, -

4.k

rju

LIU...T. LV)M13 IVO-114

• -1-!1

I

-tor t cioATErt,:

1.1c !TIC b.-c.-41 ;F-r - 241- E7gs YfGor rg

:•Prl '. • It,:p_LiN

OttL6

E __

j jjE

• ro

LEQ-6

3 ICAbc. 11t7 Qt Vtc.r

srp_frpoil

imt-5,*r4".-V -,.,ffic.-spLr-prp:, • g, •

•

art' Ewe:

hdpi

Q- • r•:-••• .•••••

Traffic Research Corporation

figure agreed closely with the time used for Toronto, and included an â&#x20AC;˘average 3 minute walk to parking lots, and a 1 minute allowance for parking or "unparking" an automobile.

3. 2, 4 Economic Status Average worker incomes were derived from the income data of the Metropolitan Edmonton Transportation Survey, and from a special One Percent Census Survey. The average income for each analysis zone was classified into the following five income categories: $0000 to $2900 $2900 to $4500 $4500 to $5900 $5900 to $7100 $7100 and over These income ranges were adjusted to reflect the differences in the purchasing power of the dollar (consumer price index) between Edmonton and Toronto, and are therefore approximately 5 percent below the Toronto income levels.

This means that a salary of $2900 in Edmonton is equivalent to a salary of $3100 in Toronto, and income levels are expressed in constant dollars of the Toronto base in order to permit later comparison of Modal Split Relationships.

3.3

Observed Travel Mode Choice in Edmonton 1961 3.3.1 Determining Modal Split Relationships Three of the determinants were divided into the following contour ranges: (1)

cost ratio is divided into four ranges from 0 to 0.5, 0.5 to 1.0, 1.0 to 1.5 and greater than 1.5

(ii)

service ratio is divided into four ranges also, from 0 to 1.5, 1.5 to 3.5, 3.5 to 5.5 and greater than 5.5

(iii)

income is divided into the five ranges described in section 3.2. 4 above.

1'17' 4

7..Epv ,•,•

i•2

[

I"

r.zi./.4

L.9iEV;ES i_Ligi,- Lyciarl TA;

fr - :

'Tf re4

run

J.

e

cl- ao

C;

-

L -12 1EL-

,••

rysdri I '

traaw

crL-i: 3

if)

,

L7teile;

u_yro

f,:r [ f...,

• t_

Fr;.

1 _--

-

•••

- -Zi rj.1

_

Ceafii

•'‘

-• • -'•1• 71.

•-.1

ir—Lic t?171

411r! .

1, 01.C.AJCC.•

vr;

1 11 ,11-• -

• 1.4 . "IT

n;-

c

I

ic L

•

r'

r5.;;J'it v1•13,2131,bca'

-e1:714

11-TIP 3-1-11 6.6' a..

l'14131V,

Drk pi; lon,..e&y:

!I.

• 1•)i1 ( 1 C 0: r

IT,

:

4 E-E ' {-c/Tr-

!rrf

'

7_1"J

7-11..-• • ;

,Trrrxratrw-tAt,, so-

4:5

7 uirupg--,

LI

,-Lrq

6a

cp.731a-recifq -0LiQ b•2 3:Graff

!..E.-!.0.1

qgc.

UrLLJç.

VATALLSK4 +itLi

uliz-•

trJ

Vi

f_!4•11 M1'42

9 '4 CrWC,

-r F

ccr

orriv

titT

IT1 -91-NAneucin

1-.5.. JaviJA.P.st.r .'

aTIVT

4:144

15.9. 44Erg

ITEt 1

Traffic Research Corporation

These ranges were chosen such that they were identical with the ranges used with data of other North Amekican cities.

After the Edmonton data was stratified into the various cost ratio, service ratio and economic status categories, it was correlated with the travel time ratio. Curves were determined by regression analysis and were plotted showing percentage use of public transit as it is related to the time ratio.

Observations within equal time ratio intervals were grouped and plotted, and the total number of trips for each plotted point was listed.

Linear or curvilinear curves were drawn as the best fit through the plotted data. The curves generally agreed with the least squares fit to the ungrouped data.

3. 3. 2 Observed Relationships Figures 3 to 6 demonstrate the stratified Edmonton relationships, which show the correlation between the transit share of work trips and the travel time ratio. By comparing all sets of relationships as shown in Figure 7, the effects of time, cost, service, and economic status can be observed.

It is seen that usage is affected by changes in the time ratio. The usage of transit by low to medium income workers (economic status 1 and 2) drops from 60 percent at a time ratio of 1. 5 to 40 percent at a time ratio of 2.0. It is inferred from observations in other metropolitan areas that high income people will demonstrate a greater sensitivity to increasing time ratio.

- 12 -

F

1:11T- • •

Tiu

--

rg

'Sr l_r_r." • 3

-

Lf E

pletp

r_I,LA.6.-:11,,,_•;r13„,,-;?

n

E.L.Fr311.r:

(.31:

.1

F ,pA jUit.;_ 4q1.17.1ro

/A j.i k

co ml Bc21.4- '-z% ird

iv) g

fi-

Fs?,,

C

E ri:PLIgua

7 f wrif

iglt"LIT

TO'P .4

r!.o.i. 0:- zcFrIo .4

c , c-r.turr, ng,-!•gpi

•

rlir4 71-9 1:F7T p

LgTarg-rTreplL;

cL,

.•

7 2crrir s)

I

r..+Z,..11.173 42/1C

Et_ik c .4 .r.

e.

? •15 La:14rLr

4-11. 421-0.34;' I e:

1:1111TCp. .

17/401.:

_L.- •LueitL

WC !Jj

,;Lcg

Cru.ir_irgr-11.7 Lo;lb.lic,;521j!ba 4

_

-

q 71_ LI-D

r

;

Joiri7.oAL.E.Et. r714.7.4-i.,Toctr.4 tr) cro rixr.

brL

fp t;

ii.c

1 .C4

I.

.A.4,2

s'r

frt

FM.6 9-0%

or-It rrr":"P';

Op. ' • r-S-J' WU/

011,

res4 /31 fiff:

r

!csf

r

47111

MC,

LTjJ

vc—er lic 4,1,0f:els fra

ElorrEq

Iu itYr.fo

if.s.nfli.DGI Lixr

tpc ML-L'.

V44,

AL

ev_DialErX 1,

-411-lj .71 T.r4.J

L-14.113,)

VIVO- t

7.*

I 1: L-02• 'a ARS

C 1..01

I 1.1.Y.TpTze:

rig

1'U-1LT elc -Et ff. F-2

1,4 Li J_Tr_i -1 pi Lrati.

EC rtplit vercrifoi4ggis fr

Frirtti EUri:r.!.,_1

';

_aild a

-v-Lolpitvg

176 14q 104 rp 1-47411 E P-411-;-

rer

ygtOti

"mg

cf.-a.x.cralc-cr :ettft,J

,c,X7 !1.14/".- U.Y cc .5.J J...10 irk -F. b C. 1.57-11-el

fits4 .:4"

rp-ro;jWA

Ir!

'War Ora 4471.1 ---4:c

Traffic Research Corporation

Low to medium income people do not appear to be conscious of cost as long as the transit service is good. The same is true for higher income workers.

Sensitivity to service appears to depend upon the relative cost of the trip. Workers are more conscious of service when the transit fare is greater than fifty percent of the automobile trip cost, than when the fare is less than fifty percent of the automobile cost. The differences in the effect of service level are demonstrated by Figure 8, where transit usage is related to the service ratio. A similar sensitivity to service is inferred for high income people, although it is not readily apparent from the limited data. It is noted, however, that Figure 7 shows a 5 percent difference in absolute usage between the second and third service levels for workers of economic status 3. The 5 percent difference is significant, since the average usage is only 15 to 20 percent, and the remainder may be captive riders who have no alternative means of transportation.

