Earth Tech, Inc. Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee Commuter Rail Extension Environmental Impact Statement & Project Development Phase Ridership Forecasting Report in association with:
and American Design Bay Ridge Consulting Connetics Transportation Group Heritage Research, Inc. Martinsek & Associates Valerie Kretchmer Associates Prepared for:
SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION
September 2007 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table of Contents
I. INTRODUCTION...... 9
II. MARKET ANALYSIS...... 10 II.1. DEFINITION AND SIZE OF THE KRM CORRIDOR TRAVEL MARKET ...... 11 II.2. POPULATION ALONG THE KRM CORRIDOR MARKET...... 18 II.3. EMPLOYMENT WITHIN THE KRM CORRIDOR...... 21 II.4. JOBS HOUSING RELATIONSHIPS ...... 24 II.5. ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS WITHIN THE KRM CORRIDOR...... 26 II.6. CENSUS JOURNEY-TO-WORK ANALYSIS...... 29 II.7. KRM CORRIDOR ORIGIN-DESTINATION TRAVEL PATTERNS ...... 32 II.8. ORIGIN-DESTINATION TRAVEL PATTERNS BETWEEN STATIONS...... 40 II.9. METRA SURVEY ANALYSIS...... 44 II.10. REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION HOUSEHOLD SURVEY...... 49
III. MODEL DEVELOPMENT ...... 51 III.1. ZONE SYSTEM...... 51 III.2. HIGHWAY NETWORK...... 54 III.3. TRANSIT NETWORK...... 58 III.4. TRIP GENERATION...... 60 III.5. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND DESTINATION CHOICE MODEL...... 61 III.6. MODE CHOICE MODEL...... 64 III.7. TRIP TABLE DEVELOPMENT...... 74
IV. MODEL VALIDATION ...... 78 IV.1. VALIDATION OF TRIP GENERATION ...... 79 IV.2. VALIDATION OF TRIP DISTRIBUTION ...... 79 IV.3. VALIDATION OF MODE CHOICE ...... 81 IV.4. EXTERNAL AUTO TRAVEL...... 82 IV.5. BUS TRANSIT SURVEYS AND COUNTS...... 83 IV.6. RAIL TRANSIT SURVEYS AND COUNTS...... 84 IV.7. ORIGIN-DESTINATION TRAVEL TIMES ...... 86
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 2 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
V. MODEL APPLICATION AND RIDERSHIP FORECASTS...... 88 V.1. AGGREGATE RAIL RIDERSHIP FORECASTS (ARRF)...... 88 V.2. KEY ASSUMPTIONS ...... 93 V.3. RIDERSHIP FORECASTS...... 94 V.4. USER BENEFITS ...... 102
VII. SUMMARY...... 106
MODEL DEVELOPMENT APPENDICES...... 107 APPENDIX 1 : TRANSIT ROUTES IN KRM MODEL ...... 108 APPENDIX 2 : TRIP GENERATION ...... 127 APPENDIX 3 : TRIP DISTANCE DISTRIBUTIONS AND DESTINATION CHOICE MODELS BY PURPOSE ...... 135 APPENDIX 4 : ESTIMATION OF WORK AND NON-WORK PURPOSE TRIPS PRODUCED IN ILLINOIS AND ATTRACTED TO WISCONSIN ...... 146
MODEL VALIDATION APPENDICES...... 156
APPENDIX 5 : DISTRIBUTION OF TRIPS BY DISTANCE AND BY CONGESTED TIME: OBSERVED DISTRIBUTIONS IN SEWRPC SURVEY VERSUS MODELED ESTIMATES IN THE KRM MODEL ...... 157 APPENDIX 6 : COMPARISONS OF COUNTY-TO-COUNTY TRAVEL FLOWS ESTIMATES OF HBW TRAVEL VERSUS US CENSUS 2000 JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL FLOWS ...... 170 APPENDIX 7 : HBW TRAVEL COMPARISONS OF MODELED COUNTY- COUNTY FLOWS AGAINST OBSERVED FLOWS FROM THE HOUSEHOLD SURVEY ...... 174 APPENDIX 8 : HBNW TRAVEL COMPARISONS OF MODELED COUNTY- COUNTY FLOWS AGAINST OBSERVED FLOWS FROM THE HOUSEHOLD SURVEY ...... 176 APPENDIX 9 : NHB TRAVEL COMPARISONS OF MODELED COUNTY- COUNTY FLOWS AGAINST OBSERVED FLOWS FROM THE HOUSEHOLD SURVEY ...... 178
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 3 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
APPENDIX 10 : MODE CHOICE MODEL VALIDATION ...... 180 APPENDIX 11 : TRAFFIC VOLUME AND TRAFFIC COUNTS FOR KRM CORRIDOR...... 189 APPENDIX 12 : 2001 SEWRPC BUS TRANSIT ON-BOARD SURVEY ANALYSIS - ALL SURVEYED SYSTEMS ...... 195 APPENDIX 13 : 2001 SEWRPC BUS TRANSIT ON-BOARD SURVEY ANALYSIS - KENOSHA TRANSIT, RACINE URBAN BELLE, AND WISCONSIN COACH LINE KENOSHA-RACINE- MILWAUKEE LINES...... 213 APPENDIX 14 : METRA ON-BOARD ORIGIN-DESTINATION SURVEY ANALYSIS UPN LINE ...... 232 APPENDIX 15 : METRA ON-BOARD ORIGIN-DESTINATION SURVEY ANALYSIS - UPN LINE LAKE COUNTY AND KENOSHA STATIONS...... 242 APPENDIX 16 : HIGHWAY AND TRANSIT TRAVEL TIME RUNS...... 251 APPENDIX 17 : TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM USER BENEFITS ...... 256
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 4 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figures and Tables
FIGURE 1. KRM CORRIDOR MARKET AREA RELATIVE TO COUNTY BOUNDARIES IN THE REGION ...... 13
FIGURE 2. KRM CORRIDOR SUPERZONES...... 14
FIGURE 3. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONES AND SUPERZONE CONFIGURATION FOR THE WISCONSIN PORTION OF THE KRM CORRIDOR...... 16
FIGURE 4. GENERAL VIEW OF CONCENTRIC CATCHMENT AREAS OF STATION SITES ...... 17
TABLE 1. 2000 POPULATION IN EACH SUPERZONE DISTRICT ...... 18
FIGURE 5. POPULATION DENSITY IN THE KRM CORRIDOR...... 20
TABLE 2. POPULATION TRENDS IN THE KRM REGION ...... 21
TABLE 3. EMPLOYMENT AND EMPLOYMENT DENSITIES FOR THE KRM MARKET AREA...... 22
FIGURE 6. EMPLOYMENT DENSITY IN THE KRM CORRIDOR...... 23
TABLE 4. EMPLOYMENT TRENDS IN THE KRM REGION ...... 24
TABLE 5. KRM CORRIDOR AND THE REGION...... 25
TABLE 6. COMPARISONS OF JOBS-HOUSING STATISTICS IN THE KRM MARKET AREA...... 26
TABLE 7. HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND VEHICLE OWNERSHIP...... 27
FIGURE 7. HOUSEHOLDS WITH NO VEHICLES IN THE KRM CORRIDOR...... 28
TABLE 8. COUNTY-TO-COUNTY JOURNEY-TO-WORK TRAVEL PATTERNS ...... 31
TABLE 9. COUNTY-TO-COUNTY WORK TRIPS...... 32
TABLE 10. NUMBER OF WORKERS TRAVELING WITHIN THE KRM CORRIDOR MARKET AREA...... 35
TABLE 11. NUMBER OF WORKERS TRAVELING WITHIN THE KRM CORRIDOR MARKET AREA BY AUTO...... 36
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 5 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 12. NUMBER OF WORKERS TRAVELING WITHIN THE KRM CORRIDOR MARKET AREA BY TRANSIT ...... 37
FIGURE 8. TRANSIT SHARES FOR WORK TRIPS ORIGINATING FROM AND DESTINED TO LOCATIONS IN THE KRM CORRIDOR...... 38
FIGURE 9. TRANSIT SHARES FOR WORK TRIPS ORIGINATING FROM AND DESTINED TO KRM SUPERZONES FOR DIFFERENT TRAVEL TIME INTERVALS ...... 39
TABLE 13. MARKET SIZE BY CATCHMENT AREAS FOR THE ENTIRE KRM CORRIDOR...... 41
TABLE 14. MARKET SIZE BY CATCHMENT AREAS FOR INTRA-ILLINOIS...... 42
TABLE 15. MARKET SIZE BY CATCHMENT AREAS - ILLINOIS TO WISCONSIN ...... 42
TABLE 16. MARKET SIZE BY CATCHMENT AREAS FOR FLOWS WISCONSIN TO ILLINOIS...... 43
TABLE 17. MARKET SIZE BY CATCHMENT AREAS FOR INTRA-WISCONSIN FLOWS ...... 44
TABLE 18. ACCESS MODE TO SELECTED UP-NORTH STATIONS ...... 46
TABLE 19. ACCESS TRIP LENGTHS TO SELECTED UP-NORTH STATIONS...... 46
FIGURE 10. ORIGINS-DESTINATIONS OF METRA RIDERS BOARDING AT KENOSHA ...... 47
FIGURE 11. ORIGINS-DESTINATIONS OF METRA RIDERS BOARDING AT WAUKEGAN ...... 48
TABLE 20. 2001 INTERNAL HOUSEHOLD SURVEY TOTAL PERSON TRIPS BY KRM SUPERZONES...... 50
TABLE 21. 2001 INTERNAL HOUSEHOLD SURVEY HOME-BASED WORK PERSON TRIPS BY KRM SUPERZONES ...... 50
FIGURE 12. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE SYSTEM (TAZ 2193) FOR THE KRM CORRIDOR MODEL...... 52
FIGURE 13. DETAIL OF THE KRM CORRIDOR ZONE SYSTEM FROM LAKE COUNTY TO MILWAUKEE...... 53
TABLE 22. HIGHWAY NETWORK DATA FIELDS ...... 55
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 6 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
FIGURE 14. MILWAUKEE TO RACINE SHORTEST HIGHWAY PATH ...... 56
FIGURE 15. KENOSHA TO RACINE SHORTEST HIGHWAY PATH...... 57
FIGURE 16. KENOSHA TO LAKE COUNTY DESTINATION SHORTEST HIGHWAY PATH...... 57
FIGURE 17. BUS ROUTES IN THE SEWRPC REGION ...... 58
FIGURE 18. BUS ROUTES IN THE CMAP REGION ...... 59
TABLE 23. SUMMARY OF EXISTING SEWRPC MODE CHOICE MODELS BY PURPOSE...... 65
TABLE 24. UPDATED SEWRPC MODELS USING UPDATED SKIMS ...... 72
TABLE 24. A MODELS WITH SIMPLER SPECIFICATION AND NON-MOTORIZED MODES ...... 73
TABLE 25. SUMMARY OF TRIP TABLE APPROACHES FOR DIFFERENT TRAVEL MARKETS ...... 75
TABLE 26. WORKER FLOWS WITHIN BUFFER AREAS - KRM IN WISCONSIN...... 90
TABLE 27. WORKER FLOWS WITHIN BUFFER AREAS - EXISTING UPN SERVICE ...... 90
TABLE 28. WORKER FLOWS WITHIN BUFFER AREAS IN THE ENTIRE KRM/UPN CORRIDOR...... 90
TABLE 29. UNADJUSTED ARRF RIDERSHIP ESTIMATES BASED ON BUFFER AREA WORK FLOWS ...... 92
TABLE 30. ARRF ADJUSTMENT FACTORS TO REFLECT RAIL LEVEL OF SERVICE ...... 92
TABLE 31. ARRF ESTIMATES BASED ON RAIL SERVICE AND OBSERVED UPN RIDERSHIP...... 92
TABLE 32. YEAR 2000 AND 2035 FORECASTS FOR TSM AND KRM RAIL ALTERNATIVES ...... 95
TABLE 33. SUMMARY OF TSM AND KRM RAIL FORECASTS BY TIME OF DAY ...... 95
TABLE 34. OBSERVED RIDERSHIP PATTERNS ON THE UPN COMMUTER RAIL LINE...... 96
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 7 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 35. KRM RAIL RIDERSHIP PATTERNS BY REGION ...... 97
TABLE 36. RAIL STATION BOARDINGS FOR THE KRM TRAIN SERVICE ...... 98
TABLE 37. STATION TO STATION KRM FLOWS WITHIN WISCONSIN ...... 99
TABLE 38. TSM 2035 RIDERSHIP BY ROUTE AND TIME OF DAY...... 99
TABLE 39. MODE OF ACCESS FOR TSM 2035 RIDERSHIP...... 100
TABLE 40. BOARDINGS BY STOP FOR KRM BUS ROUTE ...... 101
TABLE 41. BOARDINGS BY STOP FOR BUS ROUTE 48 ...... 101
TABLE 42. DAILY TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM USER BENEFITS AT A COUNTY TO COUNTY LEVEL ...... 103
TABLE 43. PERCENT OF DAILY TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM USER BENEFITS...... 103
TABLE 44. DISTRIBUTION OF USER BENEFITS BY PURPOSE...... 104
TABLE 45. BREAKDOWN OF USER BENEFITS BY TIME PERIOD...... 105
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 8 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
I. INTRODUCTION
Over the past decade a very high level of interest has developed in the Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee (KRM) corridor for improved commuter
Major employers, transportation service. This interest has been manifested by the creation municipalities and counties throughout of a group involving major employers, and municipalities and counties the corridor want within the corridor which has as its objective the improvement of transit improved service. service within the corridor. The Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the seven-county Southeastern Wisconsin region, has completed two
studies1,2 which focus on transit improvements throughout the KRM
corridor. On behalf of an intergovernmental partnership of the counties and cities of
Kenosha, Racine and Milwaukee, the Wisconsin Department of
Transportation (WisDOT) and the Regional Planning Commission, the Commission is undertaking the EIS and Project Development phase of the This phase of the KRM Alternatives Analysis in order to produce a Draft Environmental KRM project builds upon the results of Impact Statement (DEIS), refine the previous alternatives analysis, and previous studies. develop further a commuter transportation project within the corridor. This study is funded by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5309 “New Starts” program, WisDOT, and the members of the KRM intergovernmental partnership. The products of this study will be used to support an application to the FTA for funding of Preliminary Engineering (PE) under the FTA’s New Starts program.
1 Feasibility Study of Commuter Railway Passenger Train Service in the Kenosha-Racine- Milwaukee Corridor, Community Assistance Planning Report No. 239, the Regional Planning Commission, Waukesha, WI, June 1998. 2 Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee Corridor Transit Study Summary Report and Recommended Plan, Community Assistance Planning Report No. 276, the Regional Planning Commission, Waukesha, WI, August 2003.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 9 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
II. MARKET ANALYSIS
This section provides supporting data to the modeling effort and to the
development of the Purpose and Need Statement. The key aim of this This report is a task was to understand the base-year and future-year travel markets precursor to the travel demand along the KRM corridor through an analysis of existing data sources, modeling effort. including data from the 2000 US Census, the Regional Planning Commission, Chicago Area Transportation Study (CMAP), and Metra.
Market analysis provides a critical first step modeling travel demand in the
KRM corridor. The market analysis provides the “big-picture” flows in the
study area. It identifies their relationship to the corridor by quantifying the The market analysis provides a “big- total size of the travel demand market in the KRM corridor and key origin- picture” view of the travel markets in destination travel patterns. These analyses also provide key inputs for the KRM corridor. model validation for the flows of travel between Wisconsin and Illinois.
The following data sources were be used:
Data sources The year 2000 US Census provides estimates of population, included: employment, and origin-destination travel flow data for work trips at different levels of detail, 2000 Census The Metra 2002 on-board survey data are analyzed to highlight
the ridershed of the proposed KRM corridor alignment and the
mode of access of existing Metra riders residing or working in the Metra on-board survey KRM corridor, and
The recent Regional Planning Commission’s household survey
provides key data for estimation and validation of travel within Wisconsin and Wisconsin-to-Illinois travel by Wisconsin residents. Commission Household survey During the model development effort, the Regional Planning Commission model and the CMAP model will provide estimates of population and employment growth and origin-destination travel flow data for all trip purposes both for the base-year and future-year horizons.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 10 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
II.1. DEFINITION AND SIZE OF THE KRM CORRIDOR
TRAVEL MARKET
The area of study includes the bi-state region of southeastern Wisconsin
The KRM study and northeastern Illinois. Counties in the bi-state area include Racine, area falls within Kenosha, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Washington, Waukesha, and Walworth two metropolitan areas. Counties in Wisconsin, and Cook, Lake, Will, DuPage, McHenry, and
Kane Counties in Illinois. The study area for the KRM corridor is generally The study area is between Milwaukee defined as the area between Milwaukee and Chicago, bordered by I-94 on and Chicago, generally east of I- the west and Lake Michigan on the east. Figure 1 features the position of 94. the KRM corridor alignment relative to the 13-county region.
Figure 2 displays the KRM corridor broken down into six in Wisconsin and
four Illinois zones. These superzones were developed only for the purpose of identifying and analyzing travel markets in the corridor. In The KRM corridor was broken into ten model development and model calibration, we rely on a very detailed superzones for the system of Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) that are smaller in size and purpose of understanding extend beyond the study boundaries of the KRM corridor. The ten travel markets. superzone districts can be generally defined as follows: Travel forecasting will use a more refined system of 1. The “Milwaukee CBD” district, or downtown Milwaukee; TAZs.
2. “Milwaukee County N and W Outer” includes north and west areas of the County outside of the core study corridor (south from
downtown along lakeshore);
3. “Milwaukee County South Inner” is the area immediately south of downtown, between I-94 and the Lake;
4. “Milwaukee County South Outer” is immediately south of the
South Milwaukee County Inner zone, between I-94 and the Lake;
5. The “Racine County E” district includes the portion of Racine County east of I-94;
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 11 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
6. The “Kenosha County E” district includes the portion of
Kenosha County east of I-94;
7. The “Lake County NE” district covers the northeast area of
Lake County Illinois;
8. “Lake S/Cook NE” area covers the northern suburbs of Chicago;
9. “Chicago Outer” includes north and near-south areas of the
City of Chicago outside of downtown; and
10. “Chicago CBD” includes downtown Chicago.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 12 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
FIGURE 1. KRM CORRIDOR MARKET AREA RELATIVE TO COUNTY BOUNDARIES IN THE REGION
Source: 2000 US Census and Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 13 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
FIGURE 2. KRM CORRIDOR SUPERZONES
Source: 2000 US Census and Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 14 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
For purposes of the KRM corridor, the six superzones in Wisconsin are of
Superzones in primary significance to the study, since the alternative transportation Wisconsin will be of investments fall within their boundaries. The superzones in Illinois are of primary significance to the less importance, but they contribute to the demand for alternative service, study. in the corridor.
Compilation and analysis of Census data was conducted at the Census TAZ level, since it was the most detailed geographical coverage available.
Analysis was Figure 3 shows an overlay of the proposed zone system in the Wisconsin performed at the Census TAZ level. portion of the study area. This zone system will be used for the detailed travel demand modeling that will evaluate the ridership of different transit
alternatives along the KRM corridor.
In order to get a better sense of the potential size of the KRM travel
Corridor sheds market, alternative sized corridor sheds were explored using different were created using distance criteria to estimate population, employment, and travel concentric rings of varying distances. movements between areas within the corridor. Concentric rings with sizes
ranging from a radius of half mile to a radius of five miles were created around each of the proposed rail station locations in the KRM corridor.
This allows to explore of a wide range of market capture definitions
combining a variety of access and egress characteristics. One example Different market could be the trips that fall within an egress ring of half mile and an access capture definitions were assumed, ring of five miles. Such a definition would include trips that originate up to ranging from one- five miles away from origin stations but have a destination within a short half to five miles. walking distance from proposed stations (Figure 4). It should be noted that these concentric rings are “mode-neutral,” since the locations of the proposed rail stations and bus stops overlap considerably.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 15 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
FIGURE 3. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONES AND SUPERZONE CONFIGURATION FOR THE WISCONSIN PORTION OF THE KRM CORRIDOR
Source: 2000 US Census and Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 16 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
FIGURE 4. GENERAL VIEW OF CONCENTRIC CATCHMENT AREAS OF STATION SITES
Source: 2000 US Census and Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 17 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
II.2. POPULATION ALONG THE KRM CORRIDOR MARKET
Corridor population is an important indicator of the potential use of Population data were obtained from transportation infrastructure and services. The study area covers two two regional discrete regions, and each has a regional planning agency that is planning agencies. responsible for preparing socio-economic forecasts in their respective
area. The Regional Planning Commission is the body charged with
regional planning in the seven-county area of southeastern Wisconsin.
The Commission’s counterpart agency in Illinois is the Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission (CMAP).
Measures of population are calculated for the base year from the 2000
Population Census and the Regional Planning Commission and CMAP’s forecasts. densities provide a useful view of the Table 1 shows the estimates of the population within each of the ten potential for new superzones, the size of each superzone, and the corresponding transit service. population density to highlight potential demand for the proposed new transit service.
TABLE 1. 2000 POPULATION IN EACH SUPERZONE DISTRICT
Population Size Density Superzones Population (sq. mi.) (persons/sq. mi.) 1 Milwaukee CBD 51,310 6.9 7,454
Milwaukee Co. N & W 2 728,460 185.0 3,937 Outer
3 Milwaukee Co. S Inner 117,630 23.2 5,064 Milwaukee Co. S 4 46,800 28.7 1,631 Outer 5 Racine County E 136,500 101.1 1,350 6 Kenosha County E 115,524 86.6 1,334 7 Lake County NE 199,069 92.2 2,160 8 Lake S/Cook NE 269,110 73.8 3,644 9 Chicago Outer 789,365 41.2 19,162 10 Chicago CBD 158,845 10.7 14,851 Totals KRM Market Area 2,612,613 649.4 4,023 Source: 2000 US Census and Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 18 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 2 features the county-level population trends in the study region. County population figures were This provides a means for comparing the expected growth rates and assembled for the patterns in the future. combined regions.
The first three of the Milwaukee County superzones exhibit a higher
population density than the rest of the Wisconsin superzones. A more detailed analysis of the distribution of the population is provided by Figure
5 which shows the population density in the Wisconsin portion of the Figure 5 shows corridor. These patterns suggest the considerably higher population population densities in map form. densities in areas that are immediately adjacent to many of the existing or
proposed KRM stations. This is particularly true for stations in downtown Kenosha, State Street in downtown Racine, South Milwaukee, Cudahy/St.
Francis, and downtown Milwaukee.
Table 2 indicates that these areas are expected to grow considerably
between 2004 and 2030. This is particularly the case with the population
in Kenosha County, which is expected to grow by 27 percent (from a 2004 population of 158,435 to a population of 201,907 in 2030). Another
Kenosha County important observation is Lake County’s rate of population growth between population is 2004 and 2030, which is approximately 22 percent. Lake County is forecasted to grow by 27% between important to the KRM corridor since it has a substantial volume of 2004 and 2030. interchange with southern Wisconsin, particularly with Kenosha County, as discussed later in this report.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 19 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
FIGURE 5. POPULATION DENSITY IN THE KRM CORRIDOR
Source: 2000 US Census and Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 20 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 2. POPULATION TRENDS IN THE KRM REGION
Population Counties 1980 1990 2000 2004 2030 2035 1 Kenosha 123,137 128,181 149,577 158,435 201,907 210,078 2 Milwaukee 964,988 959,275 940,164 928,018 999,141 1,007,122 3 Ozaukee 66,981 72,831 82,317 86,025 99,816 101,121 4 Racine 173,131 175,034 188,831 194,188 210,556 213,587 5 Walworth 71,507 75,000 92,013 98,334 133,275 140,039 Wisconsin 6 Washington 84,848 95,328 117,496 124,502 154,174 157,265 7 Waukesha 280,203 304,715 360,767 377,193 440,289 446,768 SE Wisconsin Region 1,764,795 1,810,364 1,931,165 1,966,695 2,239,158 2,275,980 8 Cook 5,253,666 5,105,067 5,376,741 5,327,777 5,938,248 n/a 9 DuPage 658,835 781,666 904,161 928,718 1,002,325 n/a 10 Kane 278,405 317,471 404,119 472,482 692,346 n/a 11 Lake 440,372 516,418 644,356 692,895 844,315 n/a Illinois 12 McHenry 147,897 183,241 260,077 296,389 449,823 n/a 13 Will 324,460 357,313 502,266 613,849 1,107,778 n/a NE Illinois Region 7,103,635 7,261,176 8,091,720 8,332,110 10,034,835 n/a 13-County Region 8,868,430 9,071,540 10,022,885 10,298,805 12,273,993 – Source: Regional Planning Commission and CMAP
II.3. EMPLOYMENT WITHIN THE KRM CORRIDOR
Employment in the KRM corridor provides a measure of potential Employment data for 2000 were destinations and corresponding destination densities for the proposed obtained from the transit services. Base-year employment estimates at the superzone level Census; the two regional planning were obtained from the 2000 US Census. County-level employment bodies furnished estimates were obtained from the Regional Planning Commission and forecasts. CMAP, while future-year forecasts reflect their adopted land use plans.
Table 3 provides estimates of employment located in each superzone within the corridor and Figure 6 shows the patterns of employment density in the Wisconsin portion of the KRM corridor.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 21 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
The employment estimates produced from the Census reflect workers who
3 travel to these locations for work. Chicago and Milwaukee CBDs are the Concentrations of major attractors of employment in the corridor, with Chicago having six employment exist in downtown times as many workers and four times the employment density of Milwaukee and Milwaukee. Chicago.
TABLE 3. EMPLOYMENT AND EMPLOYMENT DENSITIES FOR THE
KRM MARKET AREA
Size Employment Superzone Employment (sq. mi.) Density 1 Milwaukee CBD 107,585 6.9 15,629
2 Milwaukee Co. N & W 295,853 185.0 1,599 Outer 3 Milwaukee Co. S Inner 39,990 23.2 1,722 4 Milwaukee Co. S Outer 21,279 28.7 742
Racine County E 59,185 101.1 585 5 6 Kenosha County E 45,497 86.6 525 7 Lake County NE 93,752 92.2 1,017
Lake S/Cook NE 155,908 73.8 2,111 8 9 Chicago Outer 273,650 41.2 6,643 10 Chicago CBD 631,964 10.7 59,085
1,724,663 649.4 2,655 Totals Source: 2000 US Census and Cambridge Systematics
Employment densities are The density of employment along the KRM corridor is concentrated close concentrated near existing and to individual stations. This is particularly true for employment around the prospective downtown Kenosha Metra station, the Transit Center in Racine, the stations. downtown Amtrak Milwaukee station, and to some extent for areas close to the proposed station sites in South Milwaukee and Cudahy/St. Francis
(Figure 6).
3 It should be noted that due to differences in the methods of data collection between Census and other data sources for employment, Census data tends to underestimate employment figures.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 22 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
FIGURE 6. EMPLOYMENT DENSITY IN THE KRM CORRIDOR
Source: 2000 Census and Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 23 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
To analyze future trends in employment, Regional Planning Commission
and CMAP estimates at the county level are provided in Table 4. The employment forecasts indicate a modest increase of 3.3 percent in Kenosha County employment is employment within the Wisconsin portion of the corridor. When broken expected to grow by down into superzones, employment in Kenosha and Racine Counties is 24% and Racine County by 10%. expected to increase by about 24% and 10%, respectively, between 2004
and 2035. Illinois counties that the Corridor serves are expected to have larger increases in employment, including a projected 31 percent growth
for Lake County.
