Transportation for the 1980 Winter Olympics: A
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Transportation Research Record 798 29 would be provided by applying signal preemption to REFERENCES isolated intersections. There appears to be a "com pounding" of benefits along arterials that are so 1. Development of a Bus Signal Pre-Emption Policy controlled. and a System Analysis of Bus Operations. KLD As sociates, Inc., Huntington Station, NY, KLD In summary, analytic and simulation modeling of TR-11, April 1973. transit operations controlled by a bus-signal-pre 2. J.A. Wattleworth and others. Evaluation of Bus emption policy indicates that under well-defined Priority Strategies on Northwest Seventh Avenue conditions significant benefits may accrue in terms in Miami. TRB, Transportation Research Record of reduced travel time without disrupting general 626, 1977, pp. 32-35. traffic. The particular conditions and factors that 3. L. E. Rechbell and B. A. Van Aver belle. Bus Pri- promote these incremental benefits have been identi ority at Traffic Control Signals. Traffic En fied. gineering and Control, Vol. 14, No. 2, June 1972. 4. M. Yedlin and others. Bus Signal Priority Strat ACKNOWLEDGMENT egies: An Assessment of Future Research Needs. Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department We wish to acknowledge John MacGowan of the Traffic of Transportation, Rept FHWA-RD-80-043, June 1980. Systems Division of FHWA for his many constructive 5. F.V. Webster. Traffic Signal Settings. Her Maj suggestions. We would also like to acknowledge esty's Stationery Office, London, Road Research Howard Stein and Suleiman Hessami of KLD Associates, Tech. Paper 39, 1958. Inc., for their creative assistance in organizing numerous model outputs in intelligent form. This research was per formed under a U.S. Department of Transportation contract. Publication of this paper sponsored by Committee on Bus Transit Systems. Transportation for the 1980 Winter Oly1npics: A Retrospective Look RICHARD D. ALBERTIN, GERALDS. COHEN, AND ROBERT G. KNIGHTON A review of transportation planning for the 1980 Winter Olympics in Lake in peripheral parking lots for spectators arriving Placid, New York, and the implementation of the plan is presented. The many by automobile, (c) provision of transportation in events that led up to the Olympics, such as the purchase of land for parking the Olympic area by means of a shuttle-bus system, lots, the planning of the bus system, and the reconstruction of highway facili· (d) enforcement of speed traffic controls, and (e) ties, are described briefly. The operation of the bus system during the Olym sale of 50 percent of all event tickets available to pics is examined closely. Both newspaper accounts and first-hand knowledge the public only as part of a charter bus, train, or are used to ensure an accurate representation of events. The roles of and rela tions between the New York State Department of Transportation and the air package. Lake _Placid Olympic Organizing Committee are examined. NYSDOT and transportation consultants hired by LPOOC thoroughly tested and reviewed the plan by means of a series of computer programs. Assuming that all of the above basic elements would be con When Lake Placid, New York, was selected as the site scientiously implemented, these professionals were of the 1980 Winter Olympics, the world wondered if a confident that, except for possibly a few peak hours small town could run them successfully. Several at the largest events, delays would be minimal and critical problems were immediately realized. One of travel in the area possible. the greatest areas of concern was the problem of moving an estimated 50 000 people within an area PLANNING THROUGH 1976 that usually had 3000 residents. Limited housing made this issue even tougher, since 20 000-30 000 The LPOOC planning efforts were endorsed by a local people would have to arrive and leave every day. referendum in 1973, by a joint resolution of the New The Lake Placid Olympic Organizing Cornrni ttee York State Legislature in 1974, by a concurrent res (LPOOC), a private corporation made up mostly of lo olution of the U.S. Congress in 1975, and by actions cal Lake Placid citizens, turned to the New York of Presidents Nixon, Ford, and Carter and New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) for an State Governors Wilson and Carey. LPOOC requested swers to the transportation questions. NYSDOT was NYSDOT to examine existing facilities and determine asked to design a feasible plan to transport visi what actions were required. One of the state's tors. The plan, after review by LPOOC, was to be first steps was to inventory the transportation fa implemented by the organizing committee. The cilities as well as other areas that would affect Olympic Transportation Plan (1) met the various en transportation (2). A series of program information vironmental constraints, minindzed the impact to lo reports (PIRs) ;as issued. These reports included cal