On comparing the relationships for workers of economic status 1 and 2 with the relationships for workers of economic status 3, we observe a 20 percent difference in absolute usage for time ratios greater than 1.5.

This is to be expected, because high income workers are more time conscious than low income workers. However, on the basis of data from other cities, it is expected that high incorm people will use transit at a similar rate, provided the transit trip time approximately equals the automobile trip time, i.e. time ratio is 1.00.

- 13 -

r.Li_113 r4

i!rLrP-

Lzge$9'

C r ;11,{1

17 :12

Lrl

7, .4, C.:a:1_0=1,4

r

g-

ti: .,

r

-

•

If

• 4

•

hr .

Cf:" LC, I1r:r- .141 -,;1 ,

ea;

Li.

3

•k

••Nr Lp)3(1.64.

- i• etc,

t .17.74 c7 1.

, jc

:p •

•

7 -1 .

• 1

rL1L

•

fil-ft-} Fa r-13

qT,Tc-•,

r_rL

.13) -1

ip'-1

1 .11

's/

12.

acgaq•k

-

7

+6 I f

,;

C r (?

•

FT

r_ "

-

IT •

," •

7 I!

r

-

;

71144

•.;1

1

0,-,•L••

'140

• •--1 .

1-[';'"=-11 '• -

A-Le

I.,)b

1.-1,1411'

7i-rirL

Z..PJ

S

LrC

`Ja:

•

20,+'

-iL1 P_Li

LUC 1.1_17;._

- c, frirt;

• •,) p • j..pi; • Toro

r“4

V R3-11'fr-ri-

}3,M3 tucc-

z-•

407.1 ri 61J-1111z-r;. i

0,1k, Poi.c._-LL -

r

L-g.krE. f

-r- r -

a,rt

f

Et rrt

1-f-r

cj.0

=•_4 iffau

1.wFu

cx,ntivIr

kirc-!1,•ci

V 14..Fr C.CitrnAl: VOICE '41 41

€.*

vs

4..7 Ers..p

sr. -,,E1.•

LLT

c_

z _Q

frjt p rep 7. L

11.

-Zfr

1.7C

r

r-, jT ttT

1ir

ffrin

Traffic Research Corporation

3. 3. 3 Comparison of Modal Split Relationships The comparison of the Modal Split Relationships for Edmonton and Toronto is shown in Figure 9. It would appear that people in Edmonton are more time conscious, and their ridership is 10 to 20 percent lower in Edmonton than in Toronto for time ratios ranging from 1.5 to 2.0 respectively.

The reaeons for the differences are not obvious, but it is not unreasonable to associate them with different size of the cities; since Toronto has a population of 1, 600, 000 while Edmonton has 330, 000 people.

There may also be basic differences in the public acceptance of transit service.

Since the people in Edmonton are more conscious of time than the people in Toronto, we expect that the two usage curves will intersect at time ratios of approximately 1.0. This would mean that between 70 and 80 percent of low income workers in Edmonton would use transit, and 65 to 75 percent of higher income workers would ride transit to work when the time ratio is 1.0.

3. 3. 4 Extrapolation of Edmonton Relationships By comparison with relationships of other cities, the Edmonton curves were extrapolated in the range where time ratios were less than 1.5.

Figure 10 demonstrates the probable transit usage by workers with incomes ranging between $4500 - $5900. The relationship applies in the situation where the cost ratio is less than 0.5 and the service ratio varies from 1.5 to 3.5. There is a shaded area of the curve indicating the upper and lower

- 14 -

•

r

a

To c.0113N-c

.9 q Tpla eci.A.4ce 24610 ...L191,1611 WW1 sj_iVer 041 1

* pima cpc „oar

Ipc

IsrugrA p&p' z•Gv vto-Lo

4:17. iibb*It rug lomat

Trrq!k-Srar

Tzo'Y

ils•Lonjortt ringr

Li.vp 0171aiSTil 1-r1J

d

MC A-71 /1871.04

viriaxo pat. if1.01.10.1-721

ft !Ty' plc-dwelt

ru jJ zrui4 hIptoms melt Lnine te&it; 1-1--EIL ;FWD pr

r•171.40!e

tosjitrixtkon m7'11, Igrs-irsageFT13, rtt orgcx r.m.geh !pc: Etruseiagon

.,- E-Dret2foryir,cr

Equic.w.grr rT

e

Lin--.3) If2 ! • ei

it.

.1.1k5z. LE.r, To-1.

ao bc.r.Girr

ii

MC,

eiijq

LIC4311tir_ 1ST

laXTi..! firrii 1 I/

ur2E

-3:1; rqt1741:ii0L; :Ack.0-,y7 Ass trs-rETV sem R.2

e.

lir( re, la -70_

I,PTa 4V5M44

;1_,43 -r ti

MTN".

qc “.97132lir gcl 0.041f fi.pop opt

[ILL!' °•-

kçr1 rr V U-t

&rQ1

Mai P4PA 6‘”? O 12144 ark-': 9. 11413 Irttcc7.19

j 'Err,

rire crwrl? 01. MAPS arra Win

114:1_hrt4 6

Lp-s3.4;

mirk

0c, pis pi-k:Nr

ps ars bapps et.c4bpraca EYA rinfitfc

rl-Mrrilr&PLai

icrLcovra etri

131721 M1741G E%nlichu4"u Pe ll no Ci00 bcobro"

faricEetfUV-pfe fin 0 ,1r01:1-rfp2, ijrg •

itra JOL.

.re.),fp %;yEAC-3.r:ifg -cp

WAG [1:3T: 0-p.64911e' pne Fr r VrAr

L

abvt. won:A -

itquaribrou row uLoLacto SM. Ira

I'

rpre. cItTat!

IMIL12-6 COLT*

1-stIoe vivrtilful ta.cruz 2 go r 0

Me* v320- .47r7L. zqqcr.eittb Ts y 0 13 IQ btatervg rve-sz

isbtarlso p iporart.tw mtiato

Ir zharriq whbowx gywr bcarreytequotattpu

.L.Tra zotabinrRou a svG nocoil ) caugoarroen èj

rongwovivrbeoL VilAl.""t" iMrq ysr loilryto.unpfiski

Traffic Research Corporation

limits of the predicted usage at the time ratio 1.0; that is, between 65 and 75 percent.

4.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The estimate of 55 to 65 percent transit usage for work trips is based on the assumption that sufficient parking spaces will be provided to serve the residual auto traffic at the stated parking rates. In addition, sufficient road space must be provided to allow the increased number of motorists to drive at travel speeds similar to those experienced in 1961.

Our estimates are generally considered to be conservative, since they reflect the loading conditions on today's transit vehicles, and they reflect today's very favourable parking situation where people only walk an average of 3 minutes from the parking place to their work place and experience a 1 minute delay in parking.

More precise estimates of patronage could be achieved if additional survey data of the 1961 Census were analyzed, in particular, survey data of workers in the $5500-$6000 income range. In addition, an attitude type survey might be conducted by interviewing workers in the $5500-$6000 income range to determine their attitude regarding improved service and how it might affect their usage of transit. The survey could be of a market research type, similar to the Edmonton Transit System Survey conducted in April, 1961, by M.R. C. Limited, but it would concentrate only on a particular segment of the population.