TABLE 4. EMPLOYMENT TRENDS IN THE KRM REGION
Employment Counties 1980 1990 2000 2030 2035 1 Kenosha 54,100 52,200 68,700 85,000 2 Milwaukee 583,200 609,800 624,600 624,900 3 Ozaukee 28,200 35,300 50,800 61,700 4 Racine 81,200 89,600 94,400 104,000
5 Walworth 33,500 39,900 51,800 66,900 Wisconsin 6 Washington 35,200 46,100 61,700 78,600 7 Waukesha 132,800 189,700 270,800 347,200 SE Wisconsin Region 948,200 1,062,600 1,222,800 1,368,300 8 Cook 2,676,700 2,776,033 2,841,941 3,318,234 9 DuPage 293,100 530,322 646,610 830,394 10 Kane 118,300 145,205 206,107 342,684
Illinois 11 Lake 160,700 228,606 354,114 461,487 12 McHenry 46,600 65,526 105,118 167,765
13 Will 91,000 99,393 169,317 443,370
NE Illinois Region 3,386,400 3,845,085 4,323,207 5,563,934
13-County Region 4,334,600 4,907,685 5,546,007 Source: SEWRPC and CMAP
II.4. JOBS HOUSING RELATIONSHIPS
Table 5 shows that the KRM corridor (the ten superzone area between The KRM corridor makes up 10% of Milwaukee and Chicago) encompasses an area that is 649 square miles, the 13-county bi- state area, but has or less than 10 percent of the entire 13-county bi-state metropolitan area. 26% of the However, over one-quarter of residents of this combined metro area live in population and 31% of the the KRM corridor study area. Moreover, 31 percent of all jobs are found in employment. the KRM corridor. This clearly indicates that the KRM corridor is one of
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 24 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
the most densely developed areas of the 13-county bi-state metropolitan
area.
TABLE 5. KRM CORRIDOR AND THE REGION
KRM 13-County Corridor Region % KRM Land Area (sq. mi.) 649 6,955 9.3% Population (2000) 2,612,613 10,022,,885 26.1% Employment (2000) 1,724,663 5,546,007 31.1%
Population per sq. mi. 4,023 1,441 Employment per sq. mi. 2,656 797
The relationship between the number of households and the number of
jobs in a given area is important for evaluating the need for transportation
The relationship of services. Residents of an area should be able to find nearby employment households and employment can be that matches their personal job skills and experience level. If employment an important opportunities commensurate with these skill/experience levels are not indicator of the need for located near one’s residence, transportation facilities should provide transportation. accessibility to other job centers.
Table 6 presents the Jobs-to-Households ratio, which indicates that for the
entire KRM corridor there are 1.6 jobs for every household. As one would expect, the two downtown areas exhibit the highest jobs per household Job ‘surpluses’ exist in suburban ratios (Chicago with 7.4 and Milwaukee with 4.7), since both areas are Chicago portions of centers of commerce with relatively small bases of residential population. the corridor, which suggests the need to The next highest ratios are shown for the two suburban Illinois areas, ‘import’ workers from other areas. which suggest that a ‘surplus’ of jobs exist, and local employers must ‘import’ workers from other areas.
Table 6 also shows the ratio of Jobs-to-Workers, with workers representing the number of employed residents of each sub-area. The relative distribution is comparable to that shown for the Jobs-to- Households ratio.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 25 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 6. COMPARISONS OF JOBS-HOUSING STATISTICS IN THE KRM MARKET AREA
Jobs to Households Number of Employed Jobs per Resident Superzones (HHs) Jobs Residents Household Workers 1 Milwaukee CBD 23,665 107,585 22,601 4.55 4.76 2 Milw. Co. N & W Outer 290,995 295,853 323,057 1.02 0.92 3 Milwaukee Co. S Inner 46,605 39,990 52,193 0.86 0.77 4 Milwaukee Co. S Outer 18,535 21,279 24,549 1.15 0.87
Wisconsin 5 Racine County E 51,995 59,185 62,365 1.14 0.95 6 Kenosha County E 43,622 45,497 53,356 1.04 0.85 7 Lake County NE 62,471 93,752 83,041 1.50 1.13 8 Lake S/Cook NE 99,438 155,908 122,875 1.57 1.27 9 Chicago Outer 341,955 273,650 401,740 0.80 0.68 Illinois 10 Chicago CBD 83,924 631,964 85,336 7.53 7.41 Subtotals WI 475,417 569,389 538,121 1.20 1.06 IL 587,788 1,155,274 692,992 1.97 1.67 Totals KRM Market Area 1,063,205 1,724,663 1,231,113 1.62 1.40 13-County Region 3,703,148 4,840,518 4,631,947 1.31 1.05 Source: 2000 Census and Cambridge Systematics
II.5. ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS WITHIN THE KRM
CORRIDOR
Mobility of individuals and their ability to reach places of employment, particularly to locations outside their areas of residence, is highly
dependent on the availability of an automobile. This availability is a function of household income and the number of workers in the
household. Areas with lower income levels and auto availability imply a The absence of an stronger need for public transportation services. Furthermore, such areas auto implies a greater need for are critical when evaluating the distribution of transit service and its public transit. associated benefits to the population groups with different socioeconomic characteristics.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 26 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 7 includes the number of households, median and mean income,
and the number of households without an automobile. Areas with the highest percentages of households without an auto include the Chicago Areas having higher rates of and Milwaukee urban areas. Most likely, this pattern in part reflects lower households without incomes and/or the presence of higher levels of transit service. While the an auto tend to have relatively rest of the sub-areas have comparable percentages of households without higher levels of transit. an automobile, there is a clear difference in the level of public transportation services in the Illinois and Wisconsin portions of the
corridor.
TABLE 7. HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND VEHICLE OWNERSHIP
Households Percent Number of Median Mean Superzones with No Households with Households Income Income Vehicles No Vehicles
1 Milwaukee CBD 23,665 $40,089 $26,135 7,399 31.3% 2 Milw. Co. N & W Outer 290,995 $50,187 $41,360 45,088 15.5% 3 Milwaukee Co. S Inner 46,605 $42,812 $38,835 7,175 15.4%
4 Milwaukee Co. S Outer 18,535 $55,848 $52,765 1,212 6.5% 5 Racine County E 51,995 $55,148 $46,610 4,846 9.3% 6 Kenosha County E 43,622 $54,267 $47,240 3,146 7.2%
7 Lake County NE 62,471 $58,462 $54,415 5,083 8.1% 8 Lake S/Cook NE 99,438 $124,911 $104,395 8,823 8.9% 9 Chicago Outer 341,955 $62,432 $42,955 98,959 28.9% 10 Chicago CBD 83,924 $83,778 $52,078 32,745 39.0% Total KRM Corridor 1,063,205 $64,212 $47,438 214,476 20.2%
Figure 7 presents a Source: 2000 US Census and Cambridge Systematics map showing the distribution of households without an auto. Lower automobile ownership may be associated with higher levels of transit services in the Illinois portion, while lower automobile ownership may more strongly reflect the lower incomes for the households located in the suburban/rural Wisconsin portion of the corridor. Figure 7 shows the distribution of households in the corridor with no automobile available.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 27 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
FIGURE 7. HOUSEHOLDS WITH NO VEHICLES IN THE KRM CORRIDOR
Source: 2000 Census and Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 28 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
II.6. CENSUS JOURNEY-TO-WORK ANALYSIS
The analysis of the distribution of the origins and destinations of workers
is useful in gauging the adequacy of a regional transportation system.
Travel to work is frequently the focus of transportation planning because The Census offers work travel tends to be concentrated in peak periods, and usually forms valuable information on the the basis for determining the required transportation capacity. Moreover, distribution of work work trips (and school trips) are considered to be non-discretionary, travel origins and destinations. because they have specific destinations and arrival time requirements.
Therefore, deficiencies in the transportation system such as congestion, can have a greater impact on non-discretionary travelers who have fewer
choices and more constraints in completing their journey.
Efficient transit services traditionally operate in corridors with relatively
high levels of traffic. Therefore, main markets for transit services are to be
found in the most traveled corridors in region. Although by definition Transit works best Census Journey-to-Work (JTW) differs from model estimates of work in high-traveled corridors. travel, Census JTW data provides invaluable insight for identifying such
corridors and establishing a reliable benchmark for both intra-regional and
inter-regional work-related travel behavior.
Starting from broader geographies, Census JTW data were analyzed at the county and superzone levels. An analysis of the JTW data at the
county-to-county level provides insights into the relative magnitudes of
Analysis of work-related travel among counties surrounding the KRM corridor. Table Journey-to-Work 8 shows the journey-to-work travel patterns at the county level of detail for data was performed at two levels of the six counties in the Illinois region and the seven counties in the geography. Wisconsin region.
Table 9 focuses on the work travel patterns for those counties that are located closer to, and are therefore most relevant to, the KRM corridor. The travel patterns can be summarized as follows:
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 29 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
The total work travel flows between these Wisconsin and Illinois counties and the flows within the KRM Wisconsin counties add up
Interstate and to just over 60,000 round trips (bold entries in Table 9). This intra-Wisconsin estimate does not include work travel within Illinois or local travel KRM work trips total 60,000. within Kenosha, Racine, and Milwaukee Counties, which in most
cases reflects shorter work trips.
Intra-Wisconsin Work travel between counties in the Wisconsin portion of the KRM totaled 34,000 trips. corridor account for about 34,000 round trips.
Within the Wisconsin portion of the work trip table, the two largest Racine-Milwaukee and Kenosha- interchanges of trips are between Racine and Milwaukee, and Racine are the between Kenosha and Racine. largest interchange areas. Racine-Milwaukee travel is heavily tilted with trips produced in
Racine and attracted to Milwaukee, while the Kenosha-Racine Travel between Racine and market is roughly balanced in each direction. Milwaukee is tilted towards Racine origins, while travel - Work travel from Racine-to-Milwaukee County between Kenosha destinations is almost 13,000 round trips. and Racine is balanced. - Work travel between Kenosha and Racine Counties in both directions accounts for a total of 12,000 round trips.
Work travel between KRM study area counties in Illinois and KRM counties in Wisconsin accounts for more than 26,000 round trips
in both directions.
There is a clear directionality in the Wisconsin-Illinois The majority of - interstate trips have traffic with more than 80% of these interregional trips Wisconsin origins. produced in Wisconsin and attracted to Illinois counties. The largest interstate travel - Work travel from Kenosha to Lake County destinations market is trips from Kenosha to Lake accounts for over 15,000 round trips. County.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 30 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 8. COUNTY-TO-COUNTY JOURNEY-TO-WORK TRAVEL PATTERNS
Work Location in Illinois Counties Work Location in Wisconsin Counties
Home County Cook DuPage Kane Lake McHenry Will Kenosha Milwaukee Ozaukee Racine Walworth Wash. Waukesha All
Cook 2,077,798 146,135 18,345 64,253 5,182 24,432 453 513 23 141 76 0 164 2,337,515
DuPage 152,433 277,934 16,539 5,377 884 9,197 71 115 0 24 9 0 70 462,653
Kane 34,361 34,318 107,807 3,012 5,056 1,840 32 50 24 0 16 9 8 186,533
Lake 83,502 6,967 1,383 212,450 5,866 389 2,507 725 43 407 148 32 227 314,646
McHenry 31,337 4,650 8,877 16,731 68,108 343 155 83 0 76 704 9 45 131,118
Will 76,574 43,498 3,432 1,128 158 107,456 16 49 0 0 16 0 27 232,354
Kenosha 2,942 366 115 15,342 1,660 35 40,489 2,260 112 6,526 614 25 734 71,220
Milwaukee 940 112 31 626 53 21 1,570 345,163 7,411 4,866 857 4,266 57,291 423,207
Ozaukee 71 12 0 28 0 0 36 15,057 22,469 76 65 1,934 2,360 42,108
Racine 678 115 10 1,422 191 0 5,825 12,906 445 61,020 1,660 207 4,157 88,636
Walworth 1,102 133 77 976 3,164 2 844 2,290 49 2,240 30,545 144 3,088 44,654
Washington 53 14 13 6 0 9 77 14,335 4,545 76 53 32,066 9,983 61,230
Waukesha 410 80 6 156 53 19 319 61,038 1,297 1,231 1,321 2,995 119,461 188,386
All 2,462,201 514,334 156,635 321,507 90,375 143,743 52,394 454,584 36,418 76,683 36,084 41,687 197,615 4,584,260 Source: 2000 Census and Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 31 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 9. COUNTY-TO-COUNTY WORK TRIPS
Work Location in Work Location in Wisconsin Residence Illinois Total County Cook Lake Kenosha Racine Milwaukee
Cook Co 2,077,798 64,253 453 141 513 2,143,158 Lake Co 83,502 212,450 2,507 407 725 299,591
Kenosha Co 2,942 15,342 40,489 6,526 2,260 67,559 Racine Co 678 1,422 5,825 61,020 12,906 81,851
Milwaukee Co 940 626 1,570 4,866 345,163 353,165
Total 2,165,860 294,093 50,844 72,960 361,567 2,945,324 Source: 2000 US Census Transportation Planning Package and Cambridge Systematics
II.7. KRM CORRIDOR ORIGIN-DESTINATION TRAVEL
PATTERNS
Another level of A further refinement of the corridor definition, and the corresponding size of the Journey-to-Work corridor market, is obtained by examining the origin-destination travel patterns analysis was performed at the between the KRM superzones defined in Figure 3. Each of these superzones KRM corridor superzone level. includes a portion of the respective county in both the Wisconsin and Illinois portions of the KRM corridor.
Work travel in the Table 10 provides a first-cut summary of total work travel between the KRM corridor includes: superzones within the KRM Corridor and travel patterns between each origin- destination combination. Key findings are as follows:
The total work-related trips that have both an origin and a destination a total of 919,000 trips, within the KRM corridor are about 919,000 round trips;
When the work travel within the Illinois portion of the KRM corridor is 446,000 excluding intra-Illinois, excluded, the subtotal reduces to 446,000 round trips;
This subtotal is further reduced to 172,000 round trips when the shorter 172,000 excluding work flows within each KRM superzone in Wisconsin are excluded; intra-zone Wisconsin trips,
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 32 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Out of the 172,000 round trips, more than 12,000 trips cross the
12,000 interstate Wisconsin-Illinois border, with 80% of these trips having destinations trips. mostly in Lake County;
Milwaukee CBD Within the Wisconsin portion of the KRM corridor, the Milwaukee CBD and Milwaukee and the Milwaukee County N&W superzones are the major attractors County N&W are the major and generators of zone-to-zone work trips, accounting for 66% of generators and attractions and 55% of generated trips; and attractors of KRM Wisconsin work In total, the Kenosha and Racine superzones produce 16% of the work travel. trips or 27,000 round trips with destinations in the KRM corridor. These Kenosha and Racine zones two areas attract 9% of the work trips or 16,000 round trips that are produce 16% and generated in other parts of the KRM corridor. attract 9% of work travel in the KRM Tables 11 and 12 feature the number of workers traveling by auto and transit corridor. within the corridor. The automobile is the dominant mode of transportation with
Census Journey-to- the exception of the portion of the corridor that is closer to the Chicago area Work travel is also and the areas closer to Milwaukee where transit has a measurable presence available by travel mode. and market share.
Figure 8 shows the transit market share for work trips that originate in each
superzone and have a destination within the KRM Corridor. Transit shares are reflected on the height of each bar, while the total number of workers taking
The share of work transit from each superzone is provided as a label at each bar in the chart. The trips by transit is plot clearly indicates the lack of transit service for areas located in areas of the lowest in zones that have less transit KRM corridor between south suburban Milwaukee County and Lake County, IL, service. where transit share does not exceed 5%.
Figure 9 examines the impact of travel time and trip length on transit use. This figure breaks down the transit market share for work trips that originate in each
superzone with destinations within the corridor at different levels of travel time4.
Journey-to-Work data was analyzed by travel time. 4 The travel time estimate that was used to develop Figure 9 is the weighted average travel time for all commuters in each origin-destination pair. The travel time estimate is obtained from the 2000 Census Journey-to-Work database.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 33 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 9 replicates the general pattern presented in Figure 8, but also reveals
that the market share of transit increases as travel times increase. This is true
particularly for zones and locations that are currently well served by transit. In
these cases, transit patronage approaches and in some instances exceeds the The analysis reveals that transit market share of traveling by highway modes: market share rises as travel times As the origin-destination travel time increases, transit offers a more lengthen. competitive service and enjoys a higher market share compared to
shorter trips in the same superzone;
Transit enjoys a very high market share for the longer trips that
originate in Illinois suburban counties that are served by the UP-North commuter rail line; Transit also does very well serving a mix of short and long trips that originate closer to Chicago and are well served by a mix of bus and rail services; and Transit enjoys a large market share for trips that originate closer to the Milwaukee CBD and are served by the existing bus system.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 34 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 10. NUMBER OF WORKERS TRAVELING WITHIN THE KRM CORRIDOR MARKET AREA
Work Location in Wisconsin Work Location in Illinois
Milwaukee Milwaukee County Milwaukee Milwaukee Racine Kenosha Lake Lake S/ Chicago Chicago All Home Area CBD N & W Outer County S Inner County S Outer County E County E County NE Cook NE Outer CBD Destinations
Milwaukee CBD 9,039 9,024 1,111 340 182 71 – 28 29 20 19,844
Milwaukee Co. N&W Outer 59,915 175,006 13,479 7,103 2,306 883 114 75 35 206 259,122
Milwaukee Co. S Inner 10,453 16,930 9,374 3,063 489 149 18 4 – 16 40,496
Milwaukee Co. S Outer 3,637 7,583 3,499 6,620 859 350 138 17 31 50 22,783
Racine County E 1,339 3,164 1,271 1,354 42,936 4,364 511 131 51 108 55,229
Kenosha County E 425 942 248 226 4,580 30,899 6,865 1,270 134 159 45,748
Lake County NE 89 127 62 23 119 1,316 48,312 11,235 758 1,670 63,710
Lake S/Cook NE 34 38 21 89 62 3,026 42,016 10,160 25,166 80,611
Chicago Outer 39 100 13 7 45 51 1,786 20,694 95,401 152,951 271,087
Chicago CBD 11 48 – – 125 1,780 8,613 49,643 60,220
ALL ORIGINS 84,981 212,962 29,078 18,735 51,605 38,145 60,894 77,249 115,212 229,989 918,850
Source: 2000 US Census Transportation Planning Package and Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 35 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 11. NUMBER OF WORKERS TRAVELING WITHIN THE KRM CORRIDOR MARKET AREA BY AUTO
Work Location in Wisconsin Work Location in Illinois
Milwaukee Milwaukee County Milwaukee Milwaukee Racine Kenosha Lake Lake S/ Chicago Chicago All Home Area CBD N & W Outer County S Inner County S Outer County E County E County NE Cook NE Outer CBD Destinations
Milwaukee CBD 4,638 6,608 815 313 145 45 – 28 21 – 12,613
Milwaukee Co. N&W Outer 50,451 152,918 12,101 6,890 2,241 853 107 72 19 104 225,756
Milwaukee Co. S Inner 9,128 15,651 7,828 2,880 474 149 18 4 . 16 36,149
Milwaukee Co. S Outer 3,438 7,436 3,397 6,226 859 343 138 17 31 42 21,926
Racine County E 1,241 3,079 1,248 1,354 40,256 4,340 511 131 51 33 52,244
Kenosha County E 417 936 248 211 4,539 28,762 6,847 1,197 100 73 43,330
Lake County NE 83 117 62 23 119 1,299 37,887 10,704 648 767 51,708
Lake S/Cook NE 34 27 21 77 62 2,926 33,200 9,092 10,738 56,177
Chicago Outer 21 82 13 7 38 51 1,449 15,909 58,073 54,978 130,620
Chicago CBD 11 37 – – 84 1,297 5,552 11,545 18,526
ALL ORIGINS 69,463 186,891 25,733 17,903 48,749 35,904 49,966 62,559 73,586 78,296 649,050
Source: 2000 US Census Transportation Planning Package and Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 36 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 12. NUMBER OF WORKERS TRAVELING WITHIN THE KRM CORRIDOR MARKET AREA BY TRANSIT
Work Location in Wisconsin Work Location in Illinois
Milwaukee Milwaukee County Milwaukee Milwaukee Racine Kenosha Lake Lake S/ Chicago Chicago All Home Area CBD N & W Outer County S Inner County S Outer County E County E County NE Cook NE Outer CBD Destinations
Milwaukee CBD 1,379 1,331 158 6 30 – – – – 20 2,924
Milwaukee Co. N&W Outer 7,923 11,832 1,108 105 45 18 – 3 – 83 21,117
Milwaukee Co. S Inner 1,164 955 455 117 15 – – – – – 2,706
Milwaukee Co. S Outer 193 73 76 – – – – – – 8 350
Racine County E 88 42 – – 1,106 22 – – – 75 1,333
Kenosha County E – – – 15 17 357 18 73 34 86 600
Lake County NE – 10 – – – – 789 201 105 877 1,982
Lake S/Cook NE – 11 – 12 – 67 2,014 886 14,167 17,157
Chicago Outer – 18 – – 7 – 260 4,272 17,255 91,871 113,684
Chicago CBD – – – – 21 360 1,777 16,276 18,434
ALL ORIGINS 10,747 14,271 1,797 243 1,232 397 1,155 6,923 20,057 123,462 180,285
Source: 2000 US Census Transportation Planning Package and Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 37 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
FIGURE 8. TRANSIT SHARES FOR WORK TRIPS ORIGINATING FROM AND DESTINED TO LOCATIONS IN THE KRM CORRIDOR
45% 113,684
40%
35%
18,433 30%
25% 17,157
20% 180,286
15% 2,924
10% 21,117 2,706 5% 1,333 1,982 350 600
0% Milwaukee Milw. Co. Milwaukee Co. Milwaukee Co. Racine Kenosha Lake Lake S/ Chicago Chicago ALL CBD N & W Outer S Inner S Outer County E County E County NE Cook NE Outer CBD ORIGINS
Source: 2000 US Census Transportation Planning Package Part III and Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 38 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
FIGURE 9. TRANSIT SHARES FOR WORK TRIPS ORIGINATING FROM AND DESTINED TO KRM SUPERZONES FOR DIFFERENT TRAVEL TIME INTERVALS
70.0% 4,935
60.0% 13,716 55,179 314 6,015 3,068 6,016
50.0% 905 3,535 17,496 24,561 826 253 70,957
40.0% 2,927 398 11,697 36,524 999 559 293
30.0% 4,393
20.0% 6,296 59,546 98 634 1,051 224 152 1,947
10.0% 747 59 1,355 173 377 2,250 1,141 137 6,671 7,726 249 103 82 458 420 373 1,688 240 234 99 90 222 141 33 0.0% Milwaukee Milw. Co. Milwaukee Co. Milwaukee Co. Racine Kenosha Lake Lake S/ Chicago Chicago ALL CBD N & W Outer S Inner S Outer County E County E County NE Cook NE Outer CBD ORIGINS
0 - 15 mins 15 - 30 mins 30 - 35 mins 35 - 60 mins 60 or more mins
Label Values Indicate Number of Workers Source: 2000 US Census Transportation Planning Package Part III and Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 39 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
II.8. ORIGIN-DESTINATION TRAVEL PATTERNS BETWEEN
STATIONS
The third tier of analysis for the KRM market focuses in more detail on work The third level of travel flows that occur closer to the proposed KRM corridor alignment. This Journey-to-Work analysis examined analysis follows the county-level and superzone-level analyses presented in work travel proximate to the previous sections and provides a more realistic assessment of market size for KRM corridor the KRM corridor market. alignment.
To represent the coverage provided by the proposed KRM corridor service,
concentric rings of various sizes were drawn around each of the proposed Areas were defined KRM corridor stations to represent different combinations of access and egress by concentric circles around catchment areas. These “buffer zones” are used to account for the total KRM corridor magnitude of journey-to-work trips that are generated in, and attracted to, stations. areas around each of the proposed KRM corridor rail station locations.
Concentric rings of 0.5 mile and one mile were drawn to include the potential for walk access and walk egress travel to and from each of the proposed KRM
corridor station locations. Furthermore, concentric rings of two, three, and five miles were drawn to capture the majority of access and egress by motorized Buffered areas of ½, one, two, three, modes including drive alone, shared ride, and bus distribution systems. and five miles were drawn. Finally, origin-destination trips that were ten minutes or less were dropped from the analysis to eliminate those shorter trips that both started and ended within
the area around a proposed KRM corridor station.
Estimated work trips generated within a given radius of each individual KRM
station and attracted to any other individual station are presented in Table 13.
For the entire KRM The top left entry in Table 13 shows the number of work trips originating within corridor, over five miles of any KRM corridor station that had a destination within five miles of 600,000 round trip work trips are any station. This estimate of 616,741 round trips provides an “upper limit” of within five miles of the potential market size throughout the entire KRM corridor. a station location.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 40 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 13. MARKET SIZE BY CATCHMENT AREAS FOR THE ENTIRE KRM
CORRIDOR
DESTINATIONS
ORIGINS Buffer Zone
5 Mile 3 Mile 2 Mile 1 Mile 0.5 Mile
5 Mile Buffer Zone 616,741 511,496 435,993 216,776 83,549
3 Mile Buffer Zone 466,081 402,112 346,393 177,254 68,154
2 Mile Buffer Zone 328,791 287,744 253,288 132,382 50,412
1 Mile Buffer Zone 108,189 95,027 83,444 50,227 17,005
0.5 Mile Buffer Zone 24,377 21,462 18,728 11,616 5,103 Source: 2000 US Census Transportation Planning Package and Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
The bottom right entry in Table 13 shows the number of work trips that were A total of 5,100 trips are within ½ generated within half a mile of any KRM corridor station stop and had a miles of a station destination within half a mile of any KRM corridor station. This estimate of location. 5,103 round trips provides a much lower “lower limit” of the potential market since it restricts the market size to include only those trips that are generated
within a very short distance from a KRM station and have a destination within an
equally short distance from any other KRM station.
The ranges of entries in Table 13 provide some interesting insights. Expanding Assumed buffers of one mile and two the catchment area from half mile to one mile increases the total size of the miles results in KRM corridor market by a factor of almost ten to more than 50,000 work round 50,000 and 250,000 trips, respectively. trips. A further expansion in the catchment area to two miles around each KRM
station to account for access and egress trips by motorized modes increases the total size of the market even further to 250,000 round trips.
Travel flows by An examination of Tables 14 to 17 shows how the entire KRM corridor market buffered distances breaks down by broad geographical sections of the corridor. These patterns are for distinct geographic market consistent with the county-to-county and superzone-to-superzone patterns groups were reflected in Tables 8 to 9 and Tables 10 to 12, respectively. Table 14 shows estimated. that the majority of the KRM corridor travel market is within the Illinois portion of
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 41 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
the corridor. Table 15 shows the weaker portion of the interstate flow with less
than 900 work round trips produced in northern Illinois and attracted to southern Wisconsin destinations.
TABLE 14. MARKET SIZE BY CATCHMENT AREAS FOR INTRA-ILLINOIS
Intra-Illinois work DESTINATIONS travel ORIGINS Buffer Zone
5 Mile 3 Mile 2 Mile 1 Mile 0.5 Mile
5 Mile Buffer Zone 488,215 425,229 365,748 196,390 76,187 3 Mile Buffer Zone 387,349 348,729 303,769 165,037 64,172 2 Mile Buffer Zone 282,817 256,832 228,224 125,594 48,412 1 Mile Buffer Zone 98,533 88,702 78,309 48,627 16,589 0.5 Mile Buffer Zone 23,028 20,608 18,114 11,349 5,003 Source: 2000 Census Transportation Planning Package and Cambridge Systematics
TABLE 15. MARKET SIZE BY CATCHMENT AREAS - ILLINOIS TO Illinois to Wisconsin work WISCONSIN travel DESTINATIONS
ORIGINS Buffer Zone
5 Mile 3 Mile 2 Mile 1 Mile 0.5 Mile
5 Mile Buffer Zone 894 649 513 126 21
3 Mile Buffer Zone 721 488 388 109 12 2 Mile Buffer Zone 535 344 277 70 3 1 Mile Buffer Zone 230 151 125 23 0 0.5 Mile Buffer Zone 27 13 13 0 0 Source: 2000 Census Transportation Planning Package and Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 42 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 16 presents travel data for the Wisconsin-to-Illinois interstate market for
the KRM corridor. A total of 7,281 work round trips are produced in southern
Wisconsin and attracted to northern Illinois destinations. As expected, this
market is smaller if trips with origins and destinations within a tighter radius
around proposed KRM corridor stations are considered. This reflects the dispersed nature of the destinations in the suburban northern Illinois area.
