1 / 29

Challenges in Using Paramics in a Secondary Plan Study – Case Study of Downsview, Toronto

Challenges in Using Paramics in a Secondary Plan Study – Case Study of Downsview, Toronto. Paramics Users Group Meeting October 5, 2009. Overview. Background Existing Conditions Future Traffic Demands Future Model Scenarios Challenges Discussions. Study Background.

peyton
Download Presentation

Challenges in Using Paramics in a Secondary Plan Study – Case Study of Downsview, Toronto

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Challenges in Using Paramics in a Secondary Plan Study – Case Study of Downsview, Toronto Paramics Users Group Meeting October 5, 2009

  2. Overview • Background • Existing Conditions • Future Traffic Demands • Future Model Scenarios • Challenges • Discussions

  3. Study Background • Secondary Plan Update involving: • Land Use and Urban Design Plans • Transportation Assessment • Servicing • Secondary Plan Update to harness a new subway line that will run through the plan area. • Paramics model used to develop and evaluate the network alternatives and identify preferred option

  4. Study Area Context - City of Toronto

  5. Study Area / Issues Future subway extension to York University Future intermodal station

  6. Study Background - Issues

  7. Study Objectives • Issues to be addressed by modelling • Identify preferred network including lane requirements • Sensitivity analysis on specific network elements • Define timing/phasing of major (still underway) • Paramics Scenarios: • Existing Conditions • Over 50 Future 2031 scenarios representing alternative networks & land use permutations

  8. Data Collection • Signal timing data available for the focus area only • Traffic volumes: - Turning movement counts (TMCs) at major intersections • Traversal matrices for 2006 and 2031 from the City’s demand forecasting EMME model for AM peak hour • Floating car measurements of travel time along surrounding arterial sections

  9. Study Area- Existing Network Finch Ave. Dufferin St. Sheppard Ave. Area: 6km wide by 4 km Bathurst St. Sheppard Ave. Total demand: 35,000 Jane St. Vehicles in system: 4-5,000 Allen Rd. Focus Area Keele St. Wilson Ave.

  10. Calibration and Validation • Undertaken through volume comparisons at screenline, link, intersection and turning movement levels; • Stochastic assignment method used • GEH statistic as well as % variation • Acceptable results achieved as shown below

  11. Future 2031 Traffic Demands • Based on traversal matrix (AM) obtained from the City • Minor adjustments as applied for existing conditions • Trips from Downsview Park (Zone 98) replaced with trip generated from considered land-use • Adjustments for existing demands • PM demands assessed from AM and trip generation

  12. Background Traffic - EMME Zoning System

  13. Recommended Land Use • Five land use scenarios developed • Three considered in analysis • Existing TMP • Recommended Population: 19,575 Employment: 22,029 Units: 9,841 GFA: 1.4m (m2)

  14. Summary of Traffic Demands Trip Generation Total Paramics Demands

  15. Network Options Emerging Preferred

  16. Network Options – Preferred

  17. Paramics Future Networks Option 3 TMP Option 2 Emerging Preferred

  18. Paramics Future Network – Preferred

  19. Measures of Performance – Intersection LOS PM

  20. Measures of Performance – Arterial LOS

  21. Measures of Performance • LOS does bring out significant differences • Use of screen shots to emphasize certain operational aspects • Use of network based measures to better show differences

  22. Measures of Performance – Network Based

  23. Measures of Performance – Network Based This is measure of how much of the extra development demand could not be loaded into the network based on output of Paramics release file

  24. Measures of Performance – Video Clip

  25. Lane Requirements – Based on Modelled Volumes

  26. Sensitivity Analysis • Allen Area Configuration – (A) • Transit Road Extension – (B) • Roadway Extension to Wilson (C) • E-W Roadway Extension to Keele (D) • Dufferin St. Extension (E) D B A E C

  27. Sensitivity Analysis 27

  28. Challenges • Policy constraints requiring no widening of arterial networks made it difficult to develop road network • Need to communicate study findings clearly to “non-technical” persons necessitated use of unique performance measures • Need to satisfy all requirements resulted in modelling many scenarios. This was worsened by the need to communicate all findings in a way easily understood by non technical persons

  29. Discussions / Questions

More Related