A similar type of analysis of the travel mode choice of people who make trips for non-work type purposes, would be of interest to those planning future transportation for Edmonton. Approximately 50 percent of the daily -15-

LCUr!‘ r1:1tE:P g.

t-t-x4711.

:zie ,IFyr.

yez.-.61__Li—IF5

‘1P"21%1IP L

bar.E.4m5.1 -

"4.-•1-1:31.AV" “T_c

4-r.c.,

ti

•:-. -(1:1-;,,r- -a

:p

pofcei 0.; 1:_rtcr,jc.

i

-r

P 2' nr 1.f. c'1 -. T-L•`17-

1_, Fr

_kfLt::27-32.

Jolt. IT =1T-L f4:

tr-s2

QL0.1-1

qP,T Eq4)-'-`1)

ru-

+114 P . -,-r177-7

43.;•e.r-1-1_Fc

Cer .11-i!i 6 Jr

unb to5Arq E.71,1%;t4-04.

CC!

ft. ek

;-qt

itT

-0 LTC

L.1

P"-'

r'L

4.tai

Tr

•-

Z1

•TrriTc_rsql;

cp.

jJ

17-

-

;

--

n

.44 1= rt.,. 7.;_o

ikLu Tr51-,-PC. 911.4

r irCi .14

qx

1;_]..:

_0174.4 FWG

441.0k

t)J L QV411.1Mic

:.•Lr e 4',

•

b

71_1_,7 4

_rompo r,ustur 7114_1".L.btrI,E

yrp-

e-p-IjItG LE(

comer ri

1)-7',

Tj1

Eng jvc2,

—4 rp r,q

JJii:-•cal 1.340.K.143.go rro

ri-.1

,J1

:.!)

p-G. Er zii,-r1.-

LEr„r1

;Jo, Cibi',7;

cz

r....r.r1 I h.

rizIA*

t-rs 02.r.

AS'Aji

.!1_1

pi -:r.4,704- groia • ervi-Gicrt eb7c .7L

I pi..

-JJ- iJcU Ta !,Tt

ir-o

c1.013

pveog

VirlD 13' Vs.:0 IN IN

r

U-E-±47-1EGvr

i? IrPc r

Traffic Research Corporation

trips are made for non-work purposes, constituting a large market of potential transit passengers. The procedures similar to those outlined in this report could be employed to investigate the relationship between travel mode choice of non-work trip makers and the determinants.

A complete knowledge of the Modal Split Relationships of work trips and non-work trips will be of considerable value to the transit and highway planners of Edmonton. It can be used in both short term and long term planning, to evaluate the transit share of a total market of travellers as well as the effects of new pricing or service policies before they are implemented.

It is recommended that existing traffic assignment programs be modified to incorporate the Edmonton Modal Split Relationships. This modified assignment program would be most useful in evaluating proposed transportation systems in Edmonton. It could be employed to estimate the transit share, or automobile share, of a total market of travellers, and by doing so, assess the need for future transportation improvements such as street widenings, new freeway and new transit facilities with higher passenger capacity and speed.

By the application of traffic assignment programs, the planner can determine a suitable schedule of construction priorities to meet the growing need for new transportation facilities.

- 16

.3

LW.4r. VL-•P-T.r

T_T;rcri-c ir-Ga•

tiV inpflk_ 1r efiTrErf. rc_ rvic

C

1.z ot

fr.

b

VATE1J,T2

rot,FSC;_ri-Pr2: 4 TISJTO..

1 4-.= Flioefq_ug

47. a ;No

-1.-ailritt 11SI. ±juJrr L

CL'Ir-T:17 (Sr ' _'1411-r

MiT.Irj7 [1.51I161.

ri,!v

Wrep Ere

Pk.r.z 4.-1 '<it 4-1-trow4;12!jc

(II 5- ;1::.frW.Pi IN:.71 •

-2..2r731..ra

;T.Thrwillc-ti-Fr;Tolr

!_r00-Ti_Ttoci TeR7P.tLy4is-;.1,,,f

It c'lirrig pc c-Ltirijp-kklq

P.:.r-pf

i-c. --

; 1:1

iric WI.

LT-outerT Tu sav-pqrug bLtibockcf.1

Eq-Lo7mciar

r

CEL.U9 PJS

If re

4.1.1.Arqjc.L .2' srag to.

-1-213ET iiGT54.Kt-ia•

rt

IpTe

1.1.:tittLo-iu p€

713-ib]sioGini.q"

.

laft_i_pif of. ,)117.11: bx.1-Lpre at i_4;;_n_ft br.--,:,r/ va' Q wAsuirmrc ciAr mitvcst bis-Lap 3.3.s Dr Eglireuvr)r.i•

gtc

'c-

cv.T.tr

L11-4 k Z-1,11

•sr, f V f'J-11:•97,1cr.4

fiQ

pa• i

t-c,Tp-,I-cra.

p 1-_;.) 2

r 71.1 191'T-L 1 1. T..-

:LL!.

CTIfi

a_k rya fri- Jspfl ?bp; wir4Tor J /Zee.

4717 rp!).3

/LA Haze Via

TOrtg

NILO

wirq 1.rlittim&L lat ah-o.cy 41.-1-BR

.L.L7 ,,qs; F.7 r-r) fC CI 13CW tiS01.-rr4Lb umccts wati rir‘ <!ciivs.L-srlro-vgn•

1.21;:b .31 tT

1

jf. J:LG Ti.rab1o/4.4-gi

[

I-Dt.4-714IRtz. 'fru Ir.-k- r3onirprell nrIju

1;44 LaTr_rri tx-44.11-Ti p..113,- "'IA. 1.139'

'VOL

ityt1rTT771.

ijiE J:21 T-A--

rr(

Eix1 5ipz;1] 11-191. SI. Di

Traffic Research Corporation

TABLE 1 TRANSIT PATRONAGE

Sector - Zone Intrazonal Total, Zone 0 SW 1 2 SW Total SW

Total Work Trips Minimum Transit Maximum Transit to downtown Patronage Patronage ( 6,600) 760 11,740 12,500

( 4,290) 420 5,280 5,700

( 4,950) 490 6,460 6,950

1 2

Total

S S S

2,830 2,460 5,290

1,420 1,110 2,530

1,700 1,350 3,050

1 2 3

Total

SE SE SE SE

210 8,040 2,860 11,110

140 4,420 1,290 5,850

160 5,230 1,570 6,960

1 2

Total

NE NE NE

3,810 10, 390 14, 200

2, 100 5, 200 7,300

2, 480 6, 230 8,710

1 2

Total

N N N

3,290 5,760 9,050

2,140 2, 880 5,020

2,470 3,460 5,930

1 2 3

Total

NW NW NW NW

7, 480 6,390 3, 410 17, 280

4, 860 3, 830 1, 880 10,570

5,610 4,470 2, 220 12,300

2 (total) Total Interzonals Total Intrazonals

11,250

7,310

8,440

80,680 6,600

44,280 4,290

52,340 4,950

GRAND TOTAL

87,280

48,570

57,290

W

(

7z3Ja./1..-1=

•

lair al cuaincr.1,1 _ft 02.finequisq

•11‘ (_"A irdi

s coromifi

+1T At4

iti,her 41" 911r Lola T -^cVngiriai,

3.TriS

%Must?. .••••••••-.1.ira.m.

10e-1:y. I

ot a „A

te-

'dos

r ItLitu a al MI Vra

061-_ 0,14-4

,.11

0 "el'

'ORS. ik 00T le

trOZ ,S f "

fatal'

Et-tic- 4 f

a -JAI- a l

0 Elt ts

f

MO flat) ,E.

a

01 C ,1 ilt ,S

041P ,S Or,JS .?