TABLE 16. MARKET SIZE BY CATCHMENT AREAS FOR FLOWS Wisconsin to Illinois work travel WISCONSIN TO ILLINOIS
DESTINATIONS
Buffer Zone ORIGINS
5 Mile 3 Mile 2 Mile 1 Mile 0.5 Mile
5 Mile Buffer Zone 7,281 4,600 3,734 2,558 451
3 Mile Buffer Zone 4,521 2,903 2,346 1,655 259
2 Mile Buffer Zone 2,725 1,772 1,349 935 162 1 Mile Buffer Zone 667 460 401 251 60
0.5 Mile Buffer Zone 137 114 75 54 0
Source: 2000 US Census Transportation Planning Package and Cambridge Systematics
The higher number of trips falling Finally, Table 17 shows the size of the core market for the KRM corridor within within larger Wisconsin. The total size of the work-bound market is estimated at 120,351 catchment areas indicates the round trips when considering origins and destinations within a 5-mile radius of importance of providing individual KRM stations in Wisconsin. This estimate drops to 49,992 and appropriate 23,438 round trips, when the radius is reduced to three and two miles, access/egress facilities and respectively. The much lower estimate of 1,326 round trips within a one-mile services. radius points to the dispersed nature of the market. This indicates the importance of providing appropriate access/egress facilities and service (e.g., parking lots and feeder buses) that would complement the proposed line-haul service in the KRM corridor.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 43 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 17. MARKET SIZE BY CATCHMENT AREAS FOR INTRA-
WISCONSIN FLOWS
Intra-Wisconsin work travel DESTINATIONS
ORIGINS Buffer Zone
5 Mile 3 Mile 2 Mile 1 Mile 0.5 Mile
5 Mile Buffer Zone 120,351 81,018 65,998 17,702 6,890
3 Mile Buffer Zone 73,490 49,992 39,890 10,453 3,711
2 Mile Buffer Zone 42,714 28,796 23,438 5,783 1,835 1 Mile Buffer Zone 8,759 5,714 4,609 1,326 356
0.5 Mile Buffer Zone 1,185 727 526 213 100
Source: 2000 US Census Transportation Planning Package and Cambridge Systematics
The travel flow analyses will be During model development, these home-to-work travel trip tables, will be expanded to non- expanded to include all trip purposes using the Regional Planning Commission work trip purposes during model and CMAP models. In addition, these tables will be produced for the base- and development. future-year to help assess the expected travel from and to the proposed
stations along the KRM corridor.
II.9. METRA SURVEY ANALYSIS Metra’s on-board Origin-Destination Survey provides Metra’s 2002 on-board survey provides information about the travel behavior of useful information on current current Metra riders in the KRM corridor who start or end their trip at the commuter rail Kenosha Metra station and who also use the Waukegan station to access riders. destinations in northern Illinois along the UP-North line. The analysis of the travel patterns of these Metra riders provides useful insights into:
The mode of access used by Wisconsin residents to reach the Kenosha and Waukegan stations;
The distance covered from their home origin to the Kenosha or Waukegan stations;
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 44 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
The concentration of destinations of Wisconsin residents south of the
Illinois border, and the mode of egress used from the Metra stations to
their final destination; and
The location of the final destinations of Illinois-originating Metra passengers in the Kenosha area, and the mode of egress to reach Figure 10 shows the origin and these destinations. destination of riders boarding at the Kenosha Figure 10 illustrates the origins and destinations of commuter rail riders who Station. board Metra trains at the Kenosha Station to reach destinations in Chicago and other areas in Northeastern Illinois, based on a survey conducted in 2002. It is
interesting to note the concentrations of Wisconsin residents’ origins in Kenosha and Racine with few additional trips originating further north and west, Figure 11 shows the origin and and the concentrations of Illinois destinations in Lake County, the northern destination of riders boarding at suburbs of Chicago around Evanston, and the Chicago CBD. the Waukegan Station. Figure 11 shows origins and destinations of commuter rail riders who board Metra at the Waukegan Station. It is interesting to note that a significant
number of riders boarding Metra at the Waukegan station reside near the
Kenosha station. This pattern can be explained by differences in Metra service characteristics between the two stations, including fares, frequency of trains,
the mix of express/local trains, and availability of parking. It should also be noted that the distribution of destinations is similar to that observed among Analyses of Metra UP-North rider Kenosha Station riders. data by mode of access and average The distribution of mode of access and access length for the UP-North stations distance to boarding station closer to the Illinois border are provided in Tables 18 and 19. The mode of were prepared. access characteristics of the stations in the vicinity of the border implies that
the majority of riders reach their stations by auto and about 80% of the riders travel less than five miles to reach a Metra station. This finding is consistent with the use of a 5-mile radius to capture most of the KRM corridor market. Moreover, the modal shares for station access and the distribution of rider origins also underscore the reliance on park-and-ride to access stations by Metra passengers.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 45 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 18. ACCESS MODE TO SELECTED UP-NORTH STATIONS
AM Boardings by Mode (%) Drove Dropped All Totals % Metra riders by Alone Off Carpool Walk Other mode of station access. Kenosha 60.1% 17.9% 7.2% 10.7% 4.1% 100% (291) Winthrop 100% (75) Harbor 76.0% 14.7% 2.7% 5.3% 1.3%
Zion 67.3% 20.4% 2.0% 8.2% 2.0% 100% (98) Waukegan 53.1% 21.8% 6.0% 5.8% 13.2% 100% (650)
Area Total 57.7% 20.2% 5.7% 7.3% 9.1% 100% (1,114) UPN Line Total 32.7% 12.6% 3.0% 41.4% 10.3% 100% (12,604)
Source: Metra On-board Survey, 2002
TABLE 19. ACCESS TRIP LENGTHS TO SELECTED UP-NORTH STATIONS
AM Boardings by Access Distance (%) % Metra riders by access distance to 0 – 0.5 0.5 – 1 1.0 – 2.0 2.0 – 5.0 Over 5.0 Totals boarding station. Mile Mile Miles Miles Miles Kenosha 1.4% 0.0% 45.2% 34.6% 18.9% 100% (217)
Winthrop 100% (64) Harbor 12.5% 34.4% 0.0% 28.1% 25.0%
Zion 4.4% 7.8% 54.4% 24.4% 8.9% 100% (90)
Waukegan 4.6% 7.5% 31.4% 33.8% 22.8% 100% (523)
Area Total 4.4% 7.6% 34.8% 32.7% 20.6% 100% (894)
UPN Line Total 36.5% 23.9% 23.7% 11.3% 4.6% 100% (10,893)
Source: Metra On-board Survey, 2002
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 46 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
FIGURE 10. ORIGINS-DESTINATIONS OF METRA RIDERS BOARDING AT KENOSHA
Source: Metra On-board Survey, 2002
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 47 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
FIGURE 11. ORIGINS-DESTINATIONS OF METRA RIDERS BOARDING AT WAUKEGAN
Source: Metra On-board Survey, 2002
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 48 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
II.10. REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION HOUSEHOLD SURVEY
The recent 2001 internal and external household survey data collected by the Data from the Commission’s Regional Planning Commission was also analyzed to provide more insights into household surveys were analyzed. the markets along the KRM corridor.
The Internal Household Travel Survey collected information from 16,570
households and 40,249 persons resulting in a database of 117,850 linked
person trip records for internal trips geocoded to survey quarter sections.
Table 20 shows the trips by survey respondents for each origin-destination
The results yielded pair. These travel patterns are generally consistent in magnitude with the similar patterns as previously presented Census Journey–to-Work results. Table 21 presents a the Journey-to- Work findings. subset of the household survey travel data focusing on the work trips in the survey.
The entire household survey was used in model estimation and validation tasks that are described in Chapters III and IV, respectively.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 49 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT TABLE 20. 2001 INTERNAL HOUSEHOLD SURVEY TOTAL PERSON TRIPS BY KRM SUPERZONES
Destination Zone Milwaukee Milw. Co. N Milwaukee Milwaukee Racine Kenosha North Lake Lake/Cook City of Remainder Origin Zone CBD & W Outer Co. S Inner Co. S Outer County E County E County County Chicago of Illinois Total Milwaukee CBD 86,788 139,374 25,246 4,559 3,304 690 380 - 106 104 260,551 Milwaukee Co. N & W Outer 139,723 1,745,788 96,486 34,575 11,051 3,786 766 152 787 2,484 2,035,598 Milwaukee Co. S Inner 24,256 96,727 157,269 21,629 3,082 1,075 36 38 58 352 304,522 Milwaukee Co. S Outer 4,732 34,062 22,059 74,940 4,993 1,070 170 51 31 118 142,226 Racine County E 3,586 11,155 3,302 4,883 411,927 24,256 1,166 364 150 666 461,455 Kenosha County E 684 3,775 687 1,008 24,131 317,440 8,682 2,374 776 4,191 363,748 North Lake County 130 716 125 213 1,709 8,223 11,116 Lake/Cook County - 231 39 52 224 2,324 2,870 City of Chicago 181 777 116 31 103 877 2,085 Remainder of Illinois 305 1,491 175 153 791 3,884 6,799 Total 260,385 2,034,096 305,504 142,043 461,315 363,625 11,200 2,979 1,908 7,915 3,590,970 Source: the Regional Planning Commission.
TABLE 21. 2001 INTERNAL HOUSEHOLD SURVEY HOME-BASED WORK PERSON TRIPS BY KRM SUPERZONES
Destination Zone Milwaukee Milw. Co. N Milwaukee Milwaukee Racine Kenosha North Lake Lake/Cook City of Remainder Origin Zone CBD & W Outer Co. S Inner Co. S Outer County E County E County County Chicago of Illinois Total Milwaukee CBD 16,432 53,473 9,288 2,474 1,975 233 133 - - 48 84,056 Milwaukee Co. N & W Outer 59,669 314,390 26,945 10,445 4,653 1,709 153 70 382 889 419,305 Milwaukee Co. S Inner 10,158 27,257 23,057 5,083 1,528 406 36 38 36 67,599 Milwaukee Co. S Outer 3,142 11,425 5,590 9,946 1,339 425 135 51 31 88 32,172 Racine County E 2,113 4,634 1,784 1,377 74,926 7,511 1,028 200 105 434 94,112 Kenosha County E 300 1,770 338 430 7,973 53,119 5,985 2,245 485 3,184 75,829 North Lake County 58 106 37 177 901 5,335 6,614 Lake/Cook County - 69 39 52 207 1,865 2,232 City of Chicago 75 399 - 31 103 502 1,110 Remainder of Illinois 48 645 52 48 386 2,750 3,929 91,995 414,168 67,130 30,063 93,991 73,855 7,470 2,604 1,003 4,679 786,958 Total Source: the Regional Planning Commission.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 50 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
III. MODEL DEVELOPMENT
The objective of the model development task is to develop and apply an interregional model that fits the unique analysis needs of the KRM corridor. The development of a single model proved necessary given the importance of travel flows within the southern region of Wisconsin and the travel flows between the Wisconsin portions of the KRM corridor and northern Illinois, particularly Lake County.
Neither the SEWRPC nor the CMAP models extend far from the Wisconsin-Illinois border to fully capture the cross-state Wisconsin to Illinois and Illinois to Wisconsin travel markets. Furthermore, both models may be less robust close to or beyond the boundaries of their study areas.
A single model for the KRM corridor has the advantage of “bridging” the gap of existing models by providing a more accurate representation of inter-state flows and flows near the border of each urban area model:
• A single model is developed for the entire KRM corridor with particular emphasis on travel patterns within southeastern Wisconsin and between Wisconsin and Illinois counties that are close to the KRM corridor.
• Recent household survey data collected in the seven-county SEWRPC region are used to analyze all trips within Wisconsin and the trips produced in Wisconsin and attracted to Illinois.
• The 2000 US Census journey-to-work data, outputs of the CMAP model, and the new destination choice models are combined to analyze the trips produced in Lake county, Illinois and attracted to Wisconsin destinations. The CMAP model is used for accounting for all other Illinois to Illinois travel outside Lake County.
III.1. ZONE SYSTEM
A zone system with a total of 2,193 zones (1,076 in Wisconsin and 1,117 in Illinois) with corresponding socioeconomic data has been developed for the KRM corridor. A map of the entire zone system for the KRM corridor is featured in Figures 12 and 13.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 51 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
FIGURE 12. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE SYSTEM (TAZ 2193) FOR THE KRM CORRIDOR MODEL
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 52 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
FIGURE 13. DETAIL OF THE KRM CORRIDOR ZONE SYSTEM FROM LAKE COUNTY TO MILWAUKEE
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 53 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Two existing zonal systems (SEWRPC’s TAZ 2470 and CMAP Z95 systems) were used as a basis for reconfiguration of the zone system for the KRM corridor. Different levels of importance were assigned to each zone based on its location relative to the KRM corridor. Five-mile and ten-mile buffers around the proposed rail line were used as measures of proximity.
In the Wisconsin portion of the KRM corridor, the highest level of detail was achieved by maintaining the existing SEWRPC zone structure for high-importance areas. Existing zones were aggregated in the medium–importance areas, and much larger zones were created by aggregating existing zones in low-importance areas. All newly created zones are completely consistent with the SEWRPC model and are nested in the SEWRPC TAZ 2470 system and PAA37 structure (Figure 13).
A consistent approach was used in developing the zone system for the Illinois portion of the KRM corridor. In order to better reflect the travel flows in the areas surrounding the UP-North line stations in Lake County, CMAP zones were split into quarter sections within a circular buffer of one-mile from each station location. The resulting zones for Illinois are also consistent with the CMAP model and nested in the existing CMAP Z95 zone system and CMAP District structure.
III.2. HIGHWAY NETWORK
A working version of the highway network was completed by integrating the underlying networks from SEWRPC and CMAP. Prior to integrating the two highway networks, both were converted from different modeling software to the TP+ modeling software format. The SEWRPC and CMAP networks were transferred from the Tranplan and Emme2 software packages respectively. The two networks were subsequently connected and tested to ensure connectivity throughout the KRM corridor study area.
A new version of the SEWRPC network included information needed to calculate congested travel times in the corridor and was processed to incorporate the Wisconsin-based congested travel times into the KRM model network. Using these times and congested times from the CMAP model, congested travel time ‘skims’ were developed to provide inputs to Trip Distribution.
Table 22 includes a summary of the attributes from each network. Attributes used in the resulting KRM network are listed below:
• A, B – Network A and B nodes used to define the location and alignment of the link • Distance – Distance of the link in miles
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 54 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 22. HIGHWAY NETWORK DATA FIELDS
Source Field Description AA Node BB Node DISTANCE Length of Link in 100 Miles TIME1 Travel Time in Minutes (100) TIME2 Congested Travel Time in Minutes (100) CAPACITY Capacity (variable depending on model run) LINKGRP1 Cross Section Codes LINKGRP2 County and Jurisdiction Codes LINKGRP3 Not Used ASGNGRP Assignment (Volume Delay) Group Codes USER User field COST User Defined Cost Field TWOWAY Oneway or Twoway Flag Field
SEWRPCTRANPLAN Data fields VOLUME Count Volume Field DIRCODE Directional Code Field (All 1) ID Link ID Field LENGTH Length of Link in miles MODES Mode permitted on link LINKTYPE Model Link Type LANES Lanes per Direction VDF Volume Delay Function UL1 User utility 1 UL2 User utility 2 UL3 User utility 3 SPEED05 Link Free Flow Speed Mile per Hour
CATS Data fields EMME2 TIME05 Link Free Flow Travel Time CAP05 Link Daily Capacity
• Capacity – Variable value of capacity for the link. This value may vary depending whether the assignment is for a daily, peak, or off peak time period • Lanes – Number of travel lanes per direction • VDF – Volume delay function id field used to vary the impact of congestion on travel times by various roadway types • Time – Free flow travel time of the link in minutes • Speed – Free flow speed coded to link in miles per hour
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 55 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
• Linkclass – Link type ID field which defines the type roadway (corresponds to SEWRPC highway cross section codes) • CTime – Congested travel time in minutes • CSpeed – Congested speed in miles per hour • Count – daily traffic counts observed on the link
Figures 14 to 16 show three examples of how the highway network is used to calculate the shortest path between selected origin and destination zones. Figure 14 shows the path for origin-destination pairs between Milwaukee and Racine.
FIGURE 14. MILWAUKEE TO RACINE SHORTEST HIGHWAY PATH
Figure 15 shows similar origin-destination paths for zones located in Racine and Kenosha. Finally, Figure 16 shows shortest time paths for selected origin-destination pairs between Kenosha and destinations in Lake County that are located just east of I-94.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 56 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
FIGURE 15. KENOSHA TO RACINE SHORTEST HIGHWAY PATH
FIGURE 16. KENOSHA TO LAKE COUNTY DESTINATION SHORTEST HIGHWAY PATH
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 57 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
III.3. TRANSIT NETWORK
A new transit network has been developed following the review by SEWRPC and project team staff. The existing transit network maintained by SEWRPC has been transferred to the KRM model highway network. A "spatial match" to the underlying highway network was first completed for all transit routes in the SEWRPC regional model. The transit routes were then reviewed for accuracy to ensure they were coded to the proper alignments. Where needed, new roadway links were added to accommodate the level of detail required for transit routes in the entire SEWRPC area. For the Illinois portion of the network, a recent version of the CMAP transit network has been integrated into the transit network. As a result, the KRM transit network includes both the SEWRPC and CMAP transit systems.
SEWRPC coding for transit modes was maintained in the KRM network, with modes 1-10 representing various access and transfer modes, and modes 11-20 representing the assorted bus systems. For the Illinois transit system, all access and transit modes have values greater than 20.
A total of 353 separate bus routes were coded in the SEWRPC region. Figure 17 shows the distribution of the bus routes in the Wisconsin part of the corridor.
FIGURE 17. BUS ROUTES IN THE SEWRPC REGION
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 58 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
A total of 126 CTA bus routes and 233 Pace bus routes were transferred from the CMAP emme/2 network into the new transit network developed under the TP+ platform. Metra commuter rail lines, and CTA subway lines are currently being coded into the network. Figure 18 shows the currently coded distribution of the bus routes in the Chicago metropolitan area.
Appendix 1 includes a summary with the operating characteristics and route name designations for all transit routes along the KRM corridor.
FIGURE 18. BUS ROUTES IN THE CMAP REGION
Testing for both transit networks that span the KRM corridor. This testing includes, but will not be limited to the following tasks:
• Ensuring that there are no conflicts between the two transit systems,
• Confirming that transfers can take place where allowed and not take place where not allowed,
• Checking locations of park-n-ride lots,
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 59 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
• Transit route checks to ensure that bus routes are coded to the correct highway links, and
• Checking access to and from the various transit modes.
Testing and validation of the both the transit and highway systems will be ongoing throughout the entire model development and validation process.
III.4. TRIP GENERATION
New trip generation models were developed for the KRM corridor. The SEWRPC household survey data were first geocoded to the newly created zone system for the KRM corridor. This allowed us to develop a new model for the KRM corridor that is consistent with the underlying data for the SEWRPC model.
The objective of a trip generation model is to forecast the number of person trips that will begin from or end in each travel analysis zone (TAZ) within the region for a typical day of the target year. A trip generation model generally comprises two individual components: a trip production model and a trip attraction model.
The production end is typically the home end of the trip, while the attraction end is the non-home end. For example, if a person went from home to work in the morning and from work to home in the evening, the traveler would have generated two productions at the home zone and two attractions at the work zone. However, for trips that have neither the origin nor the destination at the home-end, the origin end is assumed to be the production end and the destination end to be the attraction end. Thus, if a person went to lunch from work and returned to work, he would have generated a nonhome-based trip with production and attraction ends at both the work place and the restaurant.
Trip production models are based on explanatory variables that define the demographic makeup of the zone’s population, while the trip attraction models rely on a set of explanatory variables that capture the type and intensity of employment within the zone.
Trip production rates were estimated from the household survey for each of three trip purposes: HBW – home based work trips, HBO – home based other trips, and NHB – nonhome based trips. In addition, separate trip production rates were estimated for Kenosha, Racine, Milwaukee and the rest of the SEWRPC region. Using the SEWRPC household survey, we grouped the households in the region based on their counties of location, household sizes (number of people living in the household)
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 60 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
and vehicle availability levels. The SEWRPC trip database was then used to summarize trips of each purpose produced by these households. The ratio of the number of trips of each type to the corresponding number of households yields the trip production rate. Due to sampling issues in the survey, these rates were smoothed in an additional step to reflect a logical pattern of a higher number of daily trips produced by larger households with more vehicles in the household. Table 2.1 in Appendix 2 shows the number of trips by purpose, region, household size and vehicle availability. Table 2.2 classifies the underlying households by KRM corridor region, size and vehicle availability. Table 2.3 shows the unrefined trip production rates computed from Tables 2.1 and 2.2, while Table 2.4 shows the final smoothed trip production rates by purpose.
Trip attraction models relate the trip-ends attracted by a TAZ to the type and intensity of employment in that zone. The number of work trips attracted to a TAZ depends on the total employment in that zone. Similarly, the number of shopping trips attracted to a zone depends on the retail employment in that zone. Social and recreational trips are attracted to art and entertainment centers, while school trips are attracted to educational zones. Trip attraction models quantify these relationships, and thereby, provide a means of forecasting trip-ends based on employment forecasts. Table 2.5 summarizes the trip attraction rates segmented by purpose and by geographic region.
The Trip Generation task has involved the active review by SEWRPC staff who conducted cross- checks with the outputs of the SEWRPC model.
III.5. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND DESTINATION CHOICE MODEL
The trip generation model estimates the trips produced from and attracted to each zone in the study area; the trip distribution model uses this information to estimate the trip interchanges between all possible zone pairs. For the current study, a destination choice model approach has been adopted for trip distribution. The destination choice model predicts the probability that a given zone is “chosen” as the attraction end from a given production end. The relative attractiveness of a zone depends on the following two sets of explanatory factors:
• The extent of activity in the zone, as quantified by employment, population, the number of households, and/or the area of each zone to account for zones of different sizes, and
• The proximity of the attraction zone to the production zone, as quantified by measures of separation including simple network distances or congested travel times.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 61 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
The destination choice model may be construed as a generalized form of the traditional gravity model; however, the destination choice model approach enjoys some distinct advantages:
• First, a destination choice model is estimated using person trip data from a household survey. Therefore, it is a behaviorally sound way of representing trip interchanges compared to the traditional gravity model, which relies on aggregated zonal productions and attractions.
• Second, the destination choice model easily accommodates more than one impedance measure in the same specification. Thus, one can empirically test whether both distance and congested travel time feature in an individual’s decision to make a trip to a particular attraction end.
• Third, a destination choice model allows one to empirically test various functional forms of zonal impedance. For example, the impedance between two zones can be represented by a simple linear travel time or by a polynomial form.
• Fourth, the destination choice model allows one to define the attractiveness of a zone in terms of a composite “size” measure that incorporates area (in square miles), employment, and the number of households in the zone. The size measure reflects from a behavioral standpoint trip makers’ decisions to go to attraction centers such as offices, shopping malls or recreation centers located in each zone. Each size variable, therefore, is a proxy measure of the number of elemental attraction-ends within a zone.
Three separate destination choice models were developed for the KRM corridor for the HBW, HBO and NHB trip purposes. For each of the three models, both congested travel time and network distance were used as the impedance measures. The production to attraction distances, and the congested and free flow travel times were obtained using the KRM network synthesized from the SEWRPC and CMAP area networks. Table 3.1 in Appendix 3 presents the average distance, free flow and congested travel times by trip purpose and Table 3.2 presents the percentage of intrazonal trips for each trip purpose. Figures 3.1 through 3.6 show the distribution of trip distance, free flow and congested travel times by trip purpose. As expected, the home-based work trips are longer on average than the HBO and the NHB trips.
The employment and population data necessary for model estimation were derived from SEWRPC data for the Wisconsin portion of the corridor, and the CMAP zonal socio-economic data for the Illinois
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 62 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
portion. Key zonal socio-economic variables used for model development include total employment, retail employment, non-retail employment, the number of households and zonal area in square miles.
The impedance variables and the zonal socio-economic variables were merged with the person trip database from the SEWRPC household survey. The resulting integrated database was used for destination choice model estimation in ALOGIT. The destination choice model results summarized in Table 3.3 are characterized both by proper signs for all coefficients, highly significant values for all coefficients used, and good overall model fit. A synopsis of the model results is as follows:
• For the HBW purpose, a polynomial form was used for both the congested travel times and the trip distance. This indicates that everything else being equal, the utility of an attraction zone decreases as a function of its distance and/or congested time from the production zone.
• For both the HBO and NHB models a simpler linear form has been adopted for the congested travel times and distance. Figure 3.7 shows the utility of an attraction zone as a function of congested travel time between the production and attraction zones. Figure 3.8 presents the utility of an attraction zone as a function of distance between production and attraction zones.
• For the HBW purpose, total employment and zonal area have been used to measure the overall “size” of each attraction zone. The results indicate that the larger the area and employment of a zone, the higher its attractiveness for work trips.
• For the HBO and NHB trips, measures of retail employment, non-retail employment, number of households and zonal area in square miles have been used to measure the overall “size” of the attraction zone.
• A binary variable representing Wisconsin to Illinois interchanges has been used in each of the three models. The variable shows a slight positive effect for the HBW and HBNW trips, whereas for the NHB trips, the variable has a negative effect.
• A binary variable indicating whether or not a trip is intrazonal has also been used. This variable helps account for the number of shorter trips, reflects the resolution of the zone system, and enables better validation of trips that will be assigned to the network.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 63 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
• For the HBW purpose, a series of dummy variables representing six geographic areas has been used: Milwaukee Core, Milwaukee Collar, Racine Downtown, Kenosha Downtown, Chicago Core and Chicago Collar. These dummy variables indicate that the CBD zones along the KRM corridor are more attractive for work trips than zones elsewhere in the region.
The destination choice models summarized in Table 3.3 define the utility of each possible attraction zone. Using the standard multinomial logit formulation, these utilities were used to compute the likelihood of choosing a zone as an attraction end from a given production end. The choice probabilities were then multiplied with the total productions from each zone to obtain a trip interchange matrix.
III.6. MODE CHOICE MODEL
A key question for the KRM corridor project is which mode choice models should be used for model application and what is the preferred model specification. Another critical question is how to best incorporate the commuter rail mode in these models since such a mode currently serves the SEWRPC region but is not included in the existing SEWRPC models.
The currently available mode choice models were provided to the project team by SEWRPC along with the final version of the estimation datasets. These models include the traditional level of service variables used to model the competition between highway and bus transit modes. The models for each of the four trip purposes are presented in Table 23 and are discussed in detail below.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 64 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 23. SUMMARY OF EXISTING SEWRPC MODE CHOICE MODELS BY PURPOSE
Variables Home-based Work Home-based Other Home-based Shopping Nonhome-based Coefficient t-statistic Coefficient t-statistic Coefficient t-statistic Coefficient t-statistic
Drive Alone Base -1.473 -65.4 -5.294 -82.6 1.359 57.5
Share Ride driver constant -0.8352 -80.5
Share Ride passenger constant -1.631 -150.2
Walk to transit constant Base
Walk to transit - Zero Auto 3.219 76.9 households
Drive Alone to transit constant -2.102 -107.4
Share Ride to transit constant -3.891 -98.1
In-vehicle travel time -0.02842 -35.4 -0.01028 -9.8 -0.05338 -21.4 -0.006614 -5.8
Out of vehicle travel time -0.06503 -43.6 -0.0459 -47.3 -0.06815 -31.9 -0.06824 -60.7
Cost of travel -0.005526 -57.0 -0.0119 -72.0 -0.02895 -59.2 -0.007848 -36.7
Number of Autos available – DA mode 0.6037 121.1 2.613 187.1 4.213 145.1
Nest coefficient 0.9364 83.5 N/A N/A N/A
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 65 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
III.6.1. Review of Existing Models
The first task in our review of the SEWRPC models was to evaluate the existing mode choice models using FTA’s draft guidance on the properties of models used for New Starts forecasting. The advantage of these mode choice models is that they were estimated using the latest SEWRPC household survey and reflect the current level of service characteristics of highway and transit modes in the SEWRPC region.
Our review also suggests that these models do not suffer from any of the problematic characteristics mentioned by the FTA such as bizarre alternative specific constants, non-logit decision rules, inconsistency between path-building and mode choice model, or unusual coefficients in the models. However, there are some coefficients that fall outside the expected ranges recommended by the FTA. These coefficients in Table 23 are discussed in this section in more detail. All travel time inputs are measured in minutes and all cost inputs are measured in cents.