residents and spectators, and yet allowed tens inventories of highways, lodgings, and restaurants. of thousands of people to witness the 1980 Winter Highway access to the Lake Placid area consisted Olympics. of three 2-lane rural facilities, a winding and The plan's five basic elements were (a) restric mountainous route with roads that approach from the tion of automobile access into the area, (b) parking south, west, and north. Two rail facilities serve 30 Transportation Research Record 798 the general area but would prove to have minimal im data were used as input to computer simulation pro pact. The closest airport capable of serving large grams. planes and providing reasonably frequent service was The event schedule was analyzed to select several 65 miles from Lake Placid in Clinton County. Closer peak hours of travel. Each peak hour was then bro airports could serve only general aviation or had ken down into its various components (officials, limited ground storage for planes. spectators, residents, etc.). By using available Existing bus service included daily intercity data on each group's travel patterns, the travel be service along each of the highways (usually three to tween internal locations was estimated, including four buses per day). There is no local public bus the forecasting of origin-destination (0-D) pair transportation in this area. volumes. The volumes were then assigned over the The system had to be able to work even if the availabie routes. A computer program assisted in weather was poor. In 1979, for example, in the sec this effort by providing a description of the impact ond week in February temperatures were as low as on each intersection from the accumulated needs. -30°F at night and the daytime temperature never got These results were then analyzed on a system ba above zero. Furthermore , 24-in snowfalls are not sis. Problem areas were identified and solutions uncommon in the area. were proposed. This process was repeated for sev Preliminary analysis confirmed suspicions that eral strategies until a workable solution for these unrestricted travel into the area would result in peak hours was found. These peak hours were largely massive traffic tie-ups. There was simply not dependent on the event schedule, and a solution for enough capacit y t o accommodate an unrestrict ed in one peak hour did not ensure that the same system flux of spectators. The transportation system into would solve the problems found at another site for a the area, and within it, would impose limitations different peak hour. To solve the problems, several that must affect every aspect of the Olympic plan peak hours were tested. Initial results of these ning process. Related functions such as ticket efforts were summarized in the December 20, 1977, sales, housing, and scheduling had to be flexible draft transportation plan (]). This report was then enough to meet the constraints imposed by the trans used as the basis for several informational meet portation system. ings. Comments received from these meetings were Beyond meeting the LPOOC's 1975 request for tech incorporated into the plan. nical assistance, there was a strong commitment by This plan was submitted to LPOOC for review. the state that any planning effort must maximize LPOOC hired a transportation consultant to review public safety. This concern culminated in the pass NYSDOT efforts and coordinate implementation. Be ing of a law mandating that any transportation and cause there was concern that the cost of this trans security plan allow for public and government review. portation system (which called for 450 buses) would An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) provided be prohibitive, the consultant was also directed to an environmental framework that included the follow- look for ways to reduce the costs (but maintain rev ing constraints: enue). The result of these efforts was the Olympic 1. Be sensitive to the environment--The area is Transportation Plan of July 1979 <l>· The basic el in the largest state-controlled wilderness and park ements of this plan were identical with those of the area in the nation and is regulated by the Adiron earlier plan, but it also included the following: dack Park Agency, which oversees any development in the area. 1. Snow and ice removal within the Olympic area 2. Plan no major highway construction--This was that would attempt to reach bare pavement (thereby in keeping with the desires of local officials and maximizing capacity); environmentally concerned agencies. 2. Control of all private vehicles within the 3. Use known technologies--The Olympics were too area to maximize highway capacity; important to test untried techniques. 3. A 24-h transit system of 300 buses (peak 4. Look to post-Olympics use--The capital proj - hour) supported by a system of peripheral lots along ects had to be in keeping with post-Olympics use. each travel corridor for spectators arriving by au tomobile; A series of three reports (].-2) outlined the 4.