S

'.. .Z.

IiigqI U CS el

0-11.1

U1S

1.) CA- i i•

Obi; ,8 tV8 ,:: 1:1- 11 , r i

I S Z.

.•_12 a 7. _•:.1 z

LIPS ,1

00-1 00S ,F1 0{1 r

az. „311 -a14 a Or .1E407

(2-RE irt:

rIP.1 tit a

1.

4.1 K

fl-S0

isonT

old i e Orth

wit!

E ArltiI, ,oT Int tr

441_svilA I P-

5

0-10:vi 1 t Was)

icatc, 4.1..43rd alarrorS,•rial Ig4121T

aAT OT flaASID

EXPECTED TRANSIT SHARE OF WORK TRIPS IN EDMONTON 1980 100

•a,, 41$ : 80

TRAVEL TIME RATIO DIVERSION CURVES

•••.

FOR WORK TRIPS MADE IN PEAK PERIODS

20

0 0.75

1 00

I 25

TRANSIT TO MOTOR VEHICLE TRAVEL TIME RATIO DIVERSION CURVE5FOR WORKERS WITH INCOME BETWEEN it5500AND16000 COST RATIO : SERVICE RAT 10:1.5 — 3.5 FIGURE: I

T. R.C. PROJECT 2011, JANUARY 1963.

I it

__ ._ ._ ._ ._ .___._._._._._...„.r._._.________ i

To 1331

I I

%*

i 1

I I

iI i

!

.1 --

OM 0821

071 • 072 1

i

i

1

1

!

)

i

(

i

i

L

I

\

i

‘

II

\

7731 086 i

088

\

I

\

i

\

I

I

I

I

i

I

I i

.—I

034 i

I

•

i-

!

I

I

I

‘

..-1

263 264

/ Se.

i /j*

006

I I

..i1 ----no, 002 1 k

l'—'1„,.

1 88, I

201 202

1

I

I

I

I I

1

k. !I. ...-------k,

I

i

i 1 —I N12 211 212 ) %

ç.

T I !

l I

--• 213 ' 214

-7771.

I

i 1

.--..c.._ 1 r'

r I

I

I

---—-.. ,

i

‘

/

./

S "---I NEW: —.

221 222

I

044 i

‘

./

i

i

!

f-----094 6g3

!

./

i 042\

I

)

0 1031

—i•-

4,

I

051

i

I

1

I

i

021 ./. ,

/.

I

I i

....

'EL_ . ._..------cs,Lii--.211 i

I

i

I

i

•

Li

./

I .!

!

!

I NN .

i

)11

I

I

1*.‘•

"h

Ogle/ Oy

0561 !

I 1 --1

./ / 152 1/53 / 154 155

026

r----' i

I I

/ ../.

!

i I

/

I

_._.1._._

1r

I

.

12,

1

•—•'....11 4

i

1

1

i

!

I

L'-i

!

...L. -1L......___,,,,.--..—...-1 ._....72 .i...___._._.7.r --- ._...

223; j 70121 _1 .......r.._iiff 247 \ . ! .......„,\ 1 MI 1

1

1

I

\• //

i // ../

237 %

EDMONTON MAP OF ZONES TO BE USED IN MODAL CHOICE ANALYSIS. SOURCE : E TS SURVEY IF DRAWING 12 , NOV 1962.

T R.C. DEC 1962.

SCALE ZONE BOUNDARY M TRAFFIC ZONES INCLUDED IN ANALYSIS ZONE.

Figure 2

TRAFFIC RESEARCH CORPORATION. 052011.

NMI WINN ME NW

1 .

Si WIN WM ill111 SIM

1

Sig

MK lila MIMI Mal, Pill MIK

MODAL SPLIT OF

WORK TRIPS BASED ON

(961 EDMONTON SURVEY DATA

TRANSIT S HAREOFWORK TRIPSIN%

100

80

TRAVEL TIME RATIO So

60

024

DIVERSION CURVES FOR WORK TRIPS MADE

L

IN PEAK PERIODS

3o o 10 340 40

\ 23

1

ix

NO. OF TRIPS SHOWN IN 10015 AI ....

LEGEND SERVICE RATIO

L3

L, : O. 0 —1.5 20

0

L1

I • 5 — 3-5

A 13:3 • 5 — 5-5 a L4 5• 5 — OVER 0

2

3

TRANSIT TO MOTOR VEHICLE TRAVEL TIME RATIO

DIVERSION CURVES ARE STRATIFIED BY SERVICE RATIO ECO NOM IC STATUS: 000014500(E1) COST RATIO FIGURE 3

0.4 — O-S (C1) T.R.C. PROJECT 2011, JANUARY 1963.

•

.. .•

Pi i

i :1.III I

-I

.,

;.

irr I .

II I• •• .1 5I .,

Id.

1 11

ir

1

I1

:

%

II

i•

I

1""11 I 1 I'llibi I 1 4. lel I,..'IoI . I. 1. 5'11:I is, u , 1:6 ... , ".. roil I • ji . r. • .e.

I 111:1F PP. 0., . : .:,. elk... . ' .. , -1.141 . 1 • . ., „I. I'

.

II

M

.... : .0 11

III ' .41II4 ir Ii

Ih I

I

II i

I•

.

1• I I I -

1 L% .. Lile. .,.., 1116e..:: r ,,.

.I. .

1Winire

6

i

I

Ili III

II

•. p

. .1,"1: Ill - . . ': i ' I 1104 1 I I1 - I

•

• ••1. ri

. ... .

I •

I . i ift .I I ' ill

..

, . . , .. '

I% I

I

Ii

- df

. IY. II I , I Is.

••=••p: .T

•

•

I

,11 • ,•

II

11111 ^ k 'I I , • I.II .

III I 1 111 : ? y

I

I I

I

I I 'H.

VI

I

1I I

:

I

9

I

6

II'11

•_ • L-•

I.•ir I 1•I I • II

' 1%-

.

,..

ill

%.

-

7P :

• •

.

11

r r

9

1

II

Y .

•.1 •oil, 1.1 ...1

....

•

-A

A I I : 1117I I" I , I 1 .% ris, 1i II 1 1 • IIi IiI -it -, .• • = = m ! !• I. i! • .c.

I .1.:5% I•

I-

•- •-I

WI • C I

I , I Trill II " I I • • II I'l l I di

1 1 .

_

• •

II

;7.

••

• •

••

•••

_

MODAL SPLIT OF

WORK TRIPS BASED ON

1961 EDMONTON SURVEY DATA 100

80 a..

TRAVEL TIME RATIO DIVERSION CURVES FOR WORK TRIPS MADE IN PEAK PERIODS LU

NO. OF TRIPS SHOWN IN 1001S

012

2 0

40

02

06

Lt A2

LEGEND; SERVICE RATIO

e4

• 9

1,

0.0 —1.5

A2

o Ll Ls

1•5 --3-5

• L

AS

• 14 : 5.5 —OVER

2 TRANSIT TO MOTOR VEHICLE DIVERSION

3

TRAVEL TIME RATIO

CURVES ARE STRATIFIED BY SERVICE RATIO

ECONOMIC STATUS40000-14500(E 2) COST RATIO FIGURE: 4

: 0.5 — 7-0 (CO T.R.C. PROJECT 2011 JANUARY 1963.

f

-

I

z

1

_

1

I

MODAL SPLIT OF

WORK TRIPS BASED ON

1961 EDMONTON SURVEY DATA 100

80

TRAVEL TIME RATIO DIVERSION CURVES

60

FOR WORK TRIPS MADE IN PEAK PERIODS NO. OF TRIPS SHOWN IN 100 /S

40

LEGEND: SERVICE RATIO Lz 20

o

0.0-1-5

O L2

1. 5 -3.5

A13

3 • 5 -5.5

• 14 5•5-OVER 0

2

3

TRANSIT TO MOTOR VEHICLE TRAVEL TIME RATIO DIVERSION CURVES ARE STRATIFIED BY SERVICE RATIO ECONOMIC STATUS:14500-5900(E3) COST RATIO FIGURE: 5

: 0 5 - 0.7 (C i ) T,R.C. PROJECT 201i JANUARY 1963. '

-

1:,

IC! '11

b•-r —

-

4-7

";:t 1.-

4 fri -Thr

•a-

-

_

sm-

-J-

-

.--1_ _

• , _—C

,.. v

__

It

__

-...r.