The HBW mode choice model (home-based work trips) has a nested structure that differentiates between three transit modes (Walk to Transit, Drive alone to Transit or Transit P&R, and Share a ride to Transit or Transit K&R) and three auto modes (Drive alone, Share ride driver and Share ride passenger). The drive alone alternative has been used as the base constant for the auto nest, while the walk to transit alternative has been used as the base constant for the transit nest. The constants for the two share ride modes are negative as expected and their magnitude seems appropriate (- 0.8352 and -1.631). The constants for drive to transit and share a ride to transit are also negative as expected (-2.102 and -3.891).
Another constant is used to reflect the higher propensity of zero-car households to walk to transit – this constant also has a proper sign and magnitude (3.219). The number of autos available has a positive impact on the Drive alone mode as expected with a reasonable value (0.6037). The nest coefficient of 0.936 does not draw a sharp distinction between auto and transit modes and suggests that a traditional multinomial logit model might also be appropriate.
The key explanatory variable, in-vehicle travel time, has a coefficient of -0.02842 which is within the expected range (-0.02 to -0.03 range). The ratio of OVTT to IVTT is 2.3 which again fits right within the 2 to 3 ratio range. The cost coefficient of -0.005526 seems high and also results in a value of time of $3.1 per hour which is on the low range. The input costs by alternative will be examined as part of this model evaluation and refinement.
The HBO mode choice model (home-based other trips) has a standard binomial structure that differentiates between auto and transit. Although the constant for Drive alone is unexpectedly negative
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 66 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
(-1.473), it is counter-balanced by the positive coefficient for the number of autos available which has a very strong positive impact on the Drive alone mode (2.613).
The key explanatory variable of in-vehicle travel time has a coefficient of -0.01028 which is one third (- 0.01028/-0.02842 = 0.36) of the IVTT coefficient for the HBW trips and falls within the 0.1 to 0.5 ratio range. The ratio of OVTT to IVTT is 4.46 which is higher than the 2 to 3 ratio range. The cost coefficient of -0.0119 is twice as high as the coefficient for HBW trips and suggests a value of time of $0.52 per hour which is rather low. These coefficients and input data need to be examined in greater detail as part of model refinement.
The HBS mode choice model (home-based shopping trips) has the same multinomial structure for auto versus transit. The constant for Drive alone is unexpectedly negative and very large in magnitude (-5.294). It is counter-balanced by a positive and very large coefficient for the number of autos available for the Drive alone mode (4.213). These constants need to be re-examined because of their very large values.
The key explanatory variable of in-vehicle travel time has a coefficient of -0.05338 which is larger than the IVTT coefficient for the HBW trips (-0.05338/-0.02842 = 1.88). This suggests a greater sensitivity to time for shopping versus work trips and the coefficient ratio is outside the 0.1 to 0.5 ratio range. The ratio of OVTT to IVTT is 1.28 which is outside the 2 to 3 ratio range. The cost coefficient of - 0.02895 is twice as high as the coefficient for HBW trips and suggests a value of time of $1.11 per hour which is rather low. It appears that the interaction among these three variables needs to be re- examined during model refinement. Furthermore, a combined model of HBS and HBO trip purposes will be consistent with the non-work purpose used in the KRM corridor model.
The NHB mode choice model (nonhome-based trips) has the same multinomial structure for auto versus transit. The constant for Drive alone is positive as expected with a reasonable value (1.359).
The key explanatory variable of in-vehicle travel time has a coefficient of -0.00661 which is 0.23 times as large as the IVTT coefficient for the HBW trips (-0.00661/-0.02842 = 0.23) and falls within the 0.1 to 0.5 ratio range suggested by the FTA. The ratio of OVTT to IVTT is 10.32, which is much higher than the 2 to 3 ratio range suggested by the FTA. The cost coefficient of -0.00785 is higher than the coefficient for HBW trips and suggests a value of time of $0.51 per hour which is rather low.
III.6.2. Options for Mode Choice Modeling
The first option was to re-estimate the existing SEWRPC mode choice models and enhance them with information about current rail usage for Wisconsin residents who board the Metra trains at Kenosha and Waukegan and those residents who use Amtrak to commute between Milwaukee and Chicago.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 67 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Zzz However, this option was not feasible since the recent SEWRPC household survey does not include detailed mode choice information for Wisconsin to Illinois travel.
The second option was to use the SEWRPC models as a basis and incorporate an asserted rail constant to be consistent with the methodology currently used for the New Starts studies under way for Metra. Rail is a mode that is currently available to SEWRPC area residents. It is used by Wisconsin residents who board Metra at the Kenosha station and stations in norther Illinois (most notably the Waukegan station) and by Amtrak riders who travel between Milwaukee and Chicago. However, the rail mode is not modeled explicitly in the SEWRPC model since mode usage information for travel between Wisconsin and Illinois was not collected in detail in the household survey.
The review of the existing mode choice suggests that the HBW model more closely meets most of the FTA criteria with the possible exception of the cost coefficient. However, the HBO and HBS models would most likely have to be re-estimated to ensure that the coefficients fall within the range of coefficients suggested by the FTA. The NHB model presents less of an issue although the large coefficient for out of vehicle travel time needs to be better understood. The following steps were taken as part of this model refinement effort:
• SEWRPC staff provided identifier information for the observations in the estimation dataset so that origin and destination zones and corresponding level of service information for highway and transit could be merged for each origin-destination pair.
• CS staff obtained more detailed access and egress information for the transit paths present in each origin-destination zone pair using the new KRM networks.
• CS staff proceeded with estimating a set of new mode choice models using the SEWRPC household survey for HBW, HBO and NHB trips.
III.6.3. Revised Mode Choice Models
Various model versions were estimated to incorporate potential improvements to the model. These versions originally used the old travel time and cost “skims” from the SEWRPC database as inputs to the model. Changes in these mode choice models for work travel improved the performance of the model and addressed some of the questions that were discussed earlier in this report:
• Constants were used for all modes except the “Walk to Transit” mode. This improvement was made in all versions to remain consistent with mode choice theory and practice;
• The models were estimated without using weights. This was done since the use of weights in the old models resulted in coefficients that appeared to have artificially lower standard errors and appeared to be more statistically significant;
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 68 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
• Availability criteria were used to include the “Drive” option only for respondents with an automobile available;
• Very short trips were eliminated from estimation. Trips with in-vehicle auto travel time of less than 2 minutes were removed from model estimation to reflect intra-zonal trips for which level of service information is not accurate;
• Automobile costs of 15 cents per mile were used;
• A multinomial model was used instead of a nested model since the nest coefficients were very close to one in the original models and became larger than one when the Drive constant was used to account for market shares by mode.
As a final step in model estimation, more detailed skims were developed using the KRM zone system and network. These skims were used as inputs to the mode choice models and allowed us to break down into separate components the relative impacts of wait time, walk access and egress times, and transfer times on the utility of transit. The same assumptions discussed above were used during model estimation.
Auto-related variables include congested and free-flow in-vehicle travel times and O-D distance. Transit variables include in-vehicle travel time, access/egress times, components of wait times and time spent while transferring, fares, and distance.
Table 24 summarizes the work and non-work mode choice models that were estimated using the more detailed skims from the KRM corridor model networks. These mode choice models were coded and were applied to the KRM corridor to validate the observed and predicted market shares by mode and to compare modeled and observed transit ridership along key KRM corridor groups of routes. The evaluation of the models can be summarized as follows:
The HBW mode choice model (home-based work trips) has a multinomial structure that differentiates between three transit modes (Walk to Transit, Drive alone to Transit or Transit P&R, and Share a ride to Transit or Transit K&R) and three auto modes (Drive alone, Share ride driver and Share ride passenger). Overall, the model coefficients are consistent with FTA criteria as summarized below:
• The “walk to transit” mode is used as the base. The transit modes with auto access are strongly negative. Zero auto availability has a strong positive impact on the walk to transit mode.
• The relative values of the three auto constants are reasonable. The combined effect of these constants and the three auto availability dummy variables produces positive constants for the three auto modes at different levels of auto ownership (Table 24).
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 69 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
• The value of the in-vehicle travel time coefficient is slightly below, but is consistent with, the recommended -0.02 coefficient value for IVTT.
• The coefficient for the first wait time is 2.3 times as large as the in-vehicle travel time coefficient while other wait time, which includes time spent while transferring, is 3.8 times as onerous.
• The relative value of the access and egress travel time coefficient is 3.4 times as large as the in-vehicle travel time coefficient.
• The cost coefficient is slightly lower than FTA’s guidance of a -0.003 value. However, when combined with the slightly lower value of the IVTT coefficient, it results in a value of time that is exactly at the FTA implied value of $4.2/hour.
The HBNW mode choice model (home-based non-work trips) has the same structure and number of alternatives. Overall, the model coefficients are consistent with FTA criteria for non-work models:
• The modal constants are negative with the exception of a positive constant for the Drive Alone mode relative to the zero constant for “walk to transit” (Table 24).
• When combined with the auto availability dummy variables, there is a positive effect on all three auto modes.
• The “walk to transit” mode is much more preferred than any mode with drive access to transit especially among households with zero cars available.
• The value of the in-vehicle travel time coefficient is slightly above, but is consistent with, the recommended coefficient value of -0.01 for IVTT.
• The coefficient for wait time is 1.8 times as large the in-vehicle travel time coefficient, consistent with FTA’s criteria.
• The relative value of the access and egress travel time is 3.3 times as large as the in-vehicle travel time.
• A coefficient for the number of transfers is negative with a value of -0.0638 which corresponds to 3.9 minutes of in-vehicle time, a value that is again comparable to the 5 minutes of in-vehicle time recommended by the FTA.
Overall, the two home-based mode choice models were generally consistent with FTA criteria but a model for non-home based travel could not be estimated satisfactorily. At a later stage in mode choice model estimation, the non-motorized modes were introduced as an alternative. The choice models that resulted from this round of model estimation are presented in Table 24.a. These models use a simpler specification that was tested during model application. The models were
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 70 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
evaluated with the same criteria discussed earlier and perform well meeting the expected coefficient ranges for most variables used.
During the last stage of model application, the default FTA coefficients were used in the mode choice model specification. This decision reflected the need to be entirely consistent with the coefficient values used by the FTA and to calculate the transportation system user benefits based on these coefficients.
Although the estimated models were consistent with the expected range of coefficients, there were differences for which we wanted to control and make sure that they did not have any adverse impacts on ridership and benefit estimation. For example, although the transfer time coefficient was a multiple of the in-vehicle travel time coefficient, there was no separate coefficient for the number of transfers needed that could be reliably estimated.
The mode choice model with the default FTA coefficients was applied and re-validated for the KRM study area. Revised TSM and KRM rail ridership forecasts were obtained and the user benefits were calculated based on these most recent model runs.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 71 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT TABLE 24. UPDATED SEWRPC MODELS USING UPDATED SKIMS
Home-based Work Home-based Other Variables Coefficient t-statistic Coefficient t-statistic
Drive Alone -0.188 -0.5 0.548 1.0 Share Ride driver constant -1.888 -5.1 -0.2588 -0.5
Share Ride passenger constant -2.412 -6.5 -0.4025 -0.8
Drive Alone to transit constant -1.423 -4.8 -2.087 -5.6
Share Ride to transit constant -3.174 -8.1 -1.695 -5.1
Walk to transit - Zero Auto HH 1.772 4.4 2.797 9.1
In-vehicle travel time (min.) -0.0147 -2.0 -0.0164 -1.3
Access & Egress time (min.) -0.0502 -1.5 -0.0554 -3.0
First wait time (min.) -0.0344 -2.8 -0.0299 -3.6 Other wait time (min.) -0.0562 -4.6
Cost of travel (cents) -0.002119 -2.0 -0.00352 -1.3
Number of Transfers -0.0638 -0.4
Number of Autos – DA mode 0.7921 6.8 1.089 5.7
Number of Autos – SR Driver 0.6463 5.4 1.168 6.2
Number of Autos – SR Passenger 0.3578 2.9 1.085 5.7
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 72 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT TABLE 24.a MODELS WITH SIMPLER SPECIFICATION AND NON-MOTORIZED MODES
Trip Purpose Home- Home- Based Based Nonhome Work Nonwork Based
Constant - Drive Alone 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000
Constant - Shared Ride -1.57920 0.16590 -0.41830
Constant - Walk to Transit -0.12720 -0.37340 -0.54690
Constant - Drive to Transit -2.36720 -2.00530 -2.05540
Constant - Non-Motorized 0.64940 2.27370 0.52580
IVTT - All modes -0.01728 -0.01898 -0.03201
Initial Wait – Transit -0.04497 -0.02147 -0.10070
Transfer Time – Transit -0.07727 -0.04926 -0.07139
Access and Egress Time – Transit -0.06440 -0.07399 -0.05331
Cost - All Modes -0.00192 -0.00224 -0.00360
Distance - Non-Motorized Modes -1.40200 -1.29800 -1.45500
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 73 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
III.7. TRIP TABLE DEVELOPMENT
Trip tables by trip purpose are the outcome of the model development process and provide a critical input in modeling base and future-year flows. Critical inputs to this process include the SEWRPC household survey, the 2000 US Census journey-to-work database, different components of the CMAP trip table, the KRM model, and data on highway and transit traffic that are used for model validation.
In this study, a distinction needs to be made among different types of travel flows within the KRM corridor. This distinction is necessary since there are no recent household travel survey data that can be used to model the flows of trips that are generated on the Illinois side of the border that may have destinations along the KRM corridor. Given the relatively high importance of travel flows between Lake county and southern Wisconsin, we have adopted a trip table development approach that utilizes the best available data sources for each travel flow.
Table 25 summarizes the different approaches used for trips that are produced in and are attracted to Wisconsin and/or in Illinois. Trips produced in Wisconsin with destinations either in Wisconsin or in Illinois have been analyzed extensively using the recent SEWRPC household survey. Trips produced in Illinois are analyzed in two parts with different methods. The trips produced in the Lake County will reflect the productions from the CMAP model and will be distributed using the destination choice models. The trips produced in other counties in Illinois will be analyzed and modeled through a combination of data sources including the 2000 US Census of journey to work travel and the most recent version of the CMAP regional model.
Intra-Wisconsin travel (trips produced and attracted in Wisconsin).
The trip generation, destination choice models, and refined mode choice models discussed in the previous sections were used to develop this portion of the trip table. The projected change in population and employment by zone provided by SEWRPC drives the future-year forecasts.
Wisconsin to Illinois travel (trips produced and attracted in Wisconsin).
The approach used for this travel market is similar to the approach used for intra-Wisconsin travel. The trip generation, trip attraction, destination choice models, and refined mode choice models were used to develop this portion of the trip table. The projected change in population and employment by zone provided by SEWRPC drives the future-year forecasts. The Wisconsin-generated trips were assigned to Illinois destinations using the estimated destination choice models.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 74 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 25. SUMMARY OF TRIP TABLE APPROACHES FOR DIFFERENT TRAVEL MARKETS
Trips Attracted to:
Wisconsin Lake County Remaining Illinois Trips Produced in:
Analysis of the SEWRPC household survey. New production & attraction rates. Wisconsin Estimation and application of a new destination choice model. Refinement of the mode choice models.
CMAP estimates of trips produced in Lake County. Destination choice model will distribute Lake County trips produced in Lake Co.
Journey to work flow analysis. CMAP trip tables for CMAP model and SEWRPC household survey used to estimate all purposes Remaining Illinois non-work trips. (HBW, HBO, and Destination model to distribute trip ends. NHB).
Lake County Trips (trips produced in Lake County - Illinois).
The transit service improvements along the KRM corridor will provide opportunities for better access to the activity centers in located in Wisconsin. As a result, trips produced in Lake County represent a potentially critical market for the KRM corridor.
To represent the impacts of land use and transit service on the likelihood of Lake County residents choosing destinations in Wisconsin, the trips produced in Lake County were distributed by the destination choice model instead of the fixed CMAP trip table. This approach provides the number of trips originating in Lake County and distributes their destinations among areas in Wisconsin, in Lake County and in the other five counties in Illinois.
Unlike the SEWRPC survey, there is no recent household survey in Illinois that can be used to model the trips produced in the Illinois portion of the KRM corridor. Therefore, Lake country travel flows reflect the trips produced from the CMAP model for Lake county and were distributed by applying the new destination choice models. The 2000 US Census journey-to-work travel flows were used primarily for validating the number of work trips.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 75 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Trips from Illinois (excluding Lake County) to Wisconsin and Lake County
Due to the lack of recent household travel survey data for travel by Illinois residents, the 2000 US Census journey to work travel flows were used as a basis for estimating trips that are produced in Illinois (excluding Lake County) and are attracted by Wisconsin destinations. To properly account for non-work travel (HBO and NHB trips), we have calculated the ratios of work to non-work trips at the regional and county level as levels of detail in the data permitted. We have used both the work and non-work trips in the CMAP trip tables and the outputs of the analysis of the SEWRPC household travel survey as a source for deriving ratios and regression models for estimating the market size of the HBO and NHB trips for this portion of the trip table.
We have used six different assumptions to derive the mix of work and non-work trips that are produced in Illinois (excluding Lake County) and are attracted to Wisconsin destinations. The first four are used to derive ratios of non-work trips to home-based trips, while the last two are used to estimate linear regression models regressing HBO and NHB over HBW trips using the CMAP trip table. The different approaches can be summarized as follows:
1. The work/non-work mix is assumed to be the same as the Illinois to Wisconsin work/non- work travel mix that is found in the existing CMAP regional travel model;
2. The mix of work and non-work trips between Illinois and Wisconsin is assumed to be the same as the travel purpose mix for all county-to-county travel within Illinois;
3. The mix of work/non-work trips is assumed to be the same as the work/non-work mix of travel that is observed for all inter-county travel in the SEWRPC model region;
4. The mix of work/non-work trips is assumed to be the same as the work/non-work mix of travel that is observed for all inter-county travel originating from the SEWRPC region and attracted to the CMAP region;
5. The likelihood of a cross-state HBW trip producing a non-work-cross-state trip is assumed to be the same as the likelihood of a HBW trip producing a non-work trip for a zone in Illinois. Linear relationships are assumed between HBW trip productions and HBO and NHB trip productions in Illinois zones;
6. The likelihood of a cross-state HBW producing a non-work-cross-state trip is assumed to be the same as the likelihood of an inter-county HBW trip producing an inter-county non- work trip for a zone in Illinois. Linear relationships are assumed between HBW trip productions and HBO and NHB trip productions in Illinois zones.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 76 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Under the assumptions above, different ratios and regression models are applied to the estimated number of HBW trips from IL zones that are known to produce JTW trips to Wisconsin destinations to estimate the size of the daily non-work travel market between Illinois and WI.
Appendix 4 features summary tables showing the estimated HBO/NHB trips that are produced in Illinois counties and are attracted to seven-county SEWRPC region in counties in Wisconsin.
5 • The total number of work trips (HBW) is estimated at around 12,500 daily trips .
• The estimated number of daily home-based other trips (HBO) ranges between 5,800 and 22,300 depending on the method used as described above.
• The total number of non-home based trips (NHB) trips ranges more widely with a low estimate of just above between 1,400 and 26,000 trips depending on the method used.
However, both lower- and upper-bound estimates result from extremely simplifying assumptions and are based on limited and less reliable data. When more reasonable assumptions are included, the estimate of total number of HBO trips lies between 8,600 and 14,400 while the range for NHB trips is between 2,500 and 11,000 daily trips.
Illinois-Illinois travel (trips produced in and attracted to Illinois zones).
The most recent survey from the CMAP region dates back to the early 1990s and cannot be used to provide recent travel behavior data in the region. Therefore, the most recent version of the CMAP trip tables by trip purpose for the base year have been used for our analysis.
These trip tables have been modified to fit the KRM zone system that provides additional detail along the KRM alignment than the CMAP model system and less detail in zones that are located further away from the KRM alignment.
5 One Journey-to Work trip is equivalent to a 1.77 HBW trips based on the analysis of SEWRPC HTS and Census County-to- County JTW Tabulations.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 77 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
IV. MODEL VALIDATION
The objective of the model validation task is to compare the modeled and observed patterns of movements in the region and to ensure that parameters needed to test certain strategies and policies are included in the final model structure. The model estimation and validation efforts use all available data from different sources to fully represent the patterns of flows and level of service characteristics for different modes in the KRM corridor.
The market analysis summarized in the Chapter II was the first step in understanding travel demand in the KRM corridor. It provided the “big picture” flows in the study area, helped us quantify the total size of the travel market in the KRM corridor, and was used to identify key origin-destination travel patterns at different levels of geography.
The model estimation efforts in Chapter III focused on the representation of the trip patterns by purpose in the base year and discussed Trip Generation in Section III.4, Trip Distribution and Destination Choice modeling in Section III.5, and Mode Choice in Section III.6. Summary statistics in the Technical Appendices include data on the zone system and network, summaries of trip productions and attractions, distributions of trip lengths by purpose, and analyses of travel patterns produced in Illinois and attracted in Wisconsin.
Model validation for the KRM corridor made use of the following data sources that carry information of the observed patterns of travel making within the KRM corridor:
• The SEWRPC household survey,
• The 2000 US Census journey to work database,
• SEWRPC’s Bus Onboard survey and Metra’s Onboard Origin-Destination survey,
• Amtrak Ridership Counts on the Hiawatha Line,
• Origin-destination travel time runs for highway travel, and
• Origin-destination travel times by existing transit service.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 78 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
IV.1. VALIDATION OF TRIP GENERATION
Section III.4 and Appendix 2 on Model Development discuss the approach to developing trip production rates by trip purpose using the SEWRPC household survey. Four separate sets of trip production rates were developed for Kenosha, Racine, and Milwaukee counties and for the rest of the SEWRPC region. Household size and auto availability were used to determine different trip production rates by purpose and by geography.
Internal validation checks included the comparative analysis of trip production rates across cells with different household sizes, levels of auto availability, and geography. These comparisons suggest that for the most part the trip production rates could be used “as is” reflecting the responses obtained from the SEWRPC household survey.
IV.2. VALIDATION OF TRIP DISTRIBUTION
The Model Development chapter also presents the approach used to develop trip tables for travel within Wisconsin, travel between Wisconsin and Illinois, and travel within Illinois counties.
• Section III.5 presents the destination choice models that were estimated using the recent SEWRPC household survey. The results of the model along with distributions of trip distance and travel time are outlined in Appendix 3.
• Section III.7 and Appendix 4 discuss how the SEWRPC household survey data were used to examine within-Wisconsin travel and how a combination of CTPP journey to work and CMAP data were used to model travel between Lake county and Wisconsin and travel within the rest of Illinois counties.
In this section we present the results of the model validation effort for the destination choice models and the resulting trip tables by trip purpose.
The first set of comparisons focused on comparisons of observed versus modeled distributions and average values (Appendix 5). Table 5.1 shows for each of the three KRM corridor trip purposes the distribution of trips by distance as obtained from the SEWRPC household survey and from the application of the KRM destination choice models. The close match between these three pairs of distributions is reflected in Figures 5.1 through 5.3 which show the comparisons between the observed and predicted length distributions by trip purpose. Table 5.2 summarizes the very high coincidence ratios and correlation especially for the home-based work trip purpose as expected.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 79 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
The comparisons between congested travel times as observed in the SEWRPC survey and as estimated by the model are shown in Table 5.3 and Figures 5.4 through 5.6 for each purpose. Table 5.4 summarizes the high coincidence ratios and correlation by purpose. Finally, Tables 5.5 through 5.7 summarize the comparisons of intrazonal trips by purpose, the average trip distance and the average trip travel time by purpose.
All of these comparisons confirm that the destination choice models accurately reflect and reproduce the travel distance and travel time distributions as well as the average values that appear in the SEWRPC household survey.
A second set of comparisons focused on the observed and modeled trip interchanges at the county-to- county level. Data sources that were used for comparison purposes against the model results include the SEWRPC household survey and the CTPP Journey to Work (JTW) trip tables from the 2000 US Census. Of particular importance to the KRM corridor are the interchanges within the three Wisconsin counties of Kenosha, Racine and Milwaukee and their interaction primarily with Lake County and to a lesser extent with Cook County. In the following trip tables the comparisons for this set of interchanges are highlighted.
In Appendix 6, Tables 6.1 and 6.2 show the matrices with the model results for HBW trips and the corresponding matrix with the journey to work JTW data. Table 6.3 shows the implied ratio between the HBW and JTW which ranges between 1.71 and 2.05 for interchanges within Wisconsin and between Wisconsin and Illinois. An inspection of the patterns across row and columns of both tables shows a close correspondence between the model estimates and the 2000 JTW figures. Table 6.4 quantifies this pattern of similarities by calculating the correlation between the two distributions for each county as a production county and as an attraction county. The correlation measures are extremely high especially when considering the flows between the seven Wisconsin counties and Lake County as shown in Table 6.5.
In Appendix 7, Tables 7.1 through 7.3 show the comparison between the HBW estimates from the model and the SEWRPC household survey estimates for work travel. An inspection of the key O-D pairs highlights the high degree of correspondence between the model and the SEWRPC household survey. The deviation ranges from a low of zero or one percent to a high of no more than three percent as difference shown in Table 7.3.
A similar pattern is obtained when comparing the home-based non-work purposes in the model and in the SEWRPC survey (Appendix 8). Tables 8.1 through 8.3 again show a high degree of correspondence with deviations of less than one percent in most cases. It should be noted that the
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 80 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
model needs to be adjusted to account for non-work trips produced in Wisconsin and attracted to Cook county.
Last, the non-home based trips from the KRM corridor model are also compared against the SEWRPC household survey (Appendix 9). These comparisons show a reasonable fit with deviations ranging from four to fourteen percent within Wisconsin counties and larger deviations between Wisconsin and Illinois counties (Tables 9.1 to 9.3).
These comparisons suggest that the travel flows that are obtained by applying the estimated destination choice models properly reflect the travel flows in the SEWRPC household survey and the 2000 US Census journey to work database. Further comparisons that are discussed in Section IV.4 show that the estimated travel flows are also consistent with origin-destination surveys that were collected at the Wisconsin-Illinois state line.
IV.3. VALIDATION OF MODE CHOICE
Mode choice validation focuses on matching the modeled mode shares to the observed mode shares. Because the mode shares (especially the transit shares) are significantly different across the SEWRPC and CATS modeling regions, it is important to incorporate these differences into the validation process (Appendix 10). For the current study, we classified trip interchanges into three major geographic regions in the corridor:
• Trips originating in the seven-county SEWRPC region;
• Trips originating and terminating in the five Illinois counties: Cook, DuPage, Kane, McHenry and Will;
• Trips originating in Lake County plus all other interchanges in the corridor.
A critical component of mode choice validation is the derivation of reasonable validation targets for each trip purpose and geographic region of interest. For the trips originating in the SEWRPC region, validation targets were obtained from the household survey and the onboard transit survey. The household survey was used to derive the overall trip control totals as well as the mode shares for the non-transit modes. The linked passenger transit trip estimates were obtained from the onboard survey. For trips originating outside the SEWRPC area, generation of validation targets was more complicated due to the absence of a recent household survey. The CATS model was used to generate the overall trip control totals and mode shares for non-transit modes. The transit trip targets were obtained primarily from a report prepared by AECOM for CTA and Metra, entitled “Chicago Area New Starts Ridership Forecasting Methods Report”. Mode shares were consolidated for each of the
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 81 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
five modes (drive alone, shared ride, drive to transit, walk to transit and non-motorized), three purposes and three geographic regions.
The KRM mode choice model was run in TP+ and the predicted mode shares for each mode, purpose and geographic region were summarized. These shares were compared to the validation targets described above and the mode-specific constants were adjusted appropriately. If the predicted share for any given mode was higher than the corresponding validation target, the constant for that mode was decreased. Similarly, if the predicted share was lower than the validation target, the constant was increased. The magnitude of increase or decrease was determined by a formula derived from LOGIT model theory.
The mode choice model was then run with the updated coefficients and the new shares were compared again to the validation targets. This iterative process was continued until the modeled mode shares matched the observed mode shares very closely. The final set of constants for each mode, purpose and geographic region were then used for all subsequent model runs.
Tables 10.3 through 10.11 summarize the validation results for each purpose and geographic region. In each case, the modeled mode shares match the observed shares very closely.
