Toronto: Gardiner Expressway Study
Paramics 2009 UGM: NewarkOctober 5, 2009
Project Introduction
• Frederick G. Gardiner Expressway– Elevated freeway through downtown Toronto
• Lower Don Lands– Former industrial land redeveloped into
residential and commercial uses• Gardiner is seen as a barrier to the
redeveloped LDL– Investigate solutions
Project Introduction
• Joint Clients– City of Toronto and Waterfront Toronto– City owns the Gardiner– Waterfront Toronto is charged with revitalisation
of the waterfront• Sensitive Project
Project Scope and Goals
• $6M Planning and Design Study– Sub to Dillon Consulting– ~$300k Microsimulation budget
• Investigate four design options for treatments east of Jarvis Street– Do Nothing, Ameliorate, Remove, Submerge– Five construction staging models
• Goal is to investigate ways of reconnecting the redeveloped Lower Don Lands to the City
Microsimulation Model Area
• 5 mi2 (13 km2)• Dense, urban development
SPAD
INA
DUNDAS
WOODB
INE
Methodology
• Create existing conditions– Road selection– Zone system creation– Include transit and pedestrians
• Matrix Estimation• Calibration / Validation• Alternative Testing• Construction Staging
Existing Conditions
• Most roadways in study area– Arterial and up, some collectors, and few locals
• Coding issues with Lake Shore Boulevard
Existing Conditions
• Arup Model as a starting point• Approximately double model area
ARUPJACOBS
Zone System
• Layout zones on paper
Zone System• Simple one zone
per block with access to all roads
• Simplifies creation and coding
• Makes for very difficult matrix estimation
Zone System• One zone per
connector on each block face
• Allows maximum control
• Model becomes unwieldy with so many zones
Existing Conditions
• Transit– Streetcars
• Spadina and Queens Quay – Median-running• Other streets – In mixed traffic
– Buses– Subway
• Not included in our model
• Pedestrians– Taken only from Arup model, no new ped work
Streetcar Coding
• Spadina and Queens Quay– Median-running
• Median Lane Operation– Paramics limitation that similar
movements must be in adjacent lanes– This is an issue where the transit
vehicle through lane is adjacent to a left-turn lane
– Fortunately, coding the through movement in the transit lane as ‘barred’ works perfectly• Transit vehicle moves with normal
traffic ‘through’ green
Streetcar Coding
• Remainder of Streetcar network is in mixed traffic– Typically runs in the left-hand
lane of a two-lane per direction facility
• Congestion issues due to frequent stops– Both lanes in the streetcar travel
direction must stop when loading/unloading passengers
– New feature built into Paramics
STOP
Matrix Estimation
• Counts• Travel Demand Model O/D data• Screenlines
Matrix Estimation
• Issues– Estimation of congested conditions• Counts at congested locations are less useful• Use counts upstream of issues to help estimate
demand– Grid network adds to the challenge• Many parallel routes and relatively short blocks
Calibration / Validation• Counts• Travel Times• Screenlines• Major Queue
Locations– Gardiner and
on/off ramps
Calibration/Validation
• Issues– Major queues on Gardiner• WB in PM, EB in AM• Replication of WB queue may require network
extension or link speed modification at external station
STUDYAREA
CONGESTIONSOURCE
Future Alternatives
• Do Nothing• Ameliorate
JARVIS
EASTERN
• Remove (bring to ground)• Submerge
Construction Staging
• With a preferred alternative selected– Build a series of 5 incremental networks that take
the geometry to the final design– Stages given to us for analysis
• Provide results and recommendations
Conclusions
• Most challenging work will be: – Matrix Estimation– Calibration / Validation
• Questions or Comments?– Adam Lanigan [email protected]
Top Related