_._ ..

K M-

____

F -4 r----L,

-r-

7

--eT

>

-,•••

._

1:0

P.,-

_.. _

+4

-I.

pn

-

.._ , r---

11.4

•• F I. --..

L

-.I -il

-r

-

0

_

-, - _..

-E.-.- ,....., rrl.

L,L, c

,

_ .N

2

r1

;

4

--

-

f'd

A,--

-_•

[

,r , i

r__-

•

i

t

i

MODAL SPLIT OF

WORK TRIPS BASED ON

1961 EDMONTON SURVEY DATA

SHAR E OF WOR KTRI PSIN Z

100

80

TRAVEL TIME RATIO DIVERSION CURVES 60

FOR WORK TRIPS MADE IN PEAK PERIODS

NO. OF TRIPS SHOWN IN 100 / S

40

LEGEND: SERVICE RATIO : 00—I5

6

IA

0

o Li

1.5-3.5

A 1. 5

3.5-5.5

a L4

5- 5 —OVER

L3

2

3

TRANSIT TO MOTOR VEHICLE TRAVEL TIME RATIO

DIVERSION CURVES ARE STRATIFIED

By SERVICE RATIO

ECONOMIC STATUS: P1500-15900 COST RATIO

FIGURE: 6

:

0-5 — 0.7

2) T. R.C. PROJECT 20111 JANUARY 1963.

.

I1 :4,71

L._ '

rf.rr

•• ••.• •Fr141 1i•;Yi. ilder

d'

-.

!

-1

-' iT

"he..

Or.,0

'Affi,

-

•

r

-

5 i.1661.E.,I.

t II

.,1.11-4. e-Pe4 6. or I

4164 1410C14.

!P • 'fIrk‘..biC

I I

- — 4 -

_

Cl , i` r_A

' -••

—

ror

cp

!YID:

•

r

•

1

COMPARISON OF

MODAL SPLIT RELATIONSHIPS BASED ON

1961 EDMONTON SURVEY DATA

TRA NSIT S HAREOF WORK TRIPSIN%

100

80

TRAVEL TIME RATIO .

.

DIVERSION CURVES E2C11-2

60

FOR WORK TRIPS MADE IN PEAK PERIODS

40

E2 C2 I.2

NE.3 CI L 2 N N .

E2Ci L3

\

..... -.......

20

...,

-**-.....'s..-----" "........, ........ ......

,.......... E2 C2 L3 -3C2 L.3

0

3

2 TRANSIT TO MOTOR VEHICLE TRAVEL TIME RATIO DIVERSION CURVES ARE STRATIFIED BY COST RATIO ;SERVICE AND

FIGURE: 7

ECONOMIC

RATIO,

STATUS

TRC PROJECT 2011, JANUARY 1963.

•

•

•

/I -f

--I"

1

1.1.1-...r

• 2-

I

-r

c-

_

r_

, _ --e -C

LI 11-i

-

Ki-D40-14 •A

'3i41 7

.

32

•

I. •

MODAL SPLIT OF

WORK TRIPS BASED ON

I96i EDMONTON SURVEY DATA

TRA NSITSHAR EOF WORKTRI PS IN%

I00

80

'

SERVICE TIME RATIO DIVERSION CURVES

60

PEAK PERIODS

o4

40

FOR WORK TRIPS MADE IN

• lo

19. n6 3'

nit

A NO OF TRIPS SHOWN IN 1,00 /5 9

14

LEGEND: \

.41 \

COST RATIO

II

\GIS N‘

05

N

20

N..

a7

•

C1 O•4- 05

•

C 2 0.5- 0.7

al os'••• 2 '',.....

0

5 4 3 2 TRANSIT TO MOTOR VEHICLE SERVICE RATIO DIVERSION CURVES

ARE STRATIFIED BY COST RATIO

ECONOMIC STATUS :/000014500

FIGURE: 8

T RC PROJECT 2011, JANUARY 1963.

-

-iCI

;g-, We 4--111'," '-',V•V 'r-

E.F

--

-

3•▪•

am.

oto

_

1vir:4 40,,v

fl

1;k0i

▪ _

0" I. Ak

-3rr

--C MT

'— l•

.. .-.. ,.•

r•L

i

•

Er c:Fs-

_r,

c J

.1 I

.

2

I

COMPARISON OF

'

EDMONTON AND TORONTO MODAL SPLIT RELATIONSEILPS 100

Z1 1' 80

TRAVEL TIME RATIO

cL.

c7c

11111

DIVERSION CURVES

,

60

FOR WORK TRIPS MADE IN PEAK PERIODS

f3 Ui

< 40

LEGEND :

\Lt

TORONTO

•L3

4.1

EDMONTON

ce I— 20

0

2 TRANSIT TO MOTOR VEHICLE TRAVEL TIME RATIO

3

DIVERSION CURVES ARE STRATIFIED BY SERVICE RATIO ECONOMIC STATUS:Et COST RATIO FIGURE : 9

:C1 T.R.0

PROJECT 2011, JANUARY 1963.

••*kimm 1

•

2- , - - 461.

a

.

II

. -.

7.=

, L

fr•

• •

•

'Pk - • el

MODAL SPLIT OF

â&#x20AC;¢

WORK TRIPS BASED ON

1961 EDMONTON SURVEY DATA AND

DATA OF OTHER NORTH AMERICAN CITIES

TRI PS I N% TRANSI TSHAREOFWORK

100

80

S. S.

TRAVEL TIME RATIO DIVERSION CURVES

6

FOR WORK TRIPS MADE

5

5 \

IN PEAK PERIODS.

\ 4

S. \5

\

\

\ \ S.\ \\

2

3 TRANSIT TO MOTOR VEHICLE TRAVEL TIME RATIO DIVERSION CURVES FOR WORKERS WITH INCOMES BETWEEN 14500 AND/5900 COST RATIO 0.4-0-5 SERVICE RATIO 1.5-3.5 FIGURE: 10,

T RC PROJECT 2011, JANUARY 1963,

.

Traffic Research Corporation

APPENDIX

PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF USAGE OF THE PROPOSED EDMONTON RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM

Prepared for the Commissioner of Planning and Development, Edmonton, Alberta

by Traffic Research Corporation Limited Toronto, Ontario

December 7, 1962

4.0

7._ Is

.103g53,) 4'1-3 1

ildrarc

T 4 ri

our:, - ..Gti Vp: T.1 rt 6q3

-tRC.C4T(":"-

r_u-aUrti I

/U0%; Lia-g

ri rri.T Fr y ;pi

F

COLF-713-,V4 Tint t=

134 irptH T-104

El:MOM .1.0114 1;

bid Zrrnil4V11-4 E

1,01 biti! NAY

cpc

ID I FrOWL:t 21. r.111 t_'i 1

VI, E14D1X

Q.