IV.4. EXTERNAL AUTO TRAVEL
Figure 11.1. in Appendix 11 features the selected locations as control points. The data sources used under this task include:
• Wisconsin Count Data http://www.dot.state.wi.us/travel/counts/maps.htm
• Illinois Count Data http://www.dot.il.gov/trafficmaps/adt_chicago.pdf
SEWRPC’s 2001 External Auto trip surveys examined the auto trips traveling from Wisconsin to Illinois locations. The survey locations that are included in the analysis were Station 36 (USH 12) through Station 48 (STH 32). A map of the survey locations is in Appendix 11, Figure 11.2.
The survey data contained a “trips total” factor which was used to create summary tables and to produce estimates of interstate flows. Data were geocoded using the KRM 2193 Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) system for trip ends in Wisconsin and Census Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) Codes for trip ends in Illinois. Trip ends that are represented by FIPS are converted into the KRM 2193 TAZ system based on employment for destinations and population for origins. Figure 11.3 in Appendix 11 feature the distributions of origins and destinations of interstate trips.
The survey data indicated that there are a total of 73,500 trips from Wisconsin to Illinois and more than 29,000 trips from Illinois to Wisconsin. Table 11.1 in Appendix 11 provides a summary of county-to-
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 82 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
county flows. Table 11.2. features a comparison between Journey-to-Work, SEWRPC Household Travel Survey and SEWRPC External Auto Survey data. It should be noted that HHTS data is in production-attraction format, while JTW and External Auto Survey are unidirectional.
Data from all three sources are in substantial agreement particularly for flows between Wisconsin Counties and Lake County in Illinois. There are some mismatches for flows for Cook County which has a secondary importance for the region. In general, these sources provide consistent and valuable information on the flows crossing the state border within the corridor.
IV.5. BUS TRANSIT SURVEYS AND COUNTS
In 2001, SEWRPC conducted an On-Board Bus Transit survey to examine transit user characteristics, trip purpose, and trip origin and destination patterns. The survey effort resulted in data from 7,451 respondents using the eight different transit systems that operate in the Wisconsin portion of the corridor. The survey data contain information on the purpose, origin and destination of the trip, transfer rates, mode of access, choice of fare, and some key socioeconomic attributes of the riders. However, modes of egress and the length of access and egress trips were not captured in the survey.
The survey data also provided two variables that allowed survey responses to be weighted based on boardings and revenue generated by the transit systems. All figures and tables from the analysis of the onboard surveys use the weights developed by SEWRPC.
The frequency of weighted responses indicated that there are slightly less than 200,000 bus riders in the SEWRPC region using the eight surveyed systems. About 180,000 riders used Milwaukee County Transit System (MCTS). The next most used system was Kenosha Area Transit (KT) with 7,300 daily riders.
Trip purpose distribution of bus riders indicated almost equal shares for Home-Based-Other and Home-Based-Work with shares of 45% and 43%, respectively. Time-of-day distribution indicated that 34% of the riders used the systems during midday hours while PM and AM peak usage had comparable shares of 26% and 24%, respectively. Classification of riders by trip purpose and time-of- day indicated that the most common use was the Home-Based-Other purpose during midday. This somewhat non-traditional pattern can be partly explained by the dominance of MCTS usage and relatively high school travel, including university students and employees. Vehicle ownership and driver’s license analyses also showed that slightly over 40% of the riders were from zero vehicle households and nearly 60% of riders did not have a driver’s license.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 83 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
More than 75% of the riders walked to their bus stops, where more than 20% of the riders transferred to the ride they recorded during the survey. Analysis of transfers found non-traditionally high rates; 38% of the riders transferred once while 16% transferred two or more times.
Trip lengths were also calculated using free flow times on the shortest path skims between the origin and destination pairs. The analysis showed that the majority of riders chose transit for trips between 2.0 and 15.0 miles (over 80%). The most common trip length category was found to be 5.0 - 7.5 miles (nearly 25%). Appendix 12 features selected summaries and plots for all survey respondents.
The above analysis was also repeated for the KT, Racine Belle Urban System (the BUS), and Wisconsin Coach Lines Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee, since these three systems are most the prevalent in the KRM corridor. Appendix 13 includes similar tables and plots for these three bus systems.
There were more than 14,000 daily riders served by these three systems. In general, similar patterns were observed, indicating that current bus service in the KRM corridor is serving mainly Home-Based- Other purposes and slightly shorter trips when compared with system-wide trip length distribution. Nearly 25% of the trips were between 2.0 – 3.0 miles in length.
Finally, as a way of gauging the potential number of existing bus riders who could divert to the proposed KRM commuter rail service, market areas associated with the rail stations were drawn using different assumptions of mode of access and egress configurations. Co-centric circular buffers around the station sites were created where a catchment area of 5.0 miles was assumed for Park‘n’Ride access, 3.0 miles for transit access/egress and 0.5 miles for walk access/egress. A rider is counted as a potential rider when his/her origin pair location fell within the buffers that varied by the access/egress assumptions. Table 13.1. in Appendix 13 presents the estimates of market size under different assumptions. These estimates suggest that a maximum of about 2,000 existing bus riders from these three bus systems could be served by and potentially divert to the improved KRM service.
IV.6. RAIL TRANSIT SURVEYS AND COUNTS
Metra had conducted a systemwide origin-destination survey to analyze rider characteristics and their trip-making behavior by commuter rail. The survey effort collected data on origin and destination locations, direction of travel modes of access and egress as well as access and egress trip lengths, trip purposes, time-of-day and fare choice throughout the Metra system which is composed of 12 main lines and 3 branches serving the entire Chicago metropolitan area and surrounding communities.
Appendix 14 presents data summaries of survey responses weighted to reflect boardings for the UPN line which is the main commuter rail line within the KRM corridor.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 84 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Since the focus of the survey was the morning peak period and to an lesser extent mid-day travel, survey results do not reflect the patterns in the PM peak. However, the nature of the trips (nearly 75 percent inbound trips with the purpose for work in the UPN line) allows us to make the assumption that similar patterns will be prevalent for the PM Peak travel. The UPN line has a total of 26 stations (including terminals) between Kenosha and Downtown Chicago.
Figure 14.1 and 14.2. features the boardings from each station during the morning time and morning peak. The line serves just over 27,000 trips with the majority of travel concentrated in the AM and PM peak periods. The UPN line has a substantial amount of ridership (about 50 percent of all inbound travelers) from the near suburbs and the northern section of the City of Chicago. Almost all outbound riders are boarding from stations within the City of Chicago and destined to mainly Evanston, Highland Park, Lake Forest, Lake Bluff, and Waukegan (Figure 14.3.) The Ogilvie Transportation Center (terminal for the Chicago CBD) was the major destination for inbound travelers.
Transfer rates (transfers to another mode of transit) were much higher for outbound travelers than inbound riders (nearly 40% vs. about 10%).
Walking and driving alone were the major modes for trips to the rail stations. Typical differences in access trip patterns between inbound and outbound riders were observed, where outbound riders had longer trips with a higher variation in the modes chosen for accessing to rail. Figures 14.5 and 14.6 presents the modal shares and distribution of trip lengths for access to rail trips.
Figure 14.7 presents the mean travel distances to rail stations. It shows that access trip length increases considerably for the stations located at the outer end of the line. For outbound travel, the pattern was not as clear as for inbound travel (Figure 14.8.)
Figure 14.9 presents the distribution of trip lengths by commuter rail, it is clear that majority of rail riders travel distances longer than 10-15 miles (nearly 80 percent). Although commuter rail becomes more favorable at longer travel distances, the high population density in the northern part of Chicago and the relatively high levels of congestion are the influencing factors in the choice of UPN line as mode of travel in the region.
Based on the locations of initial origins and final destinations of UPN Line riders, distributions of typical coverages of the UPN line were analyzed. Dissolved buffers of varying sizes were created to characterize different modes of access and egress. A half mile buffer distance was used for walking, 3 miles for transit/cab modes, and 5 miles for Park ‘n Ride. Figures 14.10 and 14.11 summarize these results respectively.
• A substantial amount of current UPN riders had both an origin and a destination within walking distance from the UPN rail stations (Figure 14.10). The yellow portion of the bar chart for each
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 85 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
access mode category reflects the additional number of riders that had destinations within a 3 mile buffer from each station.
• For outbound travel, the percent of commuter rail riders who use transit to access destinations beyond one mile is much smaller when compared to inbound travelers. These differences most likely reflect the greater availability of transit service and connectivity around the Chicago downtown terminal compared to the more limited availability of transit connections at intermediate Metra rail stations.
Appendix 15 presents similar data summaries and charts for the UPN Line stations within the Lake County and Kenosha stations. The results from these stations are expected to be more informative for the KRM corridor because of similarities in land use patterns and the overall distribution of population and employment within the study area.
Figures 15.1 through 15.3 feature the origins and destinations of Kenosha, Waukegan and Winthrop Harbor station riders. Analysis of the distribution of rider origins for different stations indicate that access trip length can be influenced by level of service characteristics and fare structure. For example, these figures suggest that the Waukegan station draws some riders away from the Kenosha and Winthrop Harbor market sheds potentially reflecting a better level of service, parking availability at the station, or differences in rail fare levels.
The UPN riders from the corridor stations had slightly higher rates of transfer to other modes of transit implying that they had longer egress trips (Figure 15.4). Driving alone is the dominant mode of access and riders cover a longer distance to get to these three UPN stations (Figures 15.5 and 15.6). Rail riders from Lake County stations and Kenosha travel longer distances than average, with many of these UPN riders traveling 20 to 25 miles (Figure 15.7.) Furthermore, the coverage analysis indicates that the potential of attracting more riders by improving access/egress characteristics is higher for outlying station locations closer to the end of the UPN line (Figure 15.8.)
IV.7. ORIGIN-DESTINATION TRAVEL TIMES
To ensure consistency with previous modeling studies, origin-destination travel times for a highway network using readily available model results were calculated for a selection of key origin and destination pairs. This effort yielded estimates of travel time, trip length, and speed under congested and free-flow conditions. Appendix 16 summarizes the data collected and makes a comparison between observed and modeled highway travel times.
As part of this project, travel time “corridor runs” were conducted between key origins and destinations in Milwaukee and Lake County with Racine and Kenosha being intermediate locations and with
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 86 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
additional “spur runs” conducted between I-94 and Kenosha, I-94 and Racine, and I-94 and destinations in Lake County. The travel time runs included peak (7-9 AM & 4-6 PM) and off peak (10 AM-3 PM) hours on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays. The Corridor Runs were conducted along three corridors that included the proposed service line (roughly following STH-32), the interstate corridor I-94, and a STH-32/STH-31 combination running mostly on STH-31. Travel times were recorded for various break points along the corridor including proposed station locations. Travel runs along the STH-32/31 corridor had roughly similar break points, while I-94 travel runs included break points at each exit traversed.
The Spur Runs were conducted between I-94 and the proposed rail stations in Kenosha, Racine and Lake County – with one station representing each city center.
Similar to highway travel, travel time comparisons for existing transit service were conducted. Using available transit network data, time data for access, wait, in-vehicle-travel (IVTT), and egress have been compiled and processed to create travel time runs between selected key O-D pairs. Tables 16.2 through 16.5 in Appendix 16, feature a sample of data summaries created under this effort for AM Peak, PM Peak, midday and nighttime travel under congested traffic conditions.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 87 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
V. MODEL APPLICATION AND RIDERSHIP FORECASTS
This section summarizes the demand forecasts obtained using the KRM model. First, the results obtained by the ARRF sketch model are discussed to set the stage for the interpretation of the model forecasts. Key assumptions are summarized next since they have an important impact on the model ridership. A brief discussion of the forecasts highlights the most important findings. This section concludes with a discussion of transportation system user benefits.
V.1. AGGREGATE RAIL RIDERSHIP FORECASTS (ARRF)
The ARRF sketch model is intended to develop order-of-magnitude estimates of ridership for new rail lines in metropolitan areas where no existing fixed guideway transit facilities are present. The model was calibrated to represent ridership on existing New Starts systems throughout the country that are in operation in growing metropolitan areas. The calibration of the ARRF sketch model excludes commuter rail and LRT systems in large metropolitan areas and those systems that have been in operation for many decades.
ARRF commuter rail ridership estimates are based on Year 2000 CTPP Journey to Work flows. In particular, the travel flows that are taken into account include the journey-to-work movements from each of the proposed stations to all of the other proposed stations as follows:
• Travel flows that originate in areas within a 6-mile dissolved buffer (the union of co-centric buffers of every station in the system) for high- and middle-income workers;
• Travel flows that originate in areas within a 2-mile dissolved buffer for low-income workers; and
• Travel flows that have as a destination those locations near the proposed stations that are encompassed by a dissolved one-mile buffer around each station.
The workers are classified into three different income categories based on annual household income:
• Households with incomes less than $25,000 are assigned to the low-income group,
• Incomes between $25,000 and $60,000 are assigned to the middle-income group, and
• Incomes above $60,000 are assigned to the high-income group.
For low-income workers, a 2-mile production buffer is assumed, based on the assumption that low- income workers are less likely to have a vehicle available for traveling to commuter rail stations and would therefore have relatively limited access to commuter rail. As an upper limit for egress, a distance of one mile is assumed.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 88 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
After the application of the expected market shares to the total work flows, an unadjusted ridership estimate for total unlinked rail transit trips is obtained. This estimate is then adjusted further based on the level of service characteristics of the commuter rail system. During this process, the unadjusted ridership estimate is multiplied with a multiplicative adjustment factor that has three components:
• Operating speed,
• Frequency of service, and
• Rail connectivity at the downtown terminal location.
Rail connectivity index is a binary variable that takes the value of 1.0 if an LRT system exists to connect the proposed rail terminal with other possible downtown destinations. If such a service is not available, the rail connectivity index takes the value of 0.5. The following steps were completed:
• Station Locations: The proposed locations for the nine KRM stations in Wisconsin were used to draw the GIS buffers around each station. The same approach was used for all existing UPN line stations to provide a measure of comparison with the observed UPN ridership.
• 2000 Journey to Work (CTPP-Part 3) Database: This database was summarized at the county- to-county level first to confirm the total worker flows. The analysis was then conducted using data at the Census TAZ level.
• 2000 CTPP-Part 1 Database: The percentage of workers by three household income categories was analyzed for workers who are located close to the KRM and UPN corridors.
• GIS Analysis: Buffers of 6 miles, 2 miles and 1 mile were created around each of the proposed KRM commuter rail stations. These buffers were combined with the two CTPP databases to extract the concentrations of workers traveling between all KRM station pairs and existing UPN station pairs.
• KRM versus UPN Service. Table 26 shows the catchment population of workers when only the nine KRM stations are taken into account. Table 27 reflects the same measures for the entire Milwaukee to Chicago corridor that will be served both by the proposed KRM service and the existing UPN service. Table 28 includes the same measures of coverage, but only for the existing service on the UPN commuter rail line.
• “Unadjusted Forecasts”. This analysis generated the “nominal ridership” estimate which reflects the number of commuter rail trips expected in the corridor using FTA’s market share estimates by different worker categories. The three values represent the corridor focusing on the nine KRM stations, the entire Milwaukee-Chicago corridor, and the existing UPN service (Table 29). The “unadjusted” ridership estimate is about 5,000 for the KRM service in Wisconsin, 18,000 for
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 89 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 26. WORKER FLOWS WITHIN BUFFER AREAS - KRM IN WISCONSIN
10% Zonal Description Variable Coefficients
Six miles to One mile radius flows - High Income ARF_Flow1 0.069 34,590
Six miles to One mile radius flows - Medium Income ARF_Flow2 0.041 28,391
Two miles to One mile radius flows - Low Income ARF_Flow3 0.151 9,479
Number of Workers - Six miles to One mile radius All_FlowPNR 81,300
Number of Workers - Two miles to One mile radius All_FlowNPNR 38,136
TABLE 27. WORKER FLOWS WITHIN BUFFER AREAS - EXISTING UPN SERVICE
10% Zonal Description Variable Coefficients Coverage
Six miles to One mile radius flows - High Income ARF_Flow1 0.069 147,761
Six miles to One mile radius flows - Medium Income ARF_Flow2 0.041 74,324
Two miles to One mile radius flows - Low Income ARF_Flow3 0.151 33,398
Number of Workers - Six miles to One mile radius All_FlowPNR 263,702
Number of Workers - Two miles to One mile radius All_FlowNPNR 205,977
TABLE 28. WORKER FLOWS WITHIN BUFFER AREAS IN THE ENTIRE KRM/UPN CORRIDOR
10% Zonal Description Variable Coefficients Coverage
Six miles to One mile radius flows - High Income ARF_Flow1 0.069 178,663
Six miles to One mile radius flows - Medium Income ARF_Flow2 0.041 100,091
Two miles to One mile radius flows - Low Income ARF_Flow3 0.151 41,880
Number of Workers - Six miles to One mile radius All_FlowPNR 337,098
Number of Workers - Two miles to One mile radius All_FlowNPNR 240,136
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 90 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
the existing UPN service, and 23,000 for the combined KRM/UPN service along the entire Milwaukee-Chicago corridor.
• Rail Level of Service. Estimates of Annual Revenue Miles, Annual Revenue Vehicle Hours, Annual Revenue Train Miles, and Average Train Length (number of cars) were developed to reflect the proposed KRM/UPN service frequency and speed (Table 30). Each of the three columns of rail service data summarizes the three different ways of representing the rail corridor between Milwaukee and Chicago – KRM service in Wisconsin, existing UPN service, and the combined KRM/UPN corridor service in the entire length of the corridor.
• “Adjusted Forecasts”. This final step in the analysis “adjusts” the nominal “unadjusted” ridership forecasts based on the frequency and speed of the proposed system as it compares to FTA’s sample of New Starts projects. Since a downtown light rail system does not serve Milwaukee, the conservative assumption was to use a value of 0.5 based on the ARRF model documentation.
Table 31 summarizes the results of adjusting for the relative levels of rail service in the corridor using the three different corridor definitions. A ridership of 4,500 trips is projected for the KRM corridor when contrasting the 21,000 riders projected for the UPN existing service and the 25,500 projected for the entire Milwaukee to Chicago corridor. If only the Wisconsin stations of KRM service are taken into account, ridership on KRM is expected to be just over 60 percent of the ridership for the entire KRM corridor.
The final step in the process involved an adjustment to reflect the discrepancy between the ARRF sketch model estimate of ridership on the existing UPN service (21,000 riders) and the observed of about 27,000 daily riders on the UPN line (Table 31). This adjustment results in an expected ridership for the KRM portion of about 5,750 daily rail riders using the ARRF model.
In summary, the ridership estimates for the KRM service in the entire corridor ranges between 4,500 and 5,750 daily trips using the year 2000 Census data and the ARRF sketch forecasting model. This range was used as a guide in the remaining phases of the project to put in context and further evaluate the robustness of the ridership patterns projected by the KRM model. In the next sections, the key assumptions of the KRM model are documented, the ridership forecasts are summarized and the transportation system user benefits are discussed.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 91 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 29. UNADJUSTED ARRF RIDERSHIP ESTIMATES BASED ON BUFFER AREA WORK FLOWS
KRM Service in Existing UPN Entire KRM+UPN
Wisconsin Service Corridor Ridership Estimates by Corridor 4,982 18,286 22,755
TABLE 30. ARRF ADJUSTMENT FACTORS TO REFLECT RAIL LEVEL OF SERVICE
Entire KRM Service Existing KRM+UPN in Wisconsin UPN Service Corridor Route Length 32.8 51.6 84.4 Directional Route Miles 65.6 103.2 168.8 Annual Revenue Vehicle Miles 479,859 3,270,831 3,750,690 Annual Revenue Vehicle Hours 12,903 112,123 125,026 System Average Speed 37.2 29.17 30.00 Percent Deviation in System Average Speed 0.041 -0.201 -0.174 Weekday Train Miles per Directional Route Miles 14.34 22.73 19.47 Percent Deviation in Train Miles per Mile 0.328 0.753 0.616 Rail Connection Index 0.500 1.000 1.000 Annual Revenue Train Miles 239,930 598,067 837,997 ARRF Demand Adjustment Factor 0.56 1.15 1.12
TABLE 31. ARRF ESTIMATES BASED ON RAIL SERVICE AND OBSERVED UPN RIDERSHIP
KRM Existing Entire Proposed Service in UPN KRM+UPN KRM Wisconsin Service Corridor Service Ridership estimates reflect: ARRF unadjusted ridership and ARRF adjustment based on Rail Level of Service 2,770 21,061 25,557 4,496 Ridership estimates reflect: ARRF results (21,061 riders) and Existing UPN Ridership (27,000 riders) 3,551 27,000 32,764 5,764
Source: ARRF Sketch Model Application
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 92 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
V.2. KEY ASSUMPTIONS
The KRM model was then applied to assess the expected base-year and future-year ridership on the KRM line. This section highlights some of the key assumptions used in the study:
• Walk access. A one-mile walk access distance to and from each rail station was used as the upper limit for zones that were designated as walk access.
• Drive access. The criterion used for drive access to rail stations and to TSM bus stations with a park and ride lot was that the drive access distance could not be more than one third of the in- vehicle travel distance for each selected transit path. This rule realistically reflects the extent to which rail drivers would drive to access a station. However, it may have limited the size of the drive access market for the proposed KRM rail service.
• Mode choice model. After various iterations of the model using the KRM mode choice model, the project team utilized the default FTA model coefficients for mode choice behavior by purpose. Although the resulting ridership and benefits estimates did not change significantly from earlier rounds of analysis, this decision was made to more consistently account for all attributes of service using the exact same default FTA coefficients.
• Drive and walk access constants. Following the initial ridership forecasts and estimates of transportation system user benefits, FTA and project team staff discussed the mix of drive access and walk access trips to the KRM stations. It was decided to adjust the KRM walk and drive access constants based on the experience with the three last stations in the UPN line in northern Illinois and in southern Wisconsin. These patterns are different than the observed patterns of walk and drive access to existing bus services in Wisconsin.
• Rail travel time. Consistent with FTA guidance, the component of in-vehicle travel time that was traversed exclusively on rail links was discounted compared to all other transit and highway in- vehicle travel times. A coefficient of 0.8 was used for travel time to reflect that 10 minutes of rail in-vehicle travel time was treated as 8 minutes of in-vehicle travel time on those links on the transit path where commuter rail was used.
• Sensitivity to wait time. Commuter rail service has the advantage of published schedules that minimize wait time by rail riders even for relatively large headways. The wait time has been estimated as half the headway for headways up to 15 minutes. For longer headways, the incremental wait time is calculated as one fourth of the headway greater than 15 minutes. For headways of 45 minutes, the wait time is calculated as 7.5 minutes for the first 15-minutes and
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 93 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
an additional 7.5 minutes for the other 30 minutes resulting in a wait time of 15 minutes for the 45 minute headway.
• Constant for UPN rail service. The mode choice model was validated for the SEWRPC and CMAP study areas using the mode constants documented in Appendix 10. A uniform constant was used for all transit modes without differentiating between rail and bus service. Although the ridership totals by system matched reasonably well, there was a gap in the observed versus modeled ridership for the UPN commuter rail line. Given the relevance of this particular rail line as a part of the KRM corridor, a rail constant was used for the UPN rail service.
• Operationalizing the rail constant. A constant value of 10 minutes was incorporated into the UPN rail path skims and as an input to the mode choice model. This constant brought the modeled UPN ridership up from 21,000 to about 26,000 which reflects more closely the observed 27,000 daily ridership on the UPN line. The same constant was used in the KRM and in the UPN rail paths. It should be noted that the reduction in travel time applies only to those rail paths where the in-vehicle travel time is greater than 12.5 minutes to avoid zero or negative travel times. This realistic adjustment may understate the modeled attractiveness of rail in shorter O-D pairs served by the KRM rail service.
• Highway skims. The highway travel times that were used reflect the estimates of daily congested travel times both in the 7-county SEWRPC region and in the 6-county CMAP region. These daily congested travel times do not take into account the planned reconstruction of the I- 94 highway facility in Wisconsin over the next few years. This reconstruction will have a negative impact on highway congestion in the region and particularly in the vicinity of the KRM corridor alignment.
• Coding of rail service. The coding of the existing UPN commuter rail line and the proposed KRM service was more detailed than in traditional models. Each train was individually coded to reflect the different frequency of service by time of day and by direction (peak versus reverse), the variable stop pattern, the mix of local/express trains, and differences in speed by individual train run. Trains within the same time period were combined to reflect frequency of service by time period.
V.3. RIDERSHIP FORECASTS
The KRM model was applied under the No Build, TSM, and KRM Rail alternative options for both the base-year 2000 conditions and the future-year 2035 time horizon. Table 32 summarizes the projected ridership under each service scenario and for each of the two horizon years as provided by the KRM
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 94 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
model. For comparison purposes, the results obtained by applying the ARRF sketch forecasting model are also shown.
The KRM model results are consistent with the ARRF results for the base year 2000 and also reflect a growth in ridership between 2000 and 2035. The projected growth reflects the increase in population and employment in the corridor and in areas of the corridor that are located closer to the KRM alignment.
TABLE 32. YEAR 2000 AND 2035 FORECASTS FOR TSM AND KRM RAIL ALTERNATIVES
ARRF Model KRM Model KRM Model 2000 Census 2000 2035
TSM --- 1,733 2,575 4,496 KRM Rail to 5,764 5,966 7,392 Source: KRM Model Forecasts and ARRF Sketch Model Application
The ridership under both the TSM and the KRM Rail alternative is concentrated during the AM and PM peak periods of the day (Table 33). Ninety percent of the projected daily ridership under the KRM rail option is expected to occur during the peak periods between 6 and 9 am and between 2:30 and 6:00 pm. This pattern is consistent with the peak period oriented level of KRM rail service and is also consistent with experience in other commuter rail systems.
TABLE 33. SUMMARY OF TSM AND KRM RAIL FORECASTS BY TIME OF DAY
TSM 2000 TSM 2035 FBO 2000 FBO 2035
AM Peak 734 1,010 2,689 3,223
Midday 169 275 338 4,71
PM Peak 729 1,120 2,841 3,549
Evening 101 170 98 149
Total 1,733 2,575 5,966 7,392 Source: KRM Model Forecasts
An important point of comparison is offered by the peak period ridership patterns observed on the UPN commuter rail line. Table 34 highlights that 84 percent of daily observed ridership on the UPN
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 95 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
rail line occurs during the morning and afternoon peak periods. The share of peak period travel approaches 90 percent when only the peak direction of travel is considered (AM peak ridership for inbound travel and PM peak ridership for outbound travel).
TABLE 34. OBSERVED RIDERSHIP PATTERNS ON THE UPN COMMUTER RAIL LINE
Inbound Outbound Total Percent
AM Peak 10,463 1,588 12,051 45%
Midday 1,363 1,156 2,519 9%
PM Peak 1,290 9,261 10,551 39%
Evening 497 1,378 1,875 7%
Total 13,613 13,383 26,996 100% Source: Metra Boarding Data, 1999
Rail Mode of Access: The mode of access was also examined as part of the rail ridership forecasts. The percentage of KRM riders who are expected to drive to a KRM station is 65 percent when all Wisconsin and Illinois stations in the KRM alignment are considered. The percentage of KRM rail trips that use a drive access mode to the KRM station is slightly lower in Wisconsin where 63 percent of the KRM rail riders are expected to drive to a rail station for a total of over 3,500 daily riders. The drive access share of rail riders in the three northern Illinois stations served by KRM is higher with 75 percent of rail riders driving to these rail stations.
This pattern is consistent with the current high share of drive access to rail observed in Illinois stations currently served by the UPN service and is in contrast with the lower observed drive access share to existing bus services in Wisconsin. The modal constants used in the validation of the KRM mode choice models on the Wisconsin side of the border were based on the experience with mode of access for the three northernmost stations in the existing UPN alignment.
Rail Ridership by Region: An analysis of the rail travel flows in the different parts of the KRM corridor is shown in Table 35. This summary is based on the station to station rail passenger flows within Wisconsin and the passenger flows between Illinois and Wisconsin. The estimate for travel within the Illinois portion of the corridor reflects the remaining travel within the KRM corridor. The predicted pattern of rail ridership flows suggests that:
• Nearly 75% of the rail passenger flows are expected to occur between KRM stations that are located in Wisconsin;
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 96 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
• A total of ten percent of the KRM rail passengers are expected to travel between KRM stations in Illinois and Wisconsin; and
• The remaining 16 percent of the KRM rail ridership is expected between stations in the Illinois portion of the KRM corridor.
