Appendix B.1 EMME Model Calibration Memo

Transcription

1 Appendix B.1 EMME Model Calibration Memo

2 itrans 144 Front Street West, Suite 655 Toronto, ON M5J 2L7 Tel: (416) Fax: (905) File: 2.0 Memorandum To: Mohan Philip City of Hamilton Cc: From: Steve Keen Date: February 21, 2012 Re: ROPA9 TMP Review Summary of Modelling Work This memo details the calibration work and development of forecasts for the base and alternative 2031 scenarios in the ROPA9 study area. 1. MODEL ASSUMPTIONS AND ADJUSTMENTS The model used for the ROPA9 TMP study was the Hamilton 2010 LRT Model provided by the City on November 10, After completing our review, we identified a series of changes that needed to be made to the networks to represent the existing situation and planned future developments appropriately. These changes (all of which have been saved as EMME macros using the Network Editor tool) are as follows: 1 of 25 C:\Users\nbaudais\Desktop\ROPA Modelling summary Memo rev-1.docx

3 Table 1: Network Changes Network Modification Add missing second eastbound lane to Red Hill Valley Pkwy west of Stone Church Add Second Road West Add two additional centroids between Second Road and Upper Centennial and redistribute land use Add Whitedeer Road Code collectors at capacity and 2 lanes Code Highland and Upper Mount Albion at 50 km/h (not 60) Code local roads at consistent 500 capacity and 2 lanes (multiple changes, many were 4 lanes) Code Mud St lane capacity at consistent 1000 (without fluctuations from 700 to 1800 in existing coding) Code Upper Centennial lane capacity at 1200 Extend Glover Rd to Dickenson and Twenty Road to Glover Move wrongly located centroid from east of Upper Centennial to west of Fletcher (zone 2615) and connect it to Trinity Church and Fletcher Reconfigure centroid connectors to approximate local roads Reduce Gatestone to 40 km/h in school zone Remove direct centroid connector to Mud Street from zone 2658 Remove direct centroid connectors to Rymal from zones to south Add centroid between First Road and Upper Centennial Add centroid for Trinity West development and redistribute land use Add collector road between Fletcher and Upper Centennial south of Rymal Add extension of Second Road West south of Rymal to collector Add Trinity West Collector Add two additional centroids south of Rymal and redistribute land use Close Upper Mount Albion south of Trinity West Collector Code Rymal at 60 km/h through study area Reduce 8 lane components of Dartnall Road, Rymal Road and Upper Centennial to 4 lanes Scenarios Future Future Future Future Future Future Future Future Future In addition, the following revisions were made to future year land use: Multiply demand to zone 2648 (North Glanbrook Industrial Park) by 5 (2021) and by 6 (2031) to approximate actual forecast demand based on growth plans; Disaggregate demand allocated to model zones to additional zones south of Rymal, west of the Karst lands and north of Highland/west of Upper Centennial, for new developments in the ROPA, Trinity West and Felker developments, respectively. The revised road networks for 2011 and 2031 are shown in Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2, below. February 21, of 25

4 Exhibit 1: 2011 road network and number of lanes February 21, of 25

5 Exhibit 2: 2031 road network and number of lanes 2. MODEL CALIBRATION The model was calibrated to a 2011 base year by using 2011 (or early 2012) count data on key links in and around the ROPA 9 study area. After running the model, a post-process consisting of assigning count volumes to link extra attributes and using these in the EMME demand adjustment process was used to redistribute and reassign flows in order that they more accurately represented the observed conditions. Links leading to the following intersections were selected for calibration: Stone Church and Red Hill Valley Parkway Stone Church and Upper Mount Albion Highland and First Highland and Second Gatestone and Second Rymal and Dartnall Rymal and Pritchard Rymal and Trinity Church Rymal and Upper Mount Albion Rymal and Fletcher Rymal and Second Rymal and Centennial February 21, of 25