OW) 2 ED

TRAFFIC RESEARCH CORPORATION LIMITED

a division of KCS Limited 20 Spadina Road Toronto 4, Ontario, Canada Telephone WA. 4-3381

December 11, 1962 Mr. Geoffrey C. Hamilton, Commissioner of Planning and Development, City Hall, EDMONTON, Alberta.

Dear Mr. Hamilton: We are pleased to submit herewith our preliminary estimate of the relative usage of the proposed Edmonton Rapid Transit System.

The work carried out during the course of this project was in accordance with Stage 1 of our letter of proposal dated December 5, 1962.

We are grateful to you and Mr. MacDonald for providing background information and helping to expedite this interesting and important work.

We feel that our estimates of the transit proportion of workers travelling to downtown Edmonton will assist you in the design of the proposed Edmonton Rapid Transit System. These estimates are based on our judgment and experience gained from similar work in other cities.

Investigation of survey data, as outlined in our letter of proposal for Stage 2 of the work, have commenced, and we expect the results will corroborate these preliminary estimates.

Sincerely, (signed) H, 0

Vi311

Vice President

HGvC:am Enclosure

Cube

mom m

• •

11111111111 1

!w. Ju l 41- ;+.

9

-

9-1.•• =- p • - • - • •

1. '

%-r. 11

Co.

•

.

VFC ILI.4

11.

.-1

.1. .-.61.!

I

1.

mr_“.;.-.:

"I" 0,e.-7•7T

r. = z 7rocrso.L s /

=._.)

L. 1

r.:1_

Lt

r_1.1

,

1 -11,-

_3-

_ ;

_

t•L-

_ •:e

2

:}i

11.-.‘14

_ 'AL- •

L

_

.

i..

•

.V. 6-

fic "

I

.;

E, _R-L a?.

r!

-

-!-

7 A 1'1-

c•-i

±1.;_-tvt

t4.; L-3

4. 4 5.-i

I 44_

=

,

"

_E

r_-t p.4.jf

, C

:

r_rz

ta ma. trp-r-F

AL 5

iiv;roarlejau trq

;

g -

crocim -Pie;r

C

c-t-

-

;-;

I I- .1 -- mor.r

._ I II fliC

.

12 Pe Fir C H

ilomodom_ our;

1..4 11- Y.11

, ▪

Fl ill I II 1)

r

t

I

.

- • •

FL

-•

-

-r

-r

Traffic Research Corporation

PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF USAGE OF THE PROPOSED EDMONTON RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM 1.

INTRODUCTION In this report we submit the following estimate of the transit

proportion of work trips destined for downtown-Edmonton in 1980.

Between 60 and 80 percent of the workers employed in downtown-Edmonton could be expected to use the proposed Edmonton Rapid Transit System.

This estimate is made in accordance with a specified travel time base, and other assumptions regarding service, out-of-pocket travel costs, and the general economic level in Edmonton.

The estimate is based upon observations of how people actually travelled in other cities when subject to various travel conditions. Among the various factors which have been shown to motivate people in choosing their mode of travel, the most significant are relative time, cost, and convenience of service. The degree to which they affect user reaction depends upon the economic status of the population. Empirical evidence of how people are motivated by time, cost and service, tends also to reflect such factors as the climate and loading conditions which existed at the time and place where the data were gathered.

It should be noted, therefore, that our preliminary estimate of transit usage in Edmonton is based only on the general competitive position of transit with respect to motor vehicle travel, rather than on specific observations relative to Edmonton.

Traffic Research Corporation

We have observed that workers having moderate-to-high incomes will favour the use of mass transit facilities if they are offered service, travel times, and out-of-pocket costs which are equivalent to, or better than, those of travelling in private automobiles. Under travel conditions similar to those described for Edmonton, between 60 and 80 percent of workers travelling to downtown used transit in Toronto during 1956. During 1960-61 the usage of downtown workers in Washington was between 60 and 80 percent, and in Philadelphia between 70 and 90 percent.

If the Edmonton Transit System were to operate its proposed rapid transit system, then at least 60 percent of the downtown-bound workers would use the system. The 80 percent usage might be achieved if every passenger had a seat and optimum train operation and service facilities were incorporated.

The report includes estimates of patronage obtained by applying the minimum-maximum usage figures to total work trips destined to downtown, as reported in the "Digest of Reports on the Estimation of Edmonton's Future Population, Employment and Projected Employment Trips" prepared by Mr. D. L. MacDonald, Superintendent of Edmonton Transit System. The latter sections of the report outline the time base and the other assumptions referred to previously.

Z.

ESTIMATES OF PATRONAGE

Estimates of patronage have been derived by applying values of the minimum and maximum usage to estimates of total work trips in 1980. The total work trip estimates, and the resulting values of minimum and maximum

Traffic Research Corporation

patronage are shown in Table 1, catalogued by sectors and zones.

We have applied single, city-wide estimates of minimum and maximum percentage of usage in determining patronage, because of the general uniformity of service that will be provided throughout the Metropolitan area. Between various zones and sectors the usage will vary by a few percent at most. In all instances, usage should not fall below 60 percent.

3.

TIME BASE The choice between the transit mode and the automobile mode of

travel depends on the time required to complete a journey by each of the two modes. For the purposes of the estimate, the time spent on the rapid transit part of a journey was derived from the performance curves supplied by the staff of the Edmonton Transit System. The proposed rapid transit system is shown in Plate 1, and the route travel times in Plate 2.

Automobile running times were based on a map of average local speeds which were observed on Edmonton streets during 1961-62. In doing so, it is implicitly assumed that the road system of the city will be maintained in such a way as to provide the same local average speed throughout the city in 1980 as exists today. The contours of local speeds are shown in Plate 3.

Additional considerations were required to account for the time spent in travelling while not actually riding in a vehicle. These are described as follows.

-3

1?.

'

it rbs

.7r9qi1_F-3491 4

7_4.:411.Lgkj "—f n'4

,

C_

E._ a

. Wk r

I,.

01-447 wrc

ift

s -7% ?u_ria? A*,41.C• 341 El yl; •

r_j_prtc,

07.3

212t1.31:o

1H&

trtry-1 al,.

I.Vbrj f1,117.0

F_r_,

„t

1Y

47

r 2?..

6.4-j

fw4 5,J EpG ri,Er [Jr

c;4 P. rarqii

•,4a3F

j(.)'i-rT

pw

4.J b-f144:

Lc. L,T,KJ

71Qcir 7

Crj w

7-kc

T. itiAl 0) CU i7.1511pii

Tr-A.

cp

_7y- -

i<

ru birp;:v

ANTI rdi-

co_

r i5G GTh-j_i-L4gs‘'

7 1C -,:!sc lc pr

1; Lolitvo

A17)- - .•s •

CLI.1 LLI g.1c:

/Gbavgis On itp“

15,1

1-:-- r7.-A

77 u.- 2-_!,

6-7.

VAC

r-4. 4::41.

LA]

4-;':.k ILLq. +.;C9JJ.QU

?130 &his

.:..",•=aqii)

LK

4-F-=: ELJllTi

fur;

_d"

CliTUZ TCI I p

ot

)orrtGii. oAk.