TABLE 35. KRM RAIL RIDERSHIP PATTERNS BY REGION
Wisconsin Illinois
Wisconsin 5,501 199
Illinois 522 1,170
Wisconsin Illinois
Wisconsin 74% 3%
Illinois 7% 16%
Rail Station Boardings: More detailed estimates of rail boardings that were developed for each individual station along the KRM rail line are shown in Table 36.
• The Milwaukee, Racine and Kenosha stations are expected to enjoy the highest utilization among KRM riders with approximately 1,250, 900 and 975 daily rail boardings respectively.
• The stations in South Milwaukee, Oak Creek and Caledonia are also expected to enjoy strong ridership with future-year daily boardings estimated at about 595, 695, and 490, respectively.
• The rest of the KRM stations in Wisconsin are expected to have less than 350 daily boardings with the South Side station expected to carry the fewest riders with about 180 daily boardings (Table 36).
The Kenosha station will continue to be served by the existing UPN service. As a result, the increased frequency provided by both the KRM and the UPN trains at Kenosha is expected to result in a future- year total of about 1,610 daily boardings serving passengers who will either board or transfer at the Kenosha station using either a KRM or a UPN train.
KRM service will also extend south of the Wisconsin-Illinois border to provide additional service in selected stations in northern Illinois. The majority of riders who are expected to board KRM trains in Illinois will utilize the three existing northernmost stations in Illinois that include Waukegan, Zion, and Winthrop Harbor. These stations are currently served by the existing UPN service that also serves the
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 97 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Kenosha station in Wisconsin. The greater expected utilization of the Waukegan station with an estimated 500 boardings of KRM riders reflects the additional amount of commuter rail service that is planned for this Illinois station under the KRM service plan.
TABLE 36. RAIL STATION BOARDINGS FOR THE KRM TRAIN SERVICE
Daily KRM Station Boardings Milwaukee 1,250 South Side 180 Cudahy 310 South Milwaukee 595 Oak Creek 695 Caledonia 490 Racine 900 Somers 310 Kenosha 975 Winthrop Harbor 80 Zion 80 Waukegan 500 North Chicago-Lake Bluff 105 Rest of Lake/Cook Co. 410 City of Chicago 510 Note: Estimates at the station level have been rounded
Rail Station to Station Flows: An additional analysis focused on the station-to-station travel flows between stations in the Wisconsin portion of the KRM corridor. A total of over 5,500 rail trips had an origin and a destination within Wisconsin. The most significant flows shown in Table 37 occur between Kenosha and Racine followed by flows between Milwaukee and Cudahy and between South Milwaukee and Oak Creek. Milwaukee also has sizeable interchanges between Racine and Caledonia. Other significant flows occur between Racine and three rail stations north of Racine that include Caledonia, Oak Creek and South Milwaukee.
TSM Ridership: The total projected 2035 ridership for the Transportation Systems Management alternative is expected to be 2,575 daily riders. The majority of the daily ridership is projected for the KRM bus route that extends from downtown Milwaukee to Waukegan with 1,760 daily riders or 68 percent of the total TSM ridership (Table 38). The modified Route 48 that extends between Wisconsin and 9th /10th in downtown Milwaukee and WI-100 at Nicholson Road is expected to serve over 800 daily riders and will account for the remaining one third of the TSM market (Table 38).
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 98 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 37. STATION TO STATION KRM FLOWS WITHIN WISCONSIN
South South Oak Name Milwaukee Side Cudahy Milwaukee Creek Caledonia Racine Somers
Milwaukee -
South Side 46 -
Cudahy 236 20 - South Milwaukee 656 86 89 -
Oak Creek 534 115 170 135 -
Caledonia 309 53 130 113 56 -
Racine 220 33 122 180 190 165 -
Somers 107 11 20 26 21 10 168 -
Kenosha 133 19 44 64 140 96 766 219
TABLE 38. TSM 2035 RIDERSHIP BY ROUTE AND TIME OF DAY
Total AM PM Daily Midday Evening Peak Peak Boardings
KRM Bus 1,760 775 240 595 150
Route 48 815 235 35 525 20
Total 2,575 1,010 275 1,120 170
Percent 100% 39% 11% 43% 7%
The distribution of TSM bus ridership by time of day is consistent with the projected KRM rail ridership flows by time period, the service levels proposed for each of the two TSM bus routes, and the existing UPN ridership patterns by time of day. The morning and evening peak period ridership is expected to account for just over 80 percent of the daily TSM market.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 99 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TSM Mode of Access: The mode of access was also examined as part of the TSM alternative. A total of just under 350 bus riders are expected to drive to a TSM bus stop representing 13 percent of the total TSM ridership (Table 39). This drive access share of the TSM market is lower than the projected 65 percent drive access share for the KRM rail option which serves additional stations in the Illinois portion of the corridor. The percentage of bus riders using the KRM bus route is expected to be 16 percent which is twice as high as the share of Route 48 riders who are expected to drive to and park at a bus stop (Table 39).
TABLE 39. MODE OF ACCESS FOR TSM 2035 RIDERSHIP
Total Drive Walk Daily Access Access Boardings
KRM 1,755 280 1,475
Route 44 820 65 755
Total 2,575 345 2,230
Percent 100% 13% 87%
TSM Bus Stop Boardings: The projected boardings by bus stop for the TSM alternative are shown in Table 40 for the proposed KRM bus service and in Table 41 for the modified Route 48. The pattern of boardings and the average trip lengths reflect the different markets served by each of these bus routes. The majority of the KRM route bus riders are concentrated between Caledonia and Kenosha while the majority of the Route 48 riders are concentrated in and around Milwaukee.
The KRM bus route riders have an average trip length of just over 11 miles reflecting the commuter bus nature and the length of this bus service. Route 48 riders have an average trip length of 5 and a quarter miles reflecting the shorter distance trips served by this bus route alignment.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 100 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 40. BOARDINGS BY STOP FOR KRM BUS ROUTE
TSM: Modified KRM Bus Route Node Stop Total 3018 Downtown Milwaukee 7 3719 Downtown Milwaukee 70 7817 Mitchell Airport 110 8074 WI-38 @ WI-100 45 3695 WI-100 @ WI-32 255 8157 WI-32 @ 4 Mile Rd. (Caledonia) 110 8164 WI-32 @ 3 Mile Rd. (Caledonia) 30 8227 WI-32 Douglas Ave. @ WI-32 Goold St. 75 3479 State St. @ MLK (Racine) 240 8277 WI-32 (Racine St.) @ 14th St. 140 8311 WI-32 (Racine St.) @ WI-10 (Durand Ave.) 105 8159 WI-32 (Sheridan Rd.) @ WI-E (12th St.) 140 6782 WI-32 (Sheridan Rd.) @ WI-32 (Alford Park Dr.) 40 8358 WI-32 (Sheridan Rd.) @ WI-S (Washington Rd.) 95 10050 Kenosha - WI-32 (Sheridan Rd.) 295 8388 WI-50 @ 22nd Ave. 2 30730 Waukegan 1 Total 1,760
TABLE 41. BOARDINGS BY STOP FOR BUS ROUTE 48
TSM: Modified Route 48 Bus Route Node Stop Total 3765 15 Milwaukee (Wisconsin and 9/10th) 3770 30 7416 230 4353 50 Milwaukee (Wisconsin, Cass, Michigan, Lincoln) 2893 35 7615 105 7594 5 7604 WI-32 @ Oklahoma Ave. 10 5425 25 7468 23 7931 Packard Ave. @ Layton Ave. 2 7932 25 7943 Packard Ave. @ College Ave. 20 8083 25 WI-32 (10th Ave.) @ WI-32 (Marquette Ave.) 8086 70 3346 WI-32 (Chicago Ave.) @ Puetz Rd. 65 3695 WI_32 @ WI-100 45 8074 WI-100 @ Nicholson Rd. 35 Total 815
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 101 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
V.4. USER BENEFITS
The KRM demand model has been used to calculate the transportation system user benefits. These user benefits reflect the extent to which the introduction of the KRM rail service improves the transit service under the TSM alternative that was examined. These system user benefits to travelers in the region reflect:
• The ridership of the TSM and Rail alternatives,
• The accessibility via walk and drive that is provided by each of these two modes, and
• The respective level of service and costs offered by TSM bus and the Rail alternatives.
When examining the user benefits, it was decided to maintain the current bus service offered by Wisconsin Coach lines and the Route 48 as part of the rail alternative. This decision reflects the improved accessibility that is offered by these two bus lines in a way that complements the proposed KRM corridor rail service under study. Both the costs and the benefits of maintaining these two bus routes have been taken into account when calculating the cost effectiveness index for the proposed KRM corridor rail service.
The total estimated total user benefits that reflect the difference between the TSM and the KRM Rail alternative are just over 3,089 person hours on a daily basis (Table 42). Almost all of the system user benefits are concentrated in the three Wisconsin and in the two Illinois counties out of the 13 total counties in the KRM model. Overall, 96 percent of all system user benefits are concentrated in travel within, to and from these five counties (Table 43).
This pattern is entirely consistent with the proposed service along the KRM corridor that is expected to benefit mostly Wisconsin origins and destinations in the Milwaukee, Kenosha, and Racine counties. To a lesser extent, the proposed KRM service is also expected to benefit travel patterns to and from Lake and Cook counties where the KRM service would further augment the existing UPN rail service and provide improved accessibility.
The distribution of benefits by origin county and by destination county further reflect the concentration of benefits in the Wisconsin portion of the study area. Specifically, 77 percent of the total user benefits reflect benefits for travel that originates in Wisconsin. Similarly, 79 percent of the benefits correspond to travel with a destination in the three Wisconsin counties.
Furthermore, the benefits in the Wisconsin part of the study area are concentrated primarily within Milwaukee county (28 percent of total benefits) and within Racine county (14 percent of total user benefits). This pattern is consistent with the five KRM stations that are located in Milwaukee county
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 102 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
and the two KRM stations located in Racine county. The benefits are lower for Kenosha county which is currently already served by Metra at the Kenosha rail station and where only one additional KRM station is proposed.
The inter-county benefits account for 47 percent of total user benefits reflecting the improved service that is provided to facilitate longer transit trips outside county boundaries. It is also important to note that the Wisconsin-Illinois market accounts for 12 percent of total user benefits reflecting the improvement in cross-border transit service that is offered by the proposed KRM service. Most of these cross-border user benefits are concentrated in travel between Kenosha and Lake counties where the access to jobs is expected to be a critical part of the success of the KRM corridor service.
TABLE 42. DAILY TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM USER BENEFITS AT A COUNTY TO COUNTY LEVEL
Daily Benefits To_District
From_District Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Lake Cook Total Kenosha 2,121 7,976 4,252 4,143 2,412 20,996 Racine 7,020 26,722 14,454 492 316 49,204 Milwaukee 5,189 13,295 52,235 777 362 72,586 Lake 7,590 784 1,020 2,941 2,065 14,816 Cook 2,437 644 83 8,155 9,460 20,556 Grand Total 24,699 49,588 72,616 17,713 14,362 185,270
TABLE 43. PERCENT OF DAILY TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM USER BENEFITS
Daily Benefits (in minutes) To_District
From_District Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Lake Cook Total Kenosha 1.1% 4.3% 2.3% 2.2% 1.3% 11.3% Racine 3.8% 14.4% 7.8% 0.3% 0.2% 26.6% Milwaukee 2.8% 7.2% 28.2% 0.4% 0.2% 39.2% Lake 4.1% 0.4% 0.6% 1.6% 1.1% 8.0% Cook 1.3% 0.3% 0.0% 4.4% 5.1% 11.1% Grand Total 13.3% 26.8% 39.2% 9.6% 7.8% 100.0%
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 103 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
The distribution of transportation system user benefits by purpose and by time period further reflects the nature of the proposed commuter rail service. Home based trips account for just over 90 percent of the benefits with 57 percent reflecting home based work travel (Table 44). Similarly, the peak period nature of the proposed service accounts for nearly 72 percent of the user benefits complemented by the commuter rail service after 6 pm and last by the midday service (Table 45).
TABLE 44. DISTRIBUTION OF USER BENEFITS BY PURPOSE
Purpose Benefits (min.) Percent
HBW – Work Trips 104,858 56.6%
HBNW – Non-work Trips 63,568 34.3%
NHB – Non-home Trips 16,844 9.1%
Total 185,270 100.0%
The figures in Appendix 17 show the geographic dimension of user benefits using the zonal level of detail. Figures 17.1 and 17.2 show the expected changes in population and employment in the KRM corridor. These changes suggest an overall increase in the vicinity of the KRM corridor.
Figures 17.3 and 17.4 show the total user benefits across all trip purposes. The green colored zones reflect the increase in benefits provided by KRM rail when compared to the TSM alternative. There are a few areas of orange and red indicating the decrease in user benefits with the introduction of commuter rail. These orange zones are located in:
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 104 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
TABLE 45. BREAKDOWN OF USER BENEFITS BY TIME PERIOD
Time Period Benefits (min.) Percent
AM Peak (6:00 – 9:00 am) 71,416 38.5%
Midday (9:00 am -2:30 pm) 15,644 8.4%
PM Peak (2:30 pm – 6:00 pm) 61,668 33.3%
Night (after 6:00 pm) 36,542 19.8%
Total 185,270 100.0%
• Areas north of Lincoln Avenue station and south of Milwaukee,
• Near the Cudahy/St. Francis station,
• In individual zones north of Racine, between Racine and Somers and between Somers and Kenosha, and
• West of the KRM alignment along the Route 48 alignment south of the airport.
Each one of these areas with disbenefits reflects areas with better service that is offered by the proposed TSM alternative. The TSM option offers service with more frequent stops than KRM rail at or near these locations as shown by the TSM stop locations in Figures 17.3 and 17.4.
An examination of Figures 17.5 and 17.6 highlight the benefits for work-related travel that is provided by the KRM rail alternative. These figures show a smoother pattern of system user benefits for work- bound commuters. This pattern reflects to a great extent the more frequent KRM service during the peak periods with the greatest concentration of work travel.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 105 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
VII. SUMMARY
This report discusses all activities related to the development, validation, and application of a travel demand model for the entire KRM corridor. This effort corresponds to Task 4 of the KRM Alternatives Analysis – EIS and Project Development phase of the project and provides critical inputs to the calculation of a cost-effectiveness index for the project.
The Market Analysis provides a big-picture flow of worker flows and socioeconomic characteristics in different areas of the KRM corridor and is discussed in detail in Section II. These patterns provide important background information to better understand the markets for the proposed rail service and the magnitude of each travel market.
The development of a unified model for the entire KRM corridor was based on the integration and update of SEWRPC and CMAP highway and transit networks and the development of a revised zone system to provide additional detail close to the corridor. The trip generation, destination choice, and mode choice model development relied heavily on the analysis of the recent SEWRPC household survey and is presented in Section III.
The validation of the KRM model focused primarily on Wisconsin counties and on transit flows but also took into account highway and transit flows in the Chicago metropolitan area. This effort is documented and discussed in Section IV of this report and is supported heavily by summary tables in various Technical Appendices in this report.
The application of the KRM model to develop ridership forecasts for different alternatives in the KRM corridor is discussed in detail in Section V. We first outline the results of applying the Aggregate Rail Ridership Forecasting sketch planning tool to provide a basis of comparison for the results obtained by applying the KRM model. We then document some of the key assumptions used in model application and discuss the outcomes of model application. We conclude Section V by presenting the analysis of the Transportation System User Benefits calculations and discussing the patterns of these benefits in different parts of the KRM corridor.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 106 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
MODEL DEVELOPMENT APPENDICES
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 107 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
APPENDIX 1
TRANSIT ROUTES IN KRM MODEL
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 108 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 1.1. SEWRPC Transit Routes in KRM Model
Mode Route Line Name Starting Location Ending Location Via Direc AMPMMIDNIT 14 9 218 Meno Falls/Butler Lovers Ln/Silver Spring 124th/Capitol 124th St-Lilly Rd-Custer ave S 410 440 750 470 14 9 219 Meno Falls/Butler 124th/Capitol Lovers Ln/Silver Spring 124th St-Lilly Rd-Custer ave N 410 460 990 520 14 10 1 Wells-Wisconsin 124th/Blmd Bayshore Wells St-Wisc Av-Humblt Blvd. E 210 ------14 10 2 Wells-Wisconsin Bayshore 124th/Blmd Wisc Av-Humblt Blvd. W 230 ------14 10 5 Wells-Wisconsin Hospital Bayshore Wells St-Wisc Av-Humblt Blvd. E -- 250 340 -- 14 10 6 Wells-Wisconsin Bayshore Hospital Wisc Av-Humblt Blvd. W -- 250 350 -- 14 10 7 Wells-Wisconsin BrkfldSq Bayshore Wells St-Wisc Av-Humblt Blvd. E 230 240 340 250 14 10 8 Wells-Wisconsin Bayshore BrkfldSq Wisc-Bluemnd- Humblt W 250 250 350 240 14 11 9 Vliet-Howell Layton/Pine 60th/Vliet Vliet-Howell N/W 170 140 160 200 14 11 10 Vliet-Howell 60th/Vliet Layton/Pine Vliet-Howell E/S 160 150 160 200 14 12 11 12-Wisconsin 92nd/Glendale CBD Transit Cntr Hampton-Teutonia-12th/13th-Wisc S/E 200 220 250 310 14 12 12 12-Wisconsin CBD Transit Cntr 92nd/Glendale Hampton-Teutonia-12th/13th-Wisc W/N 200 210 240 280 14 12 13 12-Wisconsin Cherrywood CBD Transit Cntr Teutonia-12th/13th-Wisc S/E 230 -- 250 -- 14 12 14 12-Wisconsin CBD Transit Cntr Cherrywood Teutonia-12th/13th-Wisc W/N 190 -- 260 -- 14 12 15 12-Wisconsin Cherrywood CBD Transit Cntr Teutonia-12th/13th-Wisc S/E -- 200 -- 290 14 12 16 12-Wisconsin CBD Transit Cntr Cherrywood Teutonia-12th/13th-Wisc W/N -- 210 -- 280 14 13 19 St.Paul-Michigan 42nd/Mt Vernon CBD Transit Cntr St.Paul-Michigan E 410 450 430 -- 14 13 20 St.Paul-Michigan CBD Transit Cntr 42nd/Mt Vernon St.Paul-Michigan W 420 440 430 -- 14 14 21 Holton-Forest Home 92nd/Howard Richards/Capitol Howard-Forest Hm-Holton N/E 240 260 300 380 14 14 22 Holton-Forest Home Richards/Capitol 92nd/Howard Howard-Forest Hm-Holton S/W 220 240 310 350 14 14 23 Holton-Forest Home Southridge Richards/Capitol 76th-Forest Hm-Holton N/E 230 290 300 380 14 14 24 Holton-Forest Home Richards/Capitol Southridge 76th-Forest Hm-Holton S/W 250 260 310 360 14 15 25 Oakland-Kinnickinnic Chicago/Drexel Bayshore 10TH-Packard-KK-Oakland N 240 300 310 400 14 15 26 Oakland-Kinnickinnic Bayshore Chicago/Drexel 10TH-Packard-KK-Oakland S 310 -- 300 430 14 15 27 Oakland-Kinnickinnic Chicago/Drexel Bayshore Rawson-15th-KK-Oakland N 460 -- 620 780 14 15 28 Oakland-Kinnickinnic Bayshore Chicago/Drexel Rawson-15th-KK-Oakland S -- 510 610 700 14 15 29 Oakland-Kinnickinnic Chicago/Drexel Bayshore 5th-Packard-KK-Oakland N -- 680 610 450 14 15 30 Oakland-Kinnickinnic Bayshore Chicago/Drexel 5th-Packard-KK-Oakland S -- 500 620 750 14 15 31 Oakland-Kinnickinnic Chicago/Drexel Wildwd/Hamp 10th-Packard-KK-Oakland N 710 ------14 15 32 Oakland-Kinnickinnic Wildwd/Hamp Chicago/Drexel 10th-Packard-KK-Oakland S 610 ------14 15 33 Oakland-Kinnickinnic Chicago/Drexel KK/Mitchell Rawson-15th-KK N -- 990 -- -- 14 15 34 Oakland-Kinnickinnic KK/Mitchell Chicago/Drexel Rawson-15th-KK S 440 250 -- -- 14 15 35 Oakland-Kinnickinnic 5th/American Bayshore 5th-Packard-KK-Oakland N -- 530 -- -- 14 15 36 Oakland-Kinnickinnic Bayshore 5th/American 5th-Packard-KK-Oakland S 480 ------14 18 37 National Avenue 124th/Grnfd 2nd/Wells Greenfield-National-2nd St E/N 180 290 270 300 14 18 38 National Avenue 2nd/Wells 124th/Grnfd Greenfield-National-2nd St S/W 260 240 270 270 14 18 39 National Avenue 108th/Cleveland 2nd/Wells 92nd-Greenfield-National-2nd St E/N 230 280 270 280 14 18 40 National Avenue 2nd/Wells 108th/Cleveland 92nd-Greenfield-National-2nd St S/W 260 230 270 280 14 19 41 MLK-S.13th 35th/SilSprng 13th/Zell Atkn-King-13th St S 350 330 560 640 14 19 42 MLK-S.13th 13th/Zell 35th/SilSprng Atkn-King-13th St N 230 440 510 580 14 19 43 MLK-S.13th Teut/Atkinson 13th/Zell Atkn-King-13th St S 460 470 610 650 14 19 44 MLK-S.13th 13th/Zell Teut/Atkinson Atkn-King-13th St N 280 430 670 460 14 19 45 MLK-S.13th 35th/SilSprng 42nd/Greenfield Atkn-King-Greenfield S 260 390 560 720 14 19 46 MLK-S.13th 42nd/Greenfield 35th/SilSprng Atkn-King-Greenfield N 420 440 590 740 14 19 48 MLK-S.13th Teut/Atkinson 13th/Van Norman Atkn-King-13th St S 990 520 560 900 14 19 49 MLK-S.13th 13th/Van Norman Teut/Atkinson Atkn-King-13th St N -- 440 570 -- 14 19 50 MLK-S.13th 35th/SilSprng 13th/Van Norman Atkn-King-13th St S 290 490 610 990 14 19 51 MLK-S.13th 13th/Van Norman 35th/SilSprng Atkn-King-13th St N 990 470 530 680 14 19 52 MLK-S.13th Teut/Atkinson 42nd/Greenfield Atkn-King-Greenfield S 590 460 610 830 14 19 53 MLK-S.13th 42nd/Greenfield Teut/Atkinson Atkn-King-Greenfield N 440 440 510 690