6 In calibration, we used the GEH statistic as an evaluation measure. The formulation of the GEH equation, which balances both absolute and relative difference, is depicted below, where M represents modelled volume and C represents count volume. Out of the 74 count locations used in calibration, 61%, or 45, had a GEH of 5 or less; 89%, or 66, had a GEH of 10 or less; and 96%, or 71, had a GEH of 12 or less. This represents a high level of calibration accuracy. In addition, we considered screenlines north and south of Rymal and east of Second Road, formed by adding together parallel links. As is shown below, the modelled volumes closely approximate count volumes, with the exception of traffic east of Second Road, where westbound modelled volumes are 21% lower than observed totals because of low modelled demand on Highland Road; however, the GEH value is still acceptably low. Table 2: Model Calibration DIR COUNT MODEL Absdiff Reldiff GEH North of Rymal (UMA to Second) NB % 8 North of Rymal (UMA to Second) SB % 7 South of Rymal (East of Glover to Centennial) NB 989 1, % 1 South of Rymal (East of Glover to Centennial) SB % 1 East of Second (Highland to Rymal) EB % 1 East of Second (Highland to Rymal) WB 1, % 7 To calibrate future scenarios, a mask derived from the difference between the adjusted and original demand matrices was applied to adjust the future year demand matrices. This was not applied for zones that experienced high demographic growth between 2008 and 2011, as in those cases the difference between modelled and observed base year volumes was taken to be due to growth rather than lack of calibration AND 2031 BASE FORECASTS The base scenario with calibration adjustments made shows the following volumes and volume/capacity ratios for the 2011 and 2031 time horizons. Of particular note, Exhibit 6 shows a number of east-west (E-W) links (Mud Street, Rymal Road and Dickenson Road) that are over capacity in the westbound direction. This is not necessarily an E-W problem, but possibly north-south traffic that has to travel westbound to access the planned Trinity Church Arterial Road (TCAR). Alternatives that included improved E-W access to the TCAR were developed to test their potential to alleviate these problem areas identified in the base case. February 21, of 25

7 Exhibit 3: 2011 Base Scenario Volumes February 21, of 25

8 Exhibit 4: 2011 Base Scenario V/C Ratios February 21, of 25

9 Exhibit 5: 2031 Base Scenario Volumes February 21, of 25

10 Exhibit 6: 2031 Base Scenario V/C Ratios February 21, of 25

11 4. ALTERNATIVES The alternatives to the base run of the ROPA 2031 horizon model feature the following variations from the base scenario. For each alternative, all other aspects of the network remain the same as the base. The first three alternatives were developed to examine if the E-W problems revealed in the base case scenario could be alleviated. Alternative 1 (Scenario 20313) Extend the collector road, south of Rymal Road (within ROPA9 development), further west of Trinity Church Road to Trinity Church Arterial Corridor; Alternative 2 (Scenario 20314) Extend Trinity Church Arterial Corridor south to Golf Club Road, increase capacity of Golf Club Road to 700/lane from Regional Road 56 to the Trinity Church Arterial Corridor; Alternative 3 (Scenario 20315) Extend Twenty Road east to existing Trinity Church Road; The next four alternatives were developed to understand the impacts of closing (or not) Second Road West. These results will be used in a more detailed analysis separate from this memo. Alternative 4 (Scenario 20316) Close Second Road West to through traffic north of Gatestone Drive (Upper Mount Albion remains closed); Alternative 5 (Scenario 20317) Maintain Upper Mount Albion Road open (Second Road West remains open); Alternative 6 (Scenario 20318) Extend Gatestone Drive southwards in a straight line to intersect with Rymal Road; Alternative 7 (Scenario 20319) Close Second Road West between Gatestone Drive and Rymal Road. The differences in volume (alternative - original) are discussed below. Green links are those that were present in the original but not the alternative, while yellow links are those present in the alternative but not the original (where a single link overlays a split link, this is also shown in green). Volumes that are different by more than 100 are shown for the first three alternatives, while differences of more than 50 (due to a wider range of diversion options or smaller initial volumes) are shown for the subsequent four. Where a link is split by the addition of an intersection, the differences (positive and negative) reflect the entire volume on the link, as the original link is considered to have been replaced by the new split two, so the overall impact can be seen by subtracting the negative value displayed from the positive value. February 21, of 25

12 Alternative 1: 2031 Volume Differences This alternative examines the effect of extending the collector road south of Rymal Road to meet the future TCAR. It shows a relief of 284 vehicles westbound approaching the TCAR, with no impact on Mud Street. The v/c ratios on the next page show v/c ratios of close to 1.0 on Rymal Road, the extended collector road and Dickenson Road; although more balanced than in the base network. February 21, of 25

13 Alternative 1: 2031 V/C Ratios February 21, of 25

14 Alternative 2: 2031 Volume Differences This alternative models the impact of extending the TCAR southwards to meet Golf Club Road in order to provide relief to Rymal Road. It provides no relief to Mud Street and a relief to Rymal Road of only 124 vehicles per hour and would require an upgrading of Golf Club Road. February 21, of 25

