TRAVEL DEMAND FORECASTING FOR THE OLYMPIC GAMES ATHENS 2004 ATTIKO METRO S.A. Anna Anastasaki

Analysis and Evaluation of the Existing Conditions (Summer 1996) Development of a Strategic Planning Model (EMME/2) Development of a Traffic Management Model (SATURN) Travel Forecasts for August 2004 –Normal Operation of the City –Olympic Trips Objectives of the Study

Study Area : Attica Region – Zonal System

Population 1996

Trips 1996 Trip Rates Trips

Daily Person Trips by Purpose Typical Summer

Main Mode Split Typical Summer

Hourly Demand Distribution – Private Modes

Hourly Demand Distribution – Public Transport

HB TRIP GENERATION PLANNING FACTORS PRODUCTIONS/ATTRACTIONS DAILY TRIPS SUB-MODE CHOICE MODEL PT GENERALISED COST MAIN MODE CHOICE MODEL TRIP DISTRIBUTION MATRIX CONVERSION ORIGIN-DESTINATION (O-D) NHB TRIPS MOTORCYCLES, TRUCKS EXTERNAL TRIPS PCU VEHICLE O-D TRIP TABLE HIGHWAY ASSIGNMENT FINAL HIGHWAY ASSIGNMENT PT ASSIGNMENT GENERALISED COST CAR, TAXI PUBLIC TRANSPORT (PT) NETWORK GENERALISED COST PER PT MODE ( Bus, Metro) PT PASSENGER O-D TRIP TABLE FINAL PT ASSIGNMENT SATISFACTORY CONVERGENCE YESNO PT MINIMUM COST PATHS HIGHWAY NETWORK HIGHWAY MINIMUM COST PATHS YESNO SATISFACTORY CONVERGENCE Strategic Planning Transport Model Structure (EMME/2)

HB Trip Production Models Classification Models –Trip Purpose (Work, Social, Other) –Car Ownership (CO, NCO) –Household Size (1-2, 3-4, 5 members) –Household Income (low, medium, high) –Zone Group Characteristics

HB Trip Attraction Models Regression Models –Trip Purpose (Work, Social, Other) –Independent Variables Retail Job Positions Non-Retail Job Positions Population

Trip Generation Models Calibration Trip Category Trip Rate Trip Productions Diff % (Pred-Obs/Obs) CO HBW1,65 4,57% HBS0,98 5,52% HBO1,11 5,04% 3,74 4,96% NCO HBW0,54-9,44% HBS0,32-8,42% HBO0,44-8,13% 1,30-8,75% Overall 2,672,08%

Mode Choice Models Sub-mode Choice –Zone level –Binary logit models –Alternatives : bus, metro –Six (6) trip categories Main Mode Choice –Zone group level –Multinomial or nested logit models –Alternatives : walk, car, taxi, public transport –Six (6) trip categories

Trip Distribution Models Zone group level Gravity model Six (6) trip categories Four (4) main modes Inner ring effects for car mode (HBW, HBO)

Trip Assignment Highway Network –10 classes of users –BPR volume-delay functions links –HCM volume-delay functions intersections Public Transport Network –Six (6) trip categories –Transit time function by mode

Network Data Centroids 1246 Nodes 5000 signalised: 1030 priority: 670 Centroid connectors 5300 Road links Transit lines 470 Bus stops 1730 Metro stations 23 Pedestrian links 12800

Network Calibration Highway Network –GEH overall: 6,0 sector level: 4,8 – 8,8 Public Transport Network –GEH bus: 9,3 metro: 7,7

Highway Network - Summer 1996

Public Transport Network - Summer 1996

Travel Demand Forecasts Network Scenarios –Basic (1) –Alternative (4) Trip Matrices –Summer Period Trips –Olympic Trips Time Periods –8-9: morning peak –17-18: afternoon peak –22-23: evening peak

Traffic Management Model (SATURN) 400 zones Olympic Highway Network (main and secondary) Trip Matrices Data from EMME/2 Transport Model Exclusive use by Athens 2004 test and evaluate traffic management schemes related to Olympic Venues

EMME/2 – GIS - SATURN System Integration Unix server Window NT Running SATURN GIS database Windows 2000 Windows NTs Emme/2 scenarios GIS Data Exchange Interface Emme/2 Matrices Exchange Interface Road network Land use Data Exchange Interface