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 109 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 1.1. (Continued) SEWRPC Transit Routes in KRM Model
Mode Route Line Name Starting Location Ending Location Via Direc AMPMMIDNIT 14 20 54 S. 16TH-S.20TH 19th/Jewell CBD Transit Cntr 20th St-Wisc Av N 140 150 160 310 14 20 55 S. 16TH-S.20TH CBD Transit Cntr 19th/Jewell 20th St-Wisc Av S 180 130 160 290 14 21 58 North Avenue Mayfair Ken/Pros North-Downer E 120 100 130 170 14 21 59 North Avenue Ken/Pros Mayfair North-Downer W 130 110 130 170 14 22 60 Center Street Blaine/Center Lake Park Center-Locust E 60 120 140 180 14 22 61 Center Street Lake Park Blaine/Center Center-Locust W 110 60 140 170 14 23 62 Fond du Lac Avenue 107th/FDL CBD Transit Cntr Mill-76th-Fond du Lac E 300 340 320 340 14 23 63 Fond du Lac Avenue CBD Transit Cntr 107th/FDL Mill-76th-Fond du Lac W 330 350 320 340 14 23 66 Fond du Lac Avenue 91st/Calumet CBD Transit Cntr 91st-Cong-Fond du Lac E 320 350 320 330 14 23 67 Fond du Lac Avenue CBD Transit Cntr 91st/Calumet 91st-Cong-Fond du Lac W 320 330 340 360 14 27 68 27th Street Hampt/GrnBay 27th/Sycamore (WalMart) 27th St-Ramsey-35th St-College Av S 120 180 250 270 14 27 69 28th Street 27th/Sycamore (WalMart) Hampt/GrnBay 27th St-Ramsey-35th St-College Av N 160 210 250 270 14 27 70 29th Street Hampt/GrnBay Southgate 27th St S 300 200 260 280 14 27 71 30th Street Southgate Hampt/GrnBay 27th St N 300 210 250 340 14 28 78 108th Street 107th/SilSprng 108th/Beloit Mayfair Rd-North-124th-Watertown Plank-108th S 310 330 310 410 14 28 79 108th Street 108th/Beloit 107th/SilSprng Mayfair Rd-North-124th-Watertown Plank-108th N 310 320 310 360 14 30 84 Sherman-Wisconsin Sherm/Flor Downer/Edgwd Sherm-Wisc-Pros-Mary E 130 150 170 220 14 30 85 Sherman-Wisconsin Downer/Edgwd Sherm/Flor Sherm-Wisc-Jack-Down W 140 150 180 200 14 30 86 Sherman-Wisconsin 67th/Keefe Downer/Edgwd Sherm-Wisc-Pros-Down E 140 150 170 230 14 30 87 Sherman-Wisconsin Downer/Edgwd 67th/Keefe Sherm-Wisc-Pros-Mary W 140 150 180 210 14 30 88 Sherman-Wisconsin 67th/Keefe Wisc/Jackson Sherm-Wisc- E 990 ------14 30X 93 Sherman Express Sherm/Flor Downer/Edgwd Keefe-Sherm-Hghlnd-Wisc-Prosp-Mrylnd E 990 ------14 30X 94 Sherman Express Downer/Edgwd 67th/Keefe Keefe-Sherm-Hghlnd-12th/13th-Wisc-Prosp-Mrylnd W -- 650 -- -- 14 30X 95 Sherman Express Sherm/Flor Wisc/Jackson Sherman-Highland-Wisc E 300 ------14 30X 96 Sherman Express Jack/Wisc Sherm/Flor Sherman-Highland-12th/13th-Wisc W -- 190 -- -- 14 30X 98 Sherman Express Jack/Wisc 67th/Keefe Sherm-Hghlnd-Wisc-Jackson-Downer E -- 650 -- -- 14 31 100 State & Highland Mayfair CBD Transit Cntr Wisc-35th-Highland-Vliet-Milw-Ludngtn-North E 280 300 340 470 14 31 101 State & Highland CBD Transit Cntr Mayfair Wisc-35th-Highland-Vliet-Milw-Ludngtn-North W 310 290 350 510 14 31 160 State & Highland Mayfair/Watertown Plank CBD Transit Cntr Watertown Plank-State-Highland E 270 290 340 510 14 31 161 State & Highland CBD Transit Cntr Mayfair/Watertown Plank Watertown Plank-State-Highland W 310 290 340 520 14 35 104 35th Street Southridge 35th/Hopkins Northway-Loomis-35th N 310 640 590 530 14 35 105 36th Street 35th/Hopkins Southridge Northway-Loomis-35th S 520 560 600 510 14 35 106 37th Street Southridge 35th/Hopkins Southway-Loomis-35th N 660 660 590 500 14 35 107 38th Street 35th/Hopkins Southridge Southway-Loomis-35th S 550 580 600 530 14 35 108 39th Street 35th/Loomis 35th/Hopkins 35th St N 300 160 290 -- 14 35 109 40th Street 35th/Hopkins 35th/Loomis 35th St S 260 200 300 -- 14 50 110 Morgan Avenue 98th/Beloit KK/Crawford Morgan-Howard E/W 250 240 350 -- 14 51 111 Oklahoma Avenue Superior/Okla 122nd/Okla Oklahoma E/W 150 140 170 250 14 52 112 Clement Avenue KK/Pryor StFrancis/Iowa Clement N/S 200 190 180 170 14 53 113 Lincoln Avenue Okla/Delwr 114th/Lncln Lincoln-Delaware E/W 170 140 220 240 14 54 114 Mitchell-Burnham KK/Mitch 92nd/Lincoln National-Becher-Burnham-Mitchel E/W 190 160 180 280 14 55 115 Layton Avenue Southridge Warnimont Park Layton-Lake Dr E/W 270 260 270 390 14 57 116 Walnut-Lisbon 92nd/Grntsa Union Depot 92nd-Center-Lisb-Walnut E 250 350 330 420 14 57 117 Walnut-Lisbon Union Depot 92nd/Grntsa 92nd-Center-Lisb-Walnut W 290 320 350 430 14 57 120 Walnut-Lisbon 124th/Capitol Union Depot Capitol-Lisbon-Walnut-Water E 260 350 340 420 14 57 121 Walnut-Lisbon Union Depot 124th/Capitol Capitol-Lisbon-Walnut-Water W 310 320 350 420 14 58 118 Green Bay-Villard Aplton/Villard Union Depot Villard-Green Bay E 170 170 220 240 14 58 119 Green Bay-Villard Union Depot Aplton/Villard Villard-Green Bay W 190 170 240 220 14 60 132 Burleigh Street 124th/Townsend Knwd/Stowell Burleigh-Locust E 270 270 340 350
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 110 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 1.1. (Continued) SEWRPC Transit Routes in KRM Model
Mode Route Line Name Starting Location Ending Location Via Direc AMPMMIDNIT 14 60 133 Burleigh Street Knwd/Stowell 124th/Townsend Burleigh-Locust W 300 270 340 370 14 60 134 Burleigh Street Mayfair Knwd/Stowell Burleigh-Locust E 250 270 340 360 14 60 135 Burleigh Street Knwd/Stowell Mayfair Burleigh-Locust W 300 260 340 370 14 60 136 Burleigh Street Humboldt/Locust 124th/Townsend Burleigh-Locust W 600 ------14 60 137 Burleigh Street Humboldt/Locust 124th/Townsend Burleigh-Locust W 600 ------14 62 138 Capitol Drive 124th/Capitol Knwd/Farwell Capitol-Downer E 130 120 140 160 14 62 139 Capitol Drive Knwd/Farwell 124th/Capitol Capitol-Downer W 120 110 130 160 14 62 140 Capitol Drive 100th/Capitol Knwd/Farwell Capitol-Downer E 210 ------14 62 141 Capitol Drive Knwd/Farwell 100th/Capitol Capitol-Downer W 600 240 -- -- 14 62 142 Capitol Drive 124th/Capitol Richards/Capitol Capitol E 380 ------14 62 143 Capitol Drive 100th/Capitol Teutonia/Capitol Capitol E -- 130 -- -- 14 62 144 Capitol Drive Bartlett/Capitol 60th/Capitol Capitol W 300 ------14 63 145 Silver Spring Drive Bayshore LverLn/SilSprng Siver Spring Dr. W/E 160 170 220 270 14 64 146 S.60th-W. Grange 108th/Janesville 60th/Vliet 108th-forest Home-Grange-60th-Hawley N/E 280 290 290 380 14 65 3 West Allis 70th/Grnfd 35th/Wells 70th-Bluemound-Wisconsin-35th N/E 430 430 400 420 14 65 4 West Allis 35th/Wells 70th/Grnfd 70th-Bluemound-Wisconsin-35th W/S 440 460 390 420 14 67 150 N.76th-S.84th 84th/Howard Northridge 92nd-MCRMC-76th N 310 300 420 430 14 67 151 N.76th-S.84th Northridge 84th/Howard 92nd-MCRMC-76th S 330 350 420 510 14 67 152 N.76th-S.84th Northridge 84th/Howard 84th-Glenview-76th S 300 360 420 520 14 67 153 N.76th-S.84th 84th/Howard Northridge 84th-Glenview-76th N 300 290 420 530 14 68 155 Port Washington 7th/North Brwn Deer/Pt Wash Port Washington Rd. N 270 280 270 600 14 68 156 Port Washington Brwn Deer/Pt Wash 7th/North Port Washington Rd. S 210 230 210 430 14 68 157 Port Washington 7th/North Brwn Deer/Pt Wash Port Washington Rd.-Lake Dr. N 999 999 999 -- 14 76 162 N.60th-S.70th Southridge 96th/Brwn Deer 76th-60th-Brown Deer N 330 310 380 300 14 76 163 N.60th-S.70th 96th/Brwn Deer Southridge Brown Deer-60th-68th S 260 ------14 76 164 N.60th-S.70th 96th/Brwn Deer Southridge Brown Deer-60th-76th S -- 290 380 340 14 76 165 N.60th-S.70th 60th/Mill Southridge 60th-76th S 240 ------14 76 166 N.60th-S.70th Southridge 60th/Bradley 68th-60th-Brown Deer N 220 300 380 340 14 76 167 N.60th-S.70th 96th/Brwn Deer 60th/Burleigh Brown Deer-60th S ------990 14 76 169 N.60th-S.70th 60th/Bradley Southridge 60th-68th S -- 300 380 340 14 80 170 6th Street MATC Sherm/Villard Howell-6th St-Hopkins N 230 150 290 350 14 80 171 7th Street Sherm/Villard MATC Howell-6th St-Hopkins S 180 230 270 360 14 80 172 8th Street 5th/Layton Sherm/Villard Howell-6th St-Hopkins N 540 220 310 -- 14 80 173 9th Street Sherm/Villard 5th/Layton Howell-6th St-Hopkins S 390 310 310 -- 14 80 174 10th Street 6th/Okla Sherm/Villard Howell-6th St-Hopkins N ------400 14 80 175 11th Street Sherm/Villard 6th/Okla Howell-6th St-Hopkins S ------410 14 80 176 12th Street MATC 6th/Wisconsin Howell-6th St N -- 260 -- -- 14 80 177 13th Street Sherm/Villard Airport Howell-6th St-Hopkins S 530 990 -- -- 14 101 181 Park Place - Silver Silver Mill Park Place/Lake Park 76th/Mill W 210 300 -- -- 14 101 182 Mill Shuttle Park Place/Lake Park Silver Mill 76th/Mill E 210 300 -- -- 14 102 185 West Loop Shuttle 76th/Mill 91st/Heather 81st N 150 150 -- -- 14 102 186 West Loop Shuttle 91st/Heather 76th/Mill Tower S 150 150 -- -- 14 104 187 Brown Deer Shuttle Port Washington/Glencoe 120th/Brwn Deer Brown Deer/Donges Ct W 300 ------14 104 188 Brown Deer Shuttle 120th/Brwn Deer Port Washington/Glencoe Brown Deer/Donges Ct E 300 ------14 104 189 Brown Deer Shuttle Port Washington/Glencoe 120th/Brwn Deer Brown Deer/Bradley W -- 300 -- -- 14 104 190 Brown Deer Shuttle 120th/Brwn Deer Port Washington/Glencoe Brown Deer/Bradley E -- 300 -- -- 14 106 125 Meno. Falls Ind Park Shuttle Pilgrim Rd. PR lot Mill Road Transit Center STH 145-Fountain Blvd.-Co. Line Road-Pilgrim Rd. N 990 450 990 620 14 106 126 Meno. Falls Ind Park Shuttle Mill Road Transit Center Pilgrim Rd. PR lot STH 145-Fountain Blvd.-Co. Line Road-Pilgrim Rd. S 450 990 990 620 14 218 200 New Berlin Ind Park Shuttle 124th/Greeenfield 166th/Ryerson Greenfield Ave-Moorland Rd- Rodgers Dr-170th-162nd-166th W 390 350 999 420
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 111 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 1.1. (Continued) SEWRPC Transit Routes in KRM Model
Mode Route Line Name Starting Location Ending Location Via Direc AMPMMIDNIT 14 218 201 New Berlin Ind Park Shuttle 162nd/Rodgers 124th/Greeenfield Greenfield Ave-Moorland Rd- Rodgers Dr-170th-162nd-166th W 390 350 999 420 14 219 202 Oak Creek Shuttle 13th/Zellman Ct. 6th/Drexel 13th-Rawson-10th-Drexel S 260 210 900 - - 14 219 203 Oak Creek Shuttle 6th/Drexel 13th/Zellman Ct. 6th-Rawson-13th N 260 210 900 - - 14 227 204 Franklin Shutte 27th St/Sycamore (WalMar57th/Airways 27th St.-Southbranch-Ryan Rd-51st St.-Franklin Dr. S 330 390 990 - - 14 227 205 Franklin Shutte 57th/Airways 27th St/Sycamore (WalMarAirways-60th St.-Ryan Rd-Southbranch-27th St. N 330 390 990 - - 14 258 206 Glendale Industrial Park ShuttleAtkinson Av/Green Bay Rd Green Bay Rd/Bender Rd Green Bay Rd/Florist/Baker/Bender N/S 380 470 - - - - 14 280 207 S. Milw-Oak Creek Shuttle MATC Oak Creek 5th St/American Ave Howell-Drexel-Chicago-American N/S 350 390 - - - - 16 49 234 Brown Deer-Northridge 85th/Beatrice (Northridge) Mrshll/Mason Brown Deer Rd-IH 43 S 140 ------16 49 235 Flyer Mrshll/Mason 85th/Beatrice (Northridge) Brown Deer Rd-IH 43 N -- 130 -- -- 16 42 214 Northshore-Northland Green Bay Rd/Cherrylane Pros/Mason Green Bay Rd-Silver Spring-IH 43 S 270 ------16 42 215 Flyer Pros/Mason Green Bay Rd/Cherrylane Green Bay Rd-Silver Spring-IH 43 N -- 500 -- -- 16 42 216 Flyer Teutonia/Florist PR lot Pros/Mason Green Bay Rd-Silver Spring-IH 43 S 330 380 -- -- 16 42 217 Flyer Pros/Mason Teutonia/Florist PR lot Green Bay Rd-Silver Spring-IH 43 N 390 500 -- -- 16 79 240 Menomonee Falls Flyer USH 41-45/Plgrm Rd P-R Cass/Wisc Plgrm-Appltn-USH 45-IH 94 E 280 ------16 79 241 Menomonee Falls Flyer Cass/Wisc Aplton/Plgrm Plgrm-Appltn-USH 45-IH 94 W -- 230 -- -- 16 39 202 Timmerman Flyer TimmermanFld Cass/Wisc Appleton-Lisbon-Stad Fwy-IH 94 E 160 ------16 39 203 Timmerman Flyer Cass/Wisc TimmermanFld Appleton-Lisbon-Stad Fwy-IH 94 W -- 150 -- -- 16 45 226 Watertown Plank 124th/Capitol Cass/Wisc USH 45-IH 94 (WP PR lot) E 150 ------16 45 227 Capitol Flyer Cass/Wisc 124th/Capitol USH 45-IH 94 (WP PR lot) W -- 160 -- -- 16 44 224 National Flyer 102nd/Linc Pros/Wisc USH 45-IH 94 (SF PR lot) E 130 ------16 44 225 National Flyer Pros/Wisc 102nd/Linc USH 45-IH 94 (SF PR lot) W -- 140 -- -- 16 40 204 College-Ryan Rd Flyer College Av P-R 10th/Wells IH 94/794 (Holt PR lot) N 600 ------16 40 205 College-Ryan Rd Flyer VnBrn/Wisc College Av P-R IH 94/794 (Holt PR lot) S -- 520 -- -- 16 40 206 College-Ryan Rd Flyer Ryan Rd P-R 10th/Wells IH 94/794 (Holt PR lot) N 150 ------16 40 207 College-Ryan Rd Flyer VnBrn/Wisc Ryan Rd P-R IH 94/794 (Holt PR lot) S -- 240 -- -- 16 43 220 Whitnall Flyer 84th/FrstHome 10th/Wells FrstHm-108th-IH 894/94/794 E 150 ------16 43 221 Whitnall Flyer VnBrn/Wisc 84th/FrstHome FrstHm-108th-IH 894/94/794 W -- 170 -- -- 16 46 228 Loomis-Southridge Flyer 74th/Edgerton (Southridge)10th/Wells 76th-IH 894/94/794 (IH894/LR PR lot) E 150 ------16 46 229 Loomis-Southridge Flyer VnBrn/Wisc 74th/Edgerton (Southridge)76th-IH 894/94/794 (IH894/LR PR lot) W -- 160 -- -- 16 47 232 S.27th Street Flyer VnBrn/Wisc 20th/College IH 94/794 S -- 210 -- -- 16 47 233 S.27th Street Flyer 20th/College 10th/Wells IH 94/794 N 300 ------16 48 212 South Shore Flyer Howell/Ryan 10th/Courthouse Ryan Rd-Chicago-Packard-Lake Dr-Superior-IH 794 N 170 ------16 48 213 South Shore Flyer 10th/Courthouse Howell/Ryan Ryan Rd-Chicago-Packard-Lake Dr-Superior-IH 794 S -- 290 -- -- 18 1X 1 Northwest Metrolink CBD Transit Cntr Northridge Wisc-Fond du Lac-76th St W 140 190 170 250 18 1X 2 Northwest Metrolink Northridge CBD Transit Cntr Wisc-Fond du Lac-76th St E 180 180 160 260 18 1X 3 Northwest Metrolink CBD Transit Cntr 107th/FDL Wisc-Fond du lac-Mill Road W -- 390 -- 999 18 1X 4 Northwest Metrolink 107th/FDL CBD Transit Cntr Wisc-Fond du lac-Mill Road E 390 ------18 1X 5 Northwest Metrolink CBD Transit Cntr 91st/GOOD HOPE Wisc-Fond du Lac-Congress-91st St. W -- 390 -- -- 18 1X 6 Northwest Metrolink 91st/GOOD HOPE CBD Transit Cntr Wisc-Fond du Lac-Congress-91st St. E 390 ------18 1X 7 Northwest Metrolink 35th/Fond du Lac 107th/FDL Fond du lac-Mill Road W 999 ------18 1X 8 Northwest Metrolink 107th/FDL 35th/Fond du Lac Fond du lac-Mill Road E -- 370 -- 999 18 1X 9 Northwest Metrolink 35th/Fond du Lac 91st/GOOD HOPE Fond du Lac-Congress-91st St. W 999 ------18 1X 10 Northwest Metrolink 91st/GOOD HOPE 35th/Fond du Lac Fond du Lac-Congress-91st St. E -- 540 -- 999 18 2X 11 Southwest Metrolink CBD Transit Cntr Southridge Wisc-16th/17th-Forest Home-76th W -- 180 -- -- 18 2X 12 Southwest Metrolink Southridge CBD Transit Cntr Wisc-16th/17th-Forest Home-76th E 150 ------18 5U 246 Oklahoma UBUS 114th/Okla Knwd/Farwell Oklahoma-IH 94/43-Locust E 310 620 560 580 18 5U 247 Oklahoma UBUS Knwd/Farwell 114th/Okla Oklahoma-IH 94/43-Locust W 790 600 600 590 18 16U 248 S.108th UBUS FrstHm/84th Knwd/Farwell FrstHm-108th-Natnl-76th-EW Bswy-IH43-Locust E 300 990 630 -- 18 16U 249 S.108th UBUS Knwd/Farwell FrstHm/84th FrstHm-108th-Natnl-76th-EW Bswy-IH43-Locust W 999 610 760 --
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 112 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 1.1. (Continued) SEWRPC Transit Routes in KRM Model
Mode Route Line Name Starting Location Ending Location Via Direc AMPMMIDNIT 18 63U 150 Silver Spring UBUS Timmerman P-R Lot Knwd/Maryland Silver Spring-Santa Monica-Oakland E 340 630 640 -- 18 63U 151 Silver Spring UBUS Knwd/Maryland Timmerman P-R Lot Oakland-Santa Monica-Silver Spring W 990 640 650 -- 18 40U 242 College Avenue UBUS College/IH94 Knwd/Maryland IH 94/43-Locust N 430 640 630 -- 18 40U 243 College Avenue UBUS Knwd/Maryland College/IH94 IH 94/43-Locust S 370 640 630 -- 18 49U 138 Brown Deer UBUS Green Bay Rd/Brown Deer Knwd/Maryland Brown Deer Rd-IH43-Capitol/Oakland E 420 620 630 -- 18 49U 139 Brown Deer UBUS Knwd/Maryland Green Bay Rd/Brown Deer Brown Deer Rd-IH43-Capitol/Oakland W 600 630 630 -- 17 901A 1 Waukesha-Milwaukee Barstow/Main (Wauk) Wisconsin/Astor Bluemound Rd-IH94-Kearney-35th St-Wisconsin E 300 -- -- 999 17 901A 2 Waukesha-Milwaukee Wisconsin/Astor Barstow/Main (Wauk) Bluemound Rd-IH94-O'Connor-35th St-Wisconsin W 999 600 600 -- 17 901B 3 Waukesha-Milwaukee Barstow/Main (Wauk) UWM Blumnd Rd-IH94-10th/11th St-Wisconsin-Linc Mem Dr. E 999 ------17 901B 4 Waukesha-Milwaukee UWM Barstow/Main (Wauk) Blumnd Rd-IH94-10th/11th St-Wisconsin-Linc Mem Dr. W -- 600 -- -- 17 901C 5 Waukesha-Milwaukee Barstow/Main (Wauk) UWM Blumnd Rd-IH94-Kearney-10th/11th St-Wisc-Linc Mem Dr. E 650 ------17 901C 6 Waukesha-Milwaukee UWM Barstow/Main (Wauk) Blumnd Rd-IH94-O'Connor-10th/11th St-Wisc-Linc Mem Dr. W -- 350 -- -- 17 901D 7 Waukesha-Milwaukee Barstow/Main (Wauk) UWM IH94-10th/11th St-Wisconsin-Linc Mem Dr. E 300 ------17 901D 8 Waukesha-Milwaukee UWM Barstow/Main (Wauk) IH94-10th/11th St-Wisconsin-Linc Mem Dr. W -- 999 -- -- 17 901E 9 Waukesha-Milwaukee Barstow/Main (Wauk) UWM Blumnd Rd-IH94-Kearney-35th-Wiscosnsin-Linc Mem Dr. E -- 600 600 600 17 901E 10 Waukesha-Milwaukee UWM Barstow/Main (Wauk) Blumnd Rd-IH94-O'connor-35th-Wiscosnsin-Linc Mem Dr. W -- 999 300 600 17 905A 11 Oconomowoc-Milwaukee Main/Wisconsin (Ocon) Wisconsin/Cass STH 67-IH94-Wisconsin E 600 ------17 905A 12 Oconomowoc-Milwaukee Wisconsin/Cass Main/Wisconsin (Ocon) STH 67-IH94-Wisconsin W -- 600 -- -- 17 905B 13 Oconomowoc-Milwaukee Main/Wisconsin (Ocon) Wisconsin/Cass STH16/CTH JJ/IH94-Wisconsin E 600 ------17 905B 14 Oconomowoc-Milwaukee Wisconsin/Cass Main/Wisconsin (Ocon) STH16/CTH JJ/IH94-Wisconsin W -- 600 -- -- 17 906 15 Mukwonago-Milwaukee Mukwonago Center 7th St/Michigan IH 43-IH 794-IH 94-Wells-Michigan E 300 ------17 906 16 Mukwonago-Milwaukee 6th St./Wells Mukwonago Center Wells-Michigan-IH 94-USH 45-IH43 W -- 600 -- -- 17 KRM 31 Milw-Rac-Ken Commuter Kenosha 7th St/Michigan STH 32-STH 38-Ryan Rd-Howell-IH 94-IH 794-Michigan N 450 650 999 450 17 KRM 32 Milw-Rac-Ken Commuter 7th St/Michigan Kenosha STH 32-STH 38-Ryan Rd-Howell-IH 94-IH 794-Michigan S 900 500 990 990 17 303 19 Hartland Ind Park Shuttle Goerkes Corners Goerkes Corners IH 94-STH 16-STH 83-IH 94 W/E 300 300 -- 300 17 Rt 143A 40 Ozaukee County Express STH 57/Fredonia Av 6th/Mitchel STH 57-IH 43-CTH W-Port Wash Rd-7th/8th St.-6th St. S 999 999 -- 999 17 Rt 143A 41 Ozaukee County Express 6th/Mitchel STH 57/Fredonia Av STH 57-IH 43-CTH W-Port Wash Rd-7th/8th St.-6th St. N 999 -- 999 999 17 Rt 143B 42 Ozaukee County Express IH43/CTHH PR Lot (Port W6th/Mitchel IH 43-CTH W-Port Wash Rd-7th/8th St.-6th St.-Kilbourn-Wisc S 310 ------17 Rt 143B 43 Ozaukee County Express 3rd/Kilbourn IH43/CTHH PR Lot (Port WIH 43-CTH W-Port Wash Rd-7th/8th St.-6th St.-Kilbourn-Wisc N -- 300 -- -- 17 Rt 143C 44 Ozaukee County Express IH43/CTH V PR Lot (Grafto6th/Mitchel IH 43-CTH W-Port Wash Rd-7th/8th St.-6th St.-Kilbourn-Wisc S 540 ------17 Rt 143C 45 Ozaukee County Express 3rd/Kilbourn IH43/CTH V PR Lot (GraftoIH 43-CTH W-Port Wash Rd-7th/8th St.-6th St.-Kilbourn-Wisc N -- -- 999 -- 17 Rt 143D 46 Ozaukee County Express IH43/CTH V PR Lot (Grafto6th/Michigan IH 43-CTH W-Port Wash Rd-7th/8th St.-6th St.-Kilbourn-Wisc S -- -- 999 -- 17 Rt 143D 47 Ozaukee County Express 6th/Mitchel IH43/CTH V PR Lot (GraftoIH 43-CTH W-Port Wash Rd-7th/8th St.-6th St. N 999 -- 999 -- 17 Rt 143E 48 Ozaukee County Express IH43/CTHH PR Lot (Port W6th/Mitchel IH 43-CTH W-Port Wash Rd-7th/8th St.-6th St. S -- 480 -- -- 17 Rt 143E 49 Ozaukee County Express 6th/Mitchel IH43/CTHH PR Lot (Port WIH 43-CTH W-Port Wash Rd-7th/8th St.-6th St. N 350 999 999 -- 12 OZ SHUT 1 Meauon Ind Park Shuttle Mequon Rd/Port Wash Rd Mequon Ind Park Mequon Rd-Industrial Dr E/W 600 600 999 -- 12 OZ SHUT 3 Grafton Shuttle CTH V/STH 32 PR lot Grafton Port Wash Rd- Washington St-1st Ave-Hickory St E/W 600 600 999 600 12 OZ SHUT 4 Saukville Shuttle CTH V/STH 32 PR lot Saukville Green Bay Ave-Progress Dr N/S 600 600 999 600 17 OZ SHUT 60 Mitchel St. Express Washington St../Island Av 6th/Mitchel USH 45-STH 145-Fond du Lac-27th St.-Grnfld-11th St.-Mitchel S 600 999 999 600 17 OZ SHUT 61 Mitchel St. Express 6th/Mitchel Washington St../Island Av USH 45-STH 145-Fond du Lac-27th St.-Grnfld-11th St.-Mitchel N 600 -- 600 999 17 OZ SHUT 62 Hartford (Quad) Express 6th/Mitchel Quad Grapics-Hartford STH60-USH 41-STH 145-Fond du Lac-27th-Grnfld-11th-Mitchel S 999 999 -- -- 17 OZ SHUT 63 Hartford (Quad) Express Quad Grapics-Hartford 6th/Mitchel STH60-USH 41-STH 145-Fond du Lac-27th-Grnfld-11th-Mitchel N 999 999 -- -- 17 OZ SHUT 64 Downtown Express Washington St../Island Av Wisconsin/Cass USH 45-IH 94-35th St.-Wisconsin Ave S 230 ------17 OZ SHUT 65 Downtown Express Wisconsin/Cass Washington St../Island Av USH 45-IH 94-35th St.-Wisconsin Ave N -- 450 -- -- 12 WASH SHUT 11 West Bend Shuttle Washington Co. FairgroundIndustrial Park USH 45-Paradise-Main-Decorah-River-Washington N 600 600 600 600 12 WASH SHUT 12 West Bend Shuttle Industrial Park Washington Co. FairgroundUSH 45-Paradise-Main-Decorah-River-Washington S 600 600 600 600 12 WASH SHUT 13 Slinger/Hartford Shuttle Pioneer Plaza Western Industrial Park USH 41-STH 60-STH 144-Wacker W 600 600 600 600 12 WASH SHUT 14 Slinger/Hartford Shuttle Western Industrial Park Pioneer Plaza USH 41-STH 60-STH 144-Wacker E 600 600 600 600 12 WASH SHUT 15 Germantown Shuttle Lannon Rd P-R Lot Germantown Business Par Lannon/STH 67-Maple-various roads in business park N 600 600 600 600