15 Alternative 2: 2031 V/C Ratios February 21, of 25

16 Alternative 3: 2031 Volume Differences This alternative models the impact of extending the Twenty Road eastwards to meet Trinity Church Road thereby providing a connection from Trinity Church Road to the TCAR. This option provides no relief to Mud Street and a relief to Rymal Road of 326 vehicles per hour (the most of the three options tested) and would require an upgrading of Twenty Road. February 21, of 25

17 Alternative 3: 2031 V/C Ratios February 21, of 25

18 Alternative 4: 2031 Volume Differences Alternative 4 tests the option of closing Second Road West north of Gatestone Drive. This shows a diversion of approximately 360 northbound and 188 southbound vehicles from Second Road W. and increases traffic on Gatestone Drive by approximately 200 vehicles NB and 160 vehicles SB. A minor diversion onto Upper Centennial is also shown. February 21, of 25

19 Alternative 4: 2031 V/C Ratios February 21, of 25

20 Alternative 5: 2031 Volume Differences This alternative tests the option of keeping Upper Mt. Albion Road open (it was previously recommended to remain open as part of the previous ROPA 9 Master Plan). The results show that a demand of 642 vehicles would be generated on the opened Upper Mt. Albion Road. February 21, of 25

21 Alternative 5: 2031 V/C Ratios February 21, of 25

22 Alternative 6: 2031 Volume Differences Alternative 6 examines the impact of extend Gatestone Drive to meet Rymal Road, this potentially relieving Second Road West. The result shows a relief of 170 vehicles on the lower part of Second Road West and an increase of 221 vehicles on the extended Gatestone Drive. Relief on the upper part of Second Road West is shown to be insignificant. February 21, of 25

23 Alternative 6: 2031 V/C Ratios February 21, of 25

24 Alternative 7: 2031 Volume Differences Alternative 7 tests the option of closing Second Road West between Rymal Road and Gatestone Drive. This shows a reduction in traffic on the lower part of Second Road West of 366 NB vehicles and reduction of 121 of Gatestone Drive. There is an insignificant reduction NB on the upper part of Second Road West, presumably because some of the current demand on Second Road West originates from the Gatestone Drive area. February 21, of 25

25 Alternative 7: 2031 V/C Ratios February 21, of 25

26 5. SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES FORECASTS The most notable forecast changes in traffic volumes of implementing each of the alternatives are summarized in Table 3, while the locations where congestion is reduced or increases across the 100% v/c ratio point are summarized in Table 4. Table 3: Summary of alternatives Alternative Traffic increases (amount) Traffic reductions (amount) 1 New east-west collector (700) Twenty Road E. (100) 2 Golf Club Road. (200) TC Arterial (north of Golf Club) (500) 3 Twenty Road E. (600) TC Road (south of Twenty) (100) 4 Gatestone Drive (200) Highland Road W. (east of Second) (100) Trinity Church Road (100) TC Arterial (south of Rymal) (300) Rymal Road E. (east of TC Road) (300) TC Arterial (north of Twenty) (200) TC Road (north of Golf Club) (200) Trinity Church Arterial (300) TC Road (north of Twenty) (200) Rymal Road (east of TC Arterial) (300) Second Road W. (400) Rymal Road E. (east of Second) (100) Highland Road W. (west of Second) (100) Rymal Road E. (west of UMA) (300) TC Arterial (north of Rymal) (300) Gatestone Dr/Second Road W. (100) 5 Upper Mount Albion Road (600) Trinity West Collector (200) Rymal Road E. (east of UMA) (200) 6 Gatestone Drive Rymal connection (200) Second Road W. (south of Gatestone) (200) 7 Rymal Road E. (east of Second) (100) Whitedeer Road (200) (Volumes are to the nearest 100) Table 4: Summary of congestion changes Rymal Road E. (east of Second) (200) Second Road W. (400) Gatestone Drive (100) Alternative Impact v/c goes over 1.00 Impact v/c goes below New east-west collector Mud Street W. (east of TC Arterial) 2 Golf Club Road Twenty Road E. (west of TC Arterial) Rymal Road E. (east of TC Road) Mud Street W. (east of TC Arterial) Dickenson Road E. (west of TCR) 3 Twenty Road E. extension Mud Street W. (east of TC Arterial) Dickenson Road E. (west of TCR) 4 - Mud Street W. (east of TC Arterial) 5 - Mud Street W. (east of TC Arterial) The results of this analysis is one input into a subsequent more comprehensive evaluation of alternatives. February 21, of 25