G

c_juu; ;VG

ire2V1

0 E. 44-6 c p),

t7..ro. .546 z-l-c RC: 51; A14.4 6: I •

whrpA-Tvp-rfrp., &4;0•_:_ar

3-

14 ,-4.'11C-16-r

_ErTtcyz.1;,4,;IL el

a

1:q4Ti

tM ..r gl; -41C•Ifriq DA-01

voita-4-

ri_lc Om ant!" p

litV Milk-41J 13Glec:cturlirW& (at IP-478.6 ,ErviLp

Y

h

r PgIoNt

C-t-.1:0 Z, g.,-0 Mel-57V /AM AIWA 4,Fti4 TIp SJ,dsycsn

140ii.v11rkt

pg7C-7.412,. 111 qic

'A9-4-r-q OFtlikv LF,41.--ekrci-w '- ;44121.211,1-44 011, -.TAITILTirli3 Fug pacsitty

11 typ7-qq, ffirriaq

ancpo

zolias •

Traffic Research Corporation

The frequency of service on rapid transit lines was defined to be 12 vehicles per hour over most of the line, and 24 vehicles per hour where the lines merged together. This involves average waiting time of slightly more than 2 minutes in the former case, and 1 minute in the latter. An average of 4 minutes was expected to be spent in reaching the ultimate destination from a downtown rapid transit station. This estimate is based on a review of station location with regard to expected employment centres.

Automobile trips to downtown were considered to require 2 minutes service time to ''unpark" at the home end of the trip, and 5 minutes to park and walk to the ultimate employment destination. A bridge crossing of the North Saskatchewan River was assessed to take 5 minutes. This was to account for the traffic saturation on the bridge and approaches in the peak periods, particularly under winter conditions.

The average time required to reach a rapid transit station depends on the access mode used, i. e, walk, feeder transit or private automobile.

The following general procedure was employed in determining the access modes of travel, and hence average travel time to station. The area best served by each rapid transit station was delineated. Each area delineated was divided into two concentric sub-areas, an inner sub-area and an outer sub-area surrounding the station. The boundaries of the inner sub-area were determined so that the average walking time to the station was 5 minutes. A person living within the inner sub-area would take on the average 5 minutes to reach a station whether he walked, used transit, 0:- was the driver or

4

v. mck.:11.

ar--ko

bery.aoly

1,04,c3.1.14.2 fl

r

I

Ji

r

isy--

;±1,1_1

r- 7.1 rr; rifj

ir-• -4 -4- 17 P.

rp-r; ;..

J .r.-1 ..r

;. 4 r-

!,'5A1,.!•1:0•1•A

riifI

I Afr'17.:2'

CT 1

-ersAp

Do iv:31c 2.0.11.1[K- rcrt

•ft

rtuq.a.t.

sva,tiriT.ce fr_irs

/„3"..bI

Ans-A

rr-g

t3.13

5„1:EC.riz)

b!

T.-•r..111-31.

G_TirCE1713

clu.21:21-...4kLu4EN

nr Fig astlarq

a49-491.1.17.

c7rt-uci:ri to pq

Ili

CFG

SP d 1-T17010. 121Q.7.1-41:1 xet..11/-

_e_gyyCrtgle

pD

cm LI ..v._rc-F

-C, U. Di LF

44 1w .1,7L

fLIb' 9.ug

-rt,

ATL--

gt. 'C

-1-1 T

IL('111 n

ItrIter. Wel) S ).1_711rEf I

L)LI

e 1.. 2 CIZrVIT -1

ç

Z.11; 411 '• 1uJ

6.; •gr-r-rErn-,

pa

fu-7, 1..j74

,7

yer(g11.'nPr16

CLIL7 g

E

-yr

"I_ErEffer

Jff../1-rimi.!

y g;

r • ..-:+-q.Erfr-nD

iru!;vg 15.13.1 r

b!..171:4 •76-9Tyr r.11

;- rok"frri r1C-iPS

rryir-

F.V.- 1J

f••!' rrt P-Co*ZU .

Xelairy

-Jr :

r•Var_lq•i L -

L-,e.

ftlr(

• iz

. r- tz - rP

-

ic. k Ty'

I, LI

3

F1

b $44) rpitl 1). 7 14.- r. -rre y jijj

r

r

:E ye

-t y,rce•r•-r_

.7

f:

ç.—t]

Liosca csii .: 3 • -.rag 7r , I •

.jc

J•

r

ar•trie

rr

St.n;

rb.,

ADu-c

sur_ria

c=r-a-a

7

3-wg

/-1.1-ir rrl

OA: ri•

Tal

rg

--"

7MI5 t4 C -0k eHiZpr.rk

puma. L1j . Wen u fp% T-4.0‘1- Trug S.5 eovipr..-10e

ort-PWIALCI

E141

su: LEtbrc

0(4 EVW6g.

.

Traffic Research Corporation

passenger of an automobile. In the outside sub-area, the travel time was

based on average time, including walks and waits, by auto or transit. These assumptions are consistent with empirical evidence from other cities having rapid transit or commuter facilities. It has been observed in these localities that people choose feeder transit rather than automobile travel, where the time to the station compares favourably. The headways for the feeder transit service were assessed at 5 minutes in Zone 1, and 10 minutes in Zone 2.

4.

OTHER ASSUMPTIONS The average annual income of workers in Edmonton was expected

to exceed $6000. Traisit riders were required to pay 15รง per trip, with free transfers and free parking at several rapid transit stations. Automobile riders were required to pay $1.00 per day parking, 40 cents per gallon of gasoline, and $2.00 per month for other operating expenses. These costs were considered to be uniformly distributed to all auto riders, with an average vehicle occupancy rate of 1.35, based on the principle of cost sharing which usually exists in car pooling arrangements.

5.

SUMMARY The findings of this study show that a high rate of patronage could

be obtained if a rapid transit system having the assumed characteristics were installed in Edmonton. This conclusion is supported by observations made in metropolitan areas currently operating rapid transit systems, such as Toronto and Philadelphia.

., 9.ff- - ep./.rt -.- -IVY 15% i- .17i• iiiiEW-1

.I

1 ts W. kliffBe -

• cal tcreVitoiti s tiai le Te,gne B V gig

Addi

1 dag

ger .pt arrz il Tr. -r+Ja.a. yd.

rekriuf asit

as/AL:1544

1-

5I

d'Ar • tr.) 16-11

ardi s

12411Z 11

7,Pit 0 awl) -02-ite1liv F..

a as rilt

I

trial hr.;1*41 115Mb' 1gamey

itEA 0 Arm*

is ar.:w

1431-11qTrr...

d es. d tt

Lill-D7 ft-m*04.121:r) 4vse itrreetirrartre s

Aifls1

1 04.41/Z It'Lltrrt '15e itO 2.7

taitrninzwa TO31-anoil ids-prx

ii-.A°1/ '1'. r *A .51 evait fffra•Cai

eTsv.r.61-,94. ern..

.711'1 71 (Ai

L _-91r Lira rin-ar

J.Er.:ftriz e gpvt a

a liar/J."71 Fa n

-Ore

la /KJ

b

Arai/61-1T?

r5F

I arri7Ada

1Es

- P.1-7

writ" co,- eT

4D..raJ1

IA

! 3'

v -zolaa€7,t

isjps

tholtoAr

r1 4y rt -xepti OOIS;r: has ,-.1.111,xisa

eiej C ir.nZ4`!•:15-1

„

11

S: •,!3 Z;C:.1,

";-

• E .1

b ern 3;2•10.7:_r.F.L;

.6004)Z. 1u3saxa

g altahi:r1 si- bv

;Ato;r;c14

F- Ii --r-i.

•

:•Z-1.1;-•

FM14

:??:1 1{.4q ibbi:mcre eqnw tiTabi-1 7.11e-iT .r14,

$,Mir

e! sin bee ee a a

el4Orrot1i

horniii,JI

IS-filt

exik

P-F)1 -sqh)*IDT raoi

Sr2.-0*7- Fri Eu,Ja i-rn 01 1. re-wt 1 •?.-z

4.1iw

a gifr he wad

tr

5.1111"7. qr•p517 41

1.:‘..rt4Crti X-1

s At} ri Zit '1 34,43

ri

r

1-t_

rinfrirs.

-c4bLle a14-I1 1ga a Ivriffiral ern

7:1_01pr th.rtS-.0 bu

1.5E- r,L5!.1.0

r7x,tio1 i-r!

ho

biqu

-1/1-ka 57-110?)kJ1 .134 i .11- 6

rN ihrrf.

Traffic Research Corporation

The proposed rapid transit system, supplemented by a good feeder transit system, and with good downtown distribution, would provide a convenient ride, comparable to that of private automobiles. A person could travel from home to work on the system in approximately the same time it would require to make the trip by private automobile, and the cost of the transit trip would be considerably less than that of an automobile trip.

6

Traffic Research Corporation

TABLE 1 TRANSIT PATRONAGE Total trips to C. B. D.

Maximum Transit Patronage ( 5, 280) 608 9, 392 10,000

( 6, 600) 760 11,740 12,500

Minimum Transit Patronage ( 3,960) 456 7,044 7,500

1 2

2,830 2,460 5, 290

1,698 1,476 3,174

2,264 1,968 4,232

Intrazonal Total, Zone 0 SW 1 SW 2 Total SW

Total

S 1 2 3

Total

SE SE SE SE

210 8,040 2,860 11,110

126 4,824 1,716 6,666

168 6,432 2,288 8,888

1 2

Total

NE NE NE

3,810 10,390 14,200

2,286 6,234 8,520

3,048 8,312 11,360

1 2

Total

N N N

3,290 5,760 9,050

1,974 3,456 5,430

2,632 4,608 7,240

1 2 3

7,480 6,390 3, 410

Total

NW NW NW NW

17,280

4,488 3,834 2, 046 10,368

5,984 5,112 2, 728 13,824

11,250

6,750

9,000

Total Interzonals Total Intrazonals

80,680 6,600

48,408 3,960

64,544 5,280

GRANT) TOTAL

87,280

52,368

69,824

2 (total)

•

7

-11 1 mir

WI

I ll

"

11

Ili

.

- 4 a.

•

•

II

PS' 3-Ps An

P Poe

74:15- - -

g*

Ro go

I

ei0P nr JP-01 444

It' swc,

SRlo

TAISIO

'El' ?pa s" oil,

e' 3,7u

2' 934 .4' wig

Ai +pc

a'

IV nit 0 _•

r Ink .61.7' Tit --r PI Mt+ 4 4 a' Sick 114 Feb

-13n 2' .-€10 21 740

5

7' -up

..?' s34 !.-.' site

31 isie Ili Hz! r yea

• 4

:7;.•

iir 11V 1-_ -1 31 oft • ,J ..._ ._

ei Pee

e' ofro

r all' 4' nit

s1-11

1 se

sap sa aft r

at LI*

-

._h _ V11'n - 1.

- _ -..1 I1* :- .-• _. A

11 6.i4

To' 113-0

-

04- an ._ . •

1 -11em _ 4, 0.0 i el ii.

LI

I *IP ea4

s4

irei)

1010

•

tV P-11

7.7

SINO VOW

II

ealptt

1,04/44000 II

•

I •

_ 7-

,!fiugsmelPr

- II

r,

I-

Troi —44

I I .0

214,111111F

10 14 -r1 aliThr fr#41

II

' I111 III 1

I up, . iv.. o' .0 I '

II

.ig b -

•

I

1

.-

NORTH EA

A!.

• •

NUKJICAPAL AIR PORT U•d y

Z

16

6

I/

a SOUTH EAST /

,/ ,.1,1•14

/, I 1

/Qz

I

--

/ '

\

\

/

Z

a./

SOUTH WEST

PRODOSED EDMONTON RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM SOURCE: E. T. S. Nov.1962

SCALE:

T. R.C. DEC. I92. 1,12012o11

LEGEND:

RAPID TRANSIT Roos Ait.wAYS SIICTO1L 60.46JCIARY Ze•411 11. c.‘1141:40.W

STA T 1013 MOIR OA STATIOW

Ett

PARIcAk. LOT

FINDER !Ws 14 EA IS WAY. 5%414407ES

PLATE N' I — -1111AVPIC E•11511.611/421 COVINNAT14:40

Imo aim ins ag

1111.1 MIMI MIMI NMI MO MIN IMO

- - i MEP aiW

MIS

E.T.S. RAPID TRANSIT TENTATIVE DESIGNS SHEET 1, JUNE 1962.

0B. LINE

30 "C.,LINE

28

28

26

26

24

24

22

22

V 20

20

18

18

16

16

TIME IN MINUTES

C7

LizzLILJ DOWNTOWp

14

12

10

7/77777171

8 HIOH LEVEL BRIDGE

LI.1LL

6

DOWN

17/771 1 7

4

4

2

2

DISTA NCE IN F

0

12 000

0

6 e 6

24 000

â&#x20AC;¢

6 66 6 (6

STATIONS TRAFFIC RESEARCH CORPORATION

36000

6 6 6

0

DI STANCE IN F

12 000

24 000

000

0 PLATE 2a

STATIONS PROJ. 2011.

DI 962

.

.

-

1

E.T.S. RAPID TRANSIT TENTATIVE DESIGNS -SHEET 2.JUNE 1962.

32

A” LINE

30

28

26

24

22

20

18

16

16

14

14

TI MEINMINU TES

TIME INMI NUTES

JI

18

12

10

V

12

10

8

8

LiZ.AZELI;TDir 17 HIGH LEVEL BRIDGE

6

<3- -C>

6

; ) 7Ik 7 w V

4

4

2

2

0

D„ LINE

CLAW DOWNTO N•

I

77T/7y 1

DI STA \ICE IN F

6 6 6 6

2 000

24 000

6 6666

48 000

6 6 6 STATIONS

TRAFFIC RESEARCH CORPORATION

36 000

0

DI STAIN CE IN FT

2

12 00

6 PLATE 2b

STATIONS

PROJ 2011

DEC. 1962

„0 ....,...-

.

.„„flo

„.000

--..\ \

\,.. =

.1

•\+ \

3

\N c (

• ••• 4 It

23.-1\ 4/

Av

•••-.-

•

25

• 4/.4.• '44.... •

•••••••• •••••

•

--•••••••

III •••••4

•

.• a .1

- - ,

15- o

$0. Ay

•

I

71 • ,

/41f \ 2o-25 .1

1. i ‘k,

14

I !I \ N \.)

/4

‘••••• •

EDMONTON 1961

•

2

1

Lowm. yam MIA SOW.ga

2s

•10

SOURCE : ET. S. 1.,lev.1941 50.44 70AOsocsava7.

1.0111VeY I 15-3e

Zomoo700

T.Q.C. Dec.. 544 PRo..12on

LEGENCP HALI•fl .AVANIR.4,

•••••••0

isMOILR 7 NI PM 7 Yet le MPH —I— — 10 To t5 mew i.5 70 24. lore 25 MOW 11,••••/••••••••••• 25 TO 3o MPH

,,,,,,

•—

—PLATE N‘ 3— TR A IMC Fir3SAIIICSICsaleakrnsi

-

I•P

•

r •

-

; •

•

-

-

L; ,

.

_

--

„ - • mom - -.

-.—

•- • 7

7 -