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 113 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 1.1. (Continued) SEWRPC Transit Routes in KRM Model
Mode Route Line Name Starting Location Ending Location Via Direc AMPMMIDNIT 12 WASH SHUT 16 Germantown Shuttle Germantown Business Par Lannon Rd P-R Lot Lannon/STH 67-Maple-various roads in business park S 600 600 600 600 15 1 1 STH 32/Sheridan Rd Douglas Av/3 Mile Rd. (GreMemorial Dr-Racine St-Douglas Av-Charles St. N -- 600 999 -- 15 1 2 Douglas Av/3 Mile Rd. (GreSTH 32/Sheridan Douglas Av-Charles St.-Racine St.-Sheridan Rd S 600 600 999 -- 15 1 23 Douglas Av/3 Mile Rd. (GreSTH 32/Sheridan Douglas Av-Racine St.-Sheridan Rd S 600 600 300 999 15 1 24 STH 32/Sheridan Douglas Av/3 Mile Rd. (GreRacine St.-Douglas Av N 600 300 -- 15 1 25 Douglas Av/3 Mile Rd. (GreDowntown Douglas Av S ------600 15 1 26 Downtown Douglas Av/3 Mile Rd. (GreDouglas Av N ------600 15 1 27 STH 32/Sheridan Douglas Av/3 Mile Rd. (GreMemorial Dr-Racine St-Douglas Av N 600 600 -- 999 15 2 3 21st/Green Bay Rd Shorecrest Shopping Cente21st St-Main St E/N 300 300 300 600 15 2 4 Shorecrest Shopping Cente21st/Green Bay Rd 21st St-Main St S/W 300 300 300 600 15 3 5 Ohio St/Byrd Av Golf/Rapids Byrd Av-16th St-Northwestern E/N 300 300 300 600 15 3 6 Golf/Rapids Ohio St/Byrd Av Byrd Av-16th St-Northwestern S/W 300 300 300 600 15 4 7 Case H.S. Shorecrest Shopping CenteWashington Av-LaSalle St N 300 300 300 300 15 4 8 Shorecrest Shopping CenteCase H.S. Washington Av-LaSalle St S 300 300 300 300 15 5 9 Concord/Spruce Rapids Plaza Taylor-Memorial-Goold N 300 300 300 -- 15 5 10 Rapids Plaza Concord/Spruce Taylor-Memorial-Goold S 300 300 300 -- 15 6/8 11 Downtown Downtown Main-State-Spring-Ohio-Lathrop-Kinzie-6th CCLkWz 300 300 300 -- 15 7 12 Downtown Meecham/Taylor Ohio-Spring W/S 300 300 999 -- 15 7 13 Downtown State Prison-Sturtevant Grand-Durrand-CTH H W/E 300 300 999 -- 15 7 14 Downtown Regency Mall Grand-Durrand W ------600 15 7 21 Downtown State Prison-Sturtevant Grand-Durrand-Waxdale-CTH H W -- -- 430 -- 15 7 22 State Prison-Sturtevant Downtown Grand-Durrand-Waxdale-CTH H E -- -- 430 -- 15 8/6 15 Elmwood Plaza Downtown Lathrop-Kinzie-7th N/E ------600 15 8/6 16 Downtown Elmwood Plaza Main-6th-Kinzie-Lathrop-Ohio-Spring-State CLkWz 300 300 300 -- 15 9 17 UW-Parkside Downtown Washington-Taylor-Meecham N 600 600 600 -- 15 9 18 Downtown UW-Parkside Washington-Taylor-Meecham S 600 600 600 -- 18 20 28 Downtown STH 20/IH 94(Grandview InWashington Av-Sth 20 E 300 600 999 999 18 20 29 STH 20/IH 94(Grandview InDowntown Washington Av-Sth 20 W 999 900 -- 999 18 20 30 STH 20/IH 94(Grandview InJI Case High School Washington Av-Sth 20 W -- -- 999 -- 15 1 30 UW-Parkside Downtown 30th Ave-22nd Ave-56th St S 300 300 600 600 15 1 31 Downtown UW-Parkside 56th St-22nd Ave-30th Ave N 300 300 600 600 15 1 32 Downtown Tremper High 22nd Ave-26th Ave-39th Ave S 300 300 600 600 15 1 33 Tremper High Downtown 39th Ave-26th Ave-22nd Ave N 300 300 600 600 15 2 34 Kenosha Industrial Park Downtown 68th Ave-52nd St-7th Ave E 300 300 600 600 15 2 35 Downtown Kenosha Industrial Park 7th Ave-52nd St-68th Ave W 300 300 600 600 15 2 36 Downtown 91st St/30th Ave 5th Ave-Sheridan Rd-85th St-32nd Ave S 300 300 600 600 15 2 37 91st St/30th Ave Downtown 32nd Ave-85th St-Sheridan Rd-5th Ave N 300 300 600 600 15 3 38 64th Av/55th St Downtown 60th St-Pershing-Washington-17th Ave E 300 300 600 600 15 3 39 Downtown 64th Av/55th St 17th Ave-Washington-Pershing-60th St W 300 300 600 600 15 3 40 Downtown 91st St/17th Ave Sheridan-75th St-80th St-22nd Ave S 300 300 600 600 15 3 41 91st St/17th Ave Downtown 22nd Ave-80th St-75th St-Sheridan N 300 300 600 600 15 4 42 Carthage College Downtown 30th Ave-18th St-18th Ave-Sheridan Rd S 300 300 600 600 15 4 43 Downtown Carthage College Sheridan Rd-18th ave-18th St-30th Ave N 300 300 600 600 15 4 44 Downtown Southport Plaza 60th St-39th Ave-80th St-60th Ave-75th St W 300 300 600 600 15 4 45 Southport Plaza Downtown 75th St-60th Ave-80th St-39th Ave-60th St E 300 300 600 600 15 5 46 Glenwood Crossings Downtown 18th St-22nd Ave-27th St-39th Ave-52nd St-56th St S 300 300 600 600 15 5 47 Downtown Glenwood Crossings 56th St-52nd St-39th Ave-27th St-22nd Ave-18th St N 300 300 600 600 15 5 48 Downtown 64th Av/55th St Sheridan-63rd St-Roosevlt-67th St-60th Ave-Green Bay S 300 300 600 600 15 5 49 64th Av/55th St Downtown 60th St-60th Ave-67th St-Roosevelt-63rd St-Sheridan N 300 300 600 600
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 114 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 1.1. (Continued) SEWRPC Transit Routes in KRM Model
Mode Route Line Name Starting Location Ending Location Via Direc AMPMMIDNIT 15 6 50 64th Av/55th St Downtown 52nd-GrnBy-45th-Wash Rd-7th W 300 300 600 600 15 6 51 Downtown 64th Av/55th St 52nd-GrnBy-45th-Wash Rd-7th E 300 300 600 600 15 7 52 Factory Outlet Centre Downtown 52nd-104th-75th E 900 800 999 600 15 7 53 Downtown Factory Outlet Centre 52nd-104th-75th W 999 900 999 600 15 8 54 LakeView Corporate Park Downtown STH 31-52nd-Sheridan E - - 900 - - 600 15 8 55 Downtown LakeView Corporate Park STH 31-52nd-Sheridan W 900 - - - - 600 15 1 171 Westbrook/Target Brookfield Square Downtown Main-Grnwy-Strdst-Abbot-Swnsn-Blumnd-Corp Lakes W 300 300 -- -- 15 1 172 Westbrook/Target Downtown Brookfield Square Main-Grnwy-Strdst-Abbot-Swnsn-Blumnd-Corp Lakes E 300 300 -- -- 15 1 173 Westbrook/Target Brookfield Square Downtown Main-Grnwy-Strdst-Abbot-Swnsn-Blumnd W -- -- 300 300 15 1 174 Westbrook/Target Downtown Brookfield Square Main-Grnwy-Strdst-Abbot-Swnsn-Blumnd E -- -- 300 300 15 2 175 Arcadian/Racine K-Mart Downtown Sunset-Racine Av-Oakland-Arcadian N 300 300 -- -- 15 2 176 Arcadian/Racine Downtown K-Mart Sunset-Racine Av-Oakland-Arcadian S 300 300 -- -- 15 2 177 Arcadian/Racine Target Downtown Sunset-Racine Av-Oakland-Arcadian N -- -- 600 600 15 2 178 Arcadian/Racine Downtown Target Sunset-Racine Av-Oakland-Arcadian S -- -- 600 600 15 3 179 Hartwell K-Mart Downtown Tenny-Hartwell-Broadway N 300 300 600 600 15 3 180 Hartwell Downtown K-Mart Tenny-Hartwell-Broadway S 300 300 600 600 15 3 187 Hartwell Merrill Crest K-Mart Tenny-Hartwell-Broadway-Madison-Grandview S 300 300 600 600 15 4 181 Grand/Summit Sentinel/West UW-Waukesha Grand-East N 300 300 300 600 15 4 182 Grand/Summit UW-Waukesha Sentinel/West Grand-East S 300 300 300 600 15 5 183 Prairie Badger Dr Downtown West-College-Prairie-School-Haymarket-Sunset E 300 300 600 -- 15 5 184 Prairie Downtown Badger Dr West-College-Prairie-School-Haymarket-Sunset W 300 300 600 -- 15 6 185 St Paul West H.S. Downtown St.Paul-Caimbrdg-Grndvw-Kensngtn-McArthur E 700 300 600 -- 15 6 186 St Paul Downtown West H.S. St.Paul-Caimbrdg-Grndvw-Kensngtn-McArthur W 700 300 600 -- 15 7 187 Madison Merrill Crest Downtown Madison-Grandview E 300 300 600 600 15 7 188 Madison Downtown Merrill Crest Madison-Grandview W 300 300 600 600 15 8 189 Summit UW-Waukesha Downtown Delafield-Summit-University E 300 300 300 600 15 8 190 Summit Downtown UW-Waukesha Delafield-Summit-University W 300 300 300 600 15 9 191 Northview Pewaukee (WCTC) Downtown North/StPaul-Mrland-Nrthvw-PebVal-Silvrnl-Grndvw S 300 300 600 600 15 9 192 Northview Downtown Pewaukee (WCTC) North/StPaul-Mrland-Nrthvw-PebVal-Silvrnl-Grndvw N 300 300 600 600 15 9 193 Northview Pewaukee (WCTC) Downtown North/StPaul-Mrland-PewkRd-Nrthvw-Grndvw-CntryInn S -- 600 -- -- 15 9 194 Northview Downtown Pewaukee (WCTC) North/StPaul-Mrland-PewkRd-Nrthvw-Grndvw-CntryInn N 600 ------15 15 195 Racine Ave K-Mart Downtown Main-Lincoln-Oakland-Racine-LesPaul-Sunset S 600 600 -- -- 15 15 196 Racine Ave Downtown K-Mart Main-Lincoln-Oakland-Racine-LesPaul-Sunset N 600 600 -- -- 15 15 204 Racine Ave K-Mart Downtown Main-Lincoln-Oakland-Racine-LesPaul-Sunset S -- -- 600 -- 15 15 205 Racine Ave Downtown K-Mart Main-Lincoln-Oakland-Racine-LesPaul-Sunset N -- -- 600 -- 15 5/6 197 St Paul/Sunset SW City of Waukesha Downtown West-College-Prairie-Sunset-Oakdale-Cambridge S ------600 15 5/6 198 St Paul/Sunset Downtown SW City of Waukesha West-College-Prairie-Sunset-Oakdale-Cambridge N ------600 15 302 199 National/Moorland 108th/National New Berlin Industrial Park National-Moorland-Ryerson-170th-Rogers W/N 400 400 -- -- 15 302 200 National/Moorland New Berlin Industrail Park 108th/National National-Moorland-Ryerson-170th-Rogers S/E 400 400 -- -- 15 302 201 National/Moorland 108th/National Brookfield Square National-Moorland-Ryerson-170th-Rogers-Moorland W/N -- -- 700 700 15 302 202 National/Moorland Brookfield Square 108th/National National-Moorland-Ryerson-170th-Rogers-Moorland S/E -- -- 700 700 15 304 203 Goerkes Corners/WCTC Goerkes Corners WCTC Blue Mound-164-CTH J- Capital-STH 16-IH 94 W/E 300 300 -- --
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 115 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 1.2. CMAP Transit Routes in KRM Model
mode veh. line description speed length segs hdwy B 1 cta006 3 KING DRIVE 12 24.29 103 9.1 B 1 cta007 3L King Drive Limite 15 12.83 50 10 B 1 cta009 4 COTTAGE GROVE 12 25.83 102 6.8 B 1 cta016 7 HARRISON ST 12 16.99 86 14.3 B 1 cta018 8 HALSTED ST 12 27.34 90 8.7 B 1 cta019 119 119TH 12 12.6 30 10 B 1 cta020 8A S HALSTED ST 12 14.52 36 13.6 B 1 cta021 9 ASHLAND AVE 12 34.32 111 7.9 B 1 cta022 11 LINCOLN AVE 12 15.74 51 13.3 B 1 cta024 12 ROOSEVELT RD 12 15.68 60 8.3 B 1 cta029 17 WESTCHESTER 12 10.96 30 60 B 1 cta031 18 16TH-18TH 12 13.49 54 15.2 B 1 cta033 20 MADISON ST 12 16.79 84 6.7 B 1 cta035 21 CERMAK RD 12 14.66 62 13.5 B 1 cta036 22 CLARK 12 21.92 98 9 B 1 cta039 24 WENTWORTH AVE 12 22.37 89 10.1 B 1 cta040 33 MAGNIFICENT MILE 12 14.22 74 11.5 B 1 cta042 27 SOUTH DEERING 12 19.08 48 13.5 B 1 cta043 28 STONY ISLAND 12 18.11 56 10.2 B 1 cta044 29 STATE ST 12 26.03 113 10.9 B 1 cta045 34 SOUTH MICHIGAN 12 11.04 20 10 B 1 cta046 30 SOUTH CHICAGO 12 25.1 52 13.1 B 1 cta050 35 35TH ST 12 10.66 36 10 B 1 cta051 36 BROADWAY 12 20.38 96 10.1 B 1 cta053 37 SEDGWICK 12 20.38 108 13.9 B 1 cta055 55 GARFIELD 12 17.72 58 8 B 1 cta056 55A 55TH/AUSTIN 12 6.06 10 17 B 1 cta057 39 PERSHING 12 16.18 56 19 B 1 cta058 55N 55TH/NARRAGANSET 12 7.06 12 12 B 1 cta062 43 43RD ST 12 4.62 20 20 B 1 cta063 44 WALLACE-RACINE 12 18.14 42 9 B 1 cta067 47 47TH ST 12 15.68 40 11.3 B 1 cta069 48 SOUTH DAMEN 12 15.48 34 11.7 B 1 cta070 49 WESTERN AVE 12 31 92 7.5 B 1 cta071 49A S WESTERN AVE 12 21.76 45 29.7 B 1 cta073 50 DAMEN 12 22.5 76 12.9 B 1 cta074 51 51ST ST 12 14.98 40 13.5 B 1 cta075 52 KEDZ-CALIFORNIA 12 19.06 68 11.8 B 1 cta076 52A SOUTH KEDZIE 12 22.02 46 7 B 1 cta077 53 PULASKI 12 21.1 60 8 B 1 cta078 53A SOUTH PULASKI 12 22.4 46 9 B 1 cta079 54 CICERO 12 16.08 44 10 B 1 cta080 54A NORTH CICERO 12 16.92 48 18.8 B 1 cta081 54B SOUTH CICERO 12 14.14 32 12 B 1 cta084 56 MILWAUKEE 12 21.84 103 10.8 B 1 cta088 56A NORTH MILWAUKEE 12 7.2 20 14.9 B 1 cta090 57 LARAMIE 12 7.32 24 12 B 1 cta093 59 59TH-61ST 12 20.02 54 15.2 B 1 cta095 60 BLUE ISLAND-26 12 17.36 90 8.5
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 116 of 262 A KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 1.2. (Continued) CMAP Transit Routes in KRM Model
mode veh. line description speed length segs hdwy B 1 cta101 49B N WESTERN AVE 12 7 16 10 B 1 cta111 65 GRAND 12 21.28 80 11 B 1 cta112 66 CHICAGO 12 17.7 74 6 B 1 cta116 67 67TH-69TH (KEDZ) 12 16.94 40 14.2 B 1 cta117 68 NORTHWEST HWY 12 8.94 22 12.1 B 1 cta118 70 DIVISION 12 14.8 54 8.5 B 1 cta119 71 71ST 12 6.79 20 9.5 B 1 cta121 72 NORTH 12 18.16 64 10 B 1 cta122 74 FULLERTON 12 16.98 52 12 B 1 cta123 75 74TH-75TH 12 13.28 34 10 B 1 cta124 76 DIVERSEY 12 18.14 52 8.3 B 1 cta126 77 BELMONT 12 21.58 58 10 B 1 cta127 78 MONTROSE 12 18.08 56 10.9 B 1 cta128 79 79TH 12 21.54 40 7.8 B 1 cta129 80 IRVING PARK 12 19.42 54 12.8 B 1 cta131 81 LAWRENCE 12 13.32 44 8.6 B 1 cta132 82 KIMBALL-HOMAN 12 22.68 74 4.6 B 1 cta133 84 PETERSON 12 11.9 28 11.6 B 1 cta134 85 CENTRAL 12 17.12 46 9 B 1 cta135 85A NORTH CENTRAL 12 7.96 18 19.9 B 1 cta137 86 NARRAGANSETT 12 10.24 26 15.7 B 1 cta138 87 87TH 12 21.39 46 9.5 B 1 cta139 88 HIGGINS 12 8.34 26 15.6 B 1 cta143 90 HARLEM 12 8.24 24 12 B 1 cta144 91 AUSTIN (IMLAY) 12 19.38 56 13 B 1 cta145 92 FOSTER 12 12.98 32 11.3 B 1 cta146 93 NORTH CALIFORNIA 12 10.03 25 15.4 B 1 cta147 94 SOUTH CALIFORNIA 12 22.14 70 8.4 B 1 cta148 95E 93RD/95TH 12 11.24 32 10 B 1 cta149 95W 95TH 12 7.16 20 9.5 B 1 cta150 96 LUNT-TOUHY 12 8.72 20 14.1 B 1 cta153 97 SKOKIE 12 15.84 54 12.9 B 1 cta159 63 63RD 12 16.94 44 7.5 B 1 cta166 106 East 103rd 12 6.14 14 28.2 B 1 cta175 112 VINCENNES 12 13.3 34 11.5 B 1 cta180 129 NORTHWESTERN-FRA 12 5.63 55 11.7 B 1 cta201 151 SHERIDAN (DEVON) 12 21.81 98 7 B 1 cta202 152 ADDISON 12 22.24 62 3.5 B 1 cta205 155 DEVON 12 7.04 14 7.8 B 1 cta207 157 STREETERVILLE 12 6.42 63 10.1 B 1 cta209 201 CENTRAL-SHERMAN 12 12.16 37 15.6 B 1 cta210 202 MAIN-EMERSON 12 8.6 24 20 B 1 cta211 203 RIDGE-GRANT 12 12.58 40 14.9 B 1 cta225 126 JACKSON 12 16.55 82 7 B 1 cta234 204 DODGE 12 8.36 26 12.5 B 1 cta240 156 LASALLE 12 12.03 68 4.8 B 1 cta241 151 SHERIDAN (BLMNT) 12 11.38 58 7 B 1 cta247 73 ARMITAGE 12 15.14 60 9.6 B 1 cta249 64 FOSTER/CANFIELD 12 3 11 15
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 117 of 262 A KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 1.2. (Continued) CMAP Transit Routes in KRM Model
mode veh. line description speed length segs hdwy B 1 cta250 81W WEST LAWRENCE 12 11.2 28 16.3 B 1 cta251 90N NORTH HARLEM 12 4.68 14 17.7 B 1 cta252 69 CUMBERLAND/E RIV 12 2.92 6 20 B 1 cta300 91 AUSTIN (JFPRK) 12 15.9 40 13 B 1 cta301 127 NORTHWESTERN-BAL 12 2.22 22 12.3 B 1 cta302 108 HALSTED/95Th 12 10.68 28 6.7 B 1 cta303 111 115TH 12 21.22 60 15.4 B 1 cta305 122 IL CENTR NW EXP 12 3.16 27 5.5 B 1 cta501 1 INDIANA-HYDPRK 12 19.76 92 10 B 1 cta599 62 ARCHER 12 26.97 104 13 B 1 cta608 125 WATER TOWER 12 4.91 49 6.6 B 1 cta62H 62H ARCHER/HARLEM 12 11.26 16 13.5 B 1 cta63W 63W/165 W 63RD/65TH 12 8.42 12 15 B 1 cta662 100 JEFFERY MANOR 12 12.92 32 16.2 B 1 cta664 103 WEST 103RD 12 13.1 34 9 B 1 cta678 123 IL CENTR UNI EXP 12 4.11 28 5.6 B 1 cta679 121 UNION/WACKER EXP 12 4.63 50 5.8 B 1 cta749 120 NW/WACKER EXP 12 3.89 42 6.2 B 1 cta886 X49 WESTERN EXP 12 35.02 100 13.1 B 1 cta900 53A S PULASKI LTD 12 7.85 15 13.7 C 7 ctr001 HOWARD DAN RYAN 25 44 64 4.5 C 7 ctr002 EVANSTON EXPRESS 25 31 62 10 C 7 ctr003 LAKE-ENGLEWOOD A 25 39.4 52 7.8 C 7 ctr004 LAKE-JACKSN PK B 25 35.6 52 7.8 C 7 ctr005 O HARE - FOREST PARK 25 26.6 31 9.2 C 7 ctr007 SKOKIE SWIFT 25 10.2 2 7 C 7 ctr008 RAVENSWOOD-CERMAK 25 19.35 42 8 C 7 ctr009 RAVENSWOOD-MIDWAY 30 40.7 60 5.35 C 7 ctr051 FOREST PARK - O HARE 25 26.6 31 15 C 7 ctr081 CERMAK - RAVENSWOOD 25 19.25 42 5 E 2 exp004 2 HYDE PARK EXP N 12 8.44 31 9.4 E 2 exp014 6 JEFFERY EXP N&S 12 30.09 103 6.8 E 2 exp191 135 WILSON LASL EXP 12 16.59 74 4.6 E 2 exp193 136 SHERIDAN LASL EX 12 9.53 35 7 E 2 exp197 146 MARINE-MICH EXP 12 18.07 78 12.5 E 2 exp198 145 WILSON-MICH EXP 12 18.63 80 9 E 2 exp229 147 OUTER DRIVE EXP 12 24.19 90 13.6 E 2 exp306 14 SOUTH LK SHR EXP 12 14.76 44 3.5 M 8 met001 KENOSHA S RUN 308 30 16.6 10 5 M 8 met002 KENOSHA S RUN 310 30 46.9 25 5 M 8 met003 KENOSHA S RUN 312 30 16.6 10 5 M 8 met004 KENOSHA S RUN 314 30 35.9 22 5 M 8 met005 KENOSHA S RUN 316 30 46.9 25 5 M 8 met006 KENOSHA S RUN 318 30 35.9 22 5 M 8 met007 KENOSHA S RUN 320 30 23.1 15 5 M 8 met008 KENOSHA S RUN 322 30 46.9 25 5 M 8 met009 KENOSHA S RUN 324 30 35.9 22 5 M 8 met010 KENOSHA S RUN 326 30 46.9 25 5 M 8 met011 KENOSHA S RUN 328 30 23.1 15 5
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 118 of 262 A KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 1.2. (Continued) CMAP Transit Routes in KRM Model
mode veh. line description speed length segs hdwy M 8 met012 KENOSHA N RUN 311 30 35.9 22 5 M 8 met013 KENOSHA N RUN 313 30 23.1 15 5 M 8 met014 KENOSHA N RUN 315 30 35.9 22 5 M 8 met044 JLT WILSPRN E RUN 16 30 33.97 5 5 M 8 met045 JLT WILSPRN E RUN 18 30 33.97 5 5 M 8 met046 JLT WILSPRN E RUN 14 30 33.97 5 5 M 8 met104 JOLIET N RUN 404 30 40.2 13 5 M 8 met105 JOLIET N RUN 406 30 40.2 13 5 M 8 met106 JOLIET N RUN 408 30 40.2 13 5 M 8 met107 JOLIET N RUN 410 30 40.2 13 5 M 8 met108 JOLIET N RUN 412 30 40.2 13 5 M 8 met109 JOLIET N RUN 414 30 40.2 13 5 M 8 met110 JOLIET N RUN 416 30 40.2 13 5 M 8 met111 BLUE ISL N RUN 604 30 16.4 13 5 M 8 met112 BLUE ISL N RUN 606 30 16.4 13 5 M 8 met113 BLUE ISL N RUN 608 30 16.4 13 5 M 8 met114 BLUE ISL N RUN 610 30 16.4 13 5 M 8 met115 BLUE ISL N RUN 612 30 16.4 13 5 M 8 met116 BLUE ISL N RUN 302 30 15.7 4 5 M 8 met117 BLUE ISL N RUN 614 30 16.4 13 5 M 8 met118 BLUE ISL N RUN 616 30 15.9 12 5 M 8 met119 JOLIET S RUN 401 30 40.2 13 5 M 8 met120 JOLIET S RUN 503 30 40.9 22 5 M 8 met121 JOLIET S RUN 505 30 40.9 22 5 M 8 met122 MICH CITY E RUN 205 30 30.32 26 5 M 8 met123 MICH CITY E RUN 207 30 30.32 26 5 M 8 met126 MICH CITY W RUN 106 30 57.32 32 5 M 8 met127 MICH CITY W RUN 108 30 57.32 32 5 M 8 met128 MICH CITY W RUN 110 30 57.32 32 5 M 8 met129 MICH CITY W RUN 12 30 57.32 32 5 M 8 met130 MICH CITY W RUN 112 30 57.32 32 5 M 8 met131 UNIV PARK N RUN 104 30 31.02 34 5 M 8 met132 BL ISLAND N RUN 204 30 18.52 28 5 M 8 met133 91ST ST N RUN 304 30 12.39 19 5 M 8 met134 BL ISLAND N RUN 500 30 18.52 28 5 M 8 met135 HARVEY N RUN 750 30 19.62 25 5 M 8 met136 FLOSSMOOR N RUN 730 30 24.42 29 5 M 8 met137 UNIV PARK N RUN 700 30 31.02 34 5 M 8 met138 91ST ST N RUN 400 30 12.39 19 5 M 8 met139 HARVEY N RUN 752 30 19.62 25 5 M 8 met140 BL ISLAND N RUN 502 30 18.52 28 5 M 8 met141 FLOSSMOOR N RUN 732 30 24.42 29 5 M 8 met142 UNIV PARK N RUN 702 30 31.02 34 5 M 8 met143 UNIV PARK N RUN 106 30 31.02 34 5 M 8 met144 HARVEY N RUN 754 30 19.62 25 5 M 8 met145 91ST ST N RUN 402 30 12.39 19 5 M 8 met146 FLOSSMOOR N RUN 734 30 24.42 29 5 M 8 met147 BL ISLAND N RUN 504 30 18.52 28 5 M 8 met148 UNIV PARK N RUN 704 30 31.02 34 5
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 119 of 262 A KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 1.2. (Continued) CMAP Transit Routes in KRM Model
mode veh. line description speed length segs hdwy M 8 met149 HARVEY N RUN 756 30 19.62 25 5 M 8 met150 115TH N RUN 604 30 14.12 21 5 M 8 met151 FLOSSMOOR N RUN 736 30 24.42 29 5 M 8 met152 91ST ST N RUN 408 30 12.39 19 5 M 8 met153 UNIV PARK N RUN 706 30 31.02 34 5 M 8 met154 HARVEY N RUN 758 30 19.62 25 5 M 8 met155 FLOSSMOOR N RUN 738 30 24.42 29 5 M 8 met156 BL ISLAND N RUN 506 30 18.52 28 5 M 8 met157 UNIV PARK N RUN 708 30 31.02 34 5 M 8 met158 91ST ST N RUN 410 30 12.39 19 5 M 8 met159 HARVEY N RUN 760 30 19.62 25 5 M 8 met160 91ST S RUN 307 30 12.39 19 5 M 8 met161 BL ISLAND S RUN 205 30 18.52 28 5 M 8 met162 91ST S RUN 309 30 12.39 19 5 M 8 met163 91ST S RUN 311 30 12.39 19 5 M 8 met164 UNIV PARK S RUN 111 30 31.02 34 5 M 8 met165 91ST S RUN 313 30 12.39 19 5 M 8 met166 UNIV PARK S RUN 113 30 31.02 34 5 M 8 met167 CNW - McHenry (603) 30 50.54 19 5 M 8 met168 CNW -Barrington(605) 30 31.94 15 5 M 8 met169 Crystal L - CNW (606 30 43.66 19 5 M 8 met170 Fox Lake-Union 2106 30 49.44 20 5 M 8 met171 Fox Lk-Union NEW EXP 30 49.44 20 5 M 8 met172 FOX LK N RUN 2103 30 49.44 20 5 M 8 met205 ORLAND PK N RUN 6 30 27.8 10 5 M 8 met206 ORLAND PK N RUN 8 30 24.1 9 5 M 8 met207 ORLAND PK N RUN 10 30 27.8 10 5 M 8 met208 ORLAND PK S RUN 3 30 27.8 10 5 M 8 met245 AURORA E RUN 1210 30 24.5 24 5 M 8 met246 AURORA E RUN 1212 30 37.42 27 5 M 8 met247 AURORA E RUN 1214 30 16.4 16 5 M 8 met248 AURORA E RUN 1216 30 20.4 21 5 M 8 met249 AURORA E RUN 1218 30 37.42 27 5 M 8 met250 AURORA E RUN 1220 30 24.5 24 5 M 8 met251 AURORA E RUN 1222 30 37.42 27 5 M 8 met252 AURORA E RUN 1224 30 20.4 21 5 M 8 met253 AURORA E RUN 1226 30 24.5 24 5 M 8 met254 AURORA E RUN 1228 30 37.42 27 5 M 8 met255 AURORA E RUN 1230 30 37.42 27 5 M 8 met256 AURORA E RUN 1232 30 20.4 21 5 M 8 met257 AURORA E RUN 1234 30 20.4 21 5 M 8 met258 AURORA E RUN 1236 30 24.5 24 5 M 8 met259 AURORA E RUN 1238 30 37.42 27 5 M 8 met260 AURORA E RUN 1208 30 37.42 27 5 M 8 met261 AURORA E RUN 1240 30 13.1 12 5 M 8 met262 AURORA E RUN 1246 30 37.42 27 5 M 8 met263 AURORA E RUN 1244 30 20.4 21 5 M 8 met264 AURORA E RUN 1246 30 24.5 24 5 M 8 met265 AURORA E RUN 1248 30 37.42 27 5
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 120 of 262 A KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 1.2. (Continued) CMAP Transit Routes in KRM Model
mode veh. line description speed length segs hdwy M 8 met266 AURORA E RUN 1250 30 13.1 12 5 M 8 met267 AURORA E RUN 1252 30 20.4 21 5 M 8 met268 AURORA E RUN 1254 30 24.5 24 5 M 8 met269 AURORA W RUN 1211 30 19.5 20 5 M 8 met270 AURORA W RUN 1215 30 24.5 24 5 M 8 met271 AURORA W RUN 1217 30 16.9 17 5 M 8 met272 AURORA W RUN 1221 30 37.42 27 5 M 8 met275 McHenry - CNW (608) 30 50.54 19 5 M 8 met276 Harvard - CNW (610) 30 64.56 21 5 M 8 met278 Barringtn - CNW (612 30 31.94 15 5 M 8 met279 Crystal L- CNW (614) 30 43.66 19 5 M 8 met280 Crystal L- CNW (616) 30 43.66 19 5 M 8 met281 Barringtn-CNW (618) 30 31.94 15 5 M 8 met282 Harvard - CNW (620) 30 64.56 21 5 M 8 met283 McHenry - CNW (622) 30 50.54 19 5 M 8 met284 Crystal L-CNW (624) 30 43.66 19 5 M 8 met285 Barringtn-CNW (626) 30 31.94 15 5 M 8 met286 Barringtn-CNW (628) 30 31.94 15 5 M 8 met287 Harvard - CNW (630) 30 64.56 21 5 M 8 met288 McHenry-CNW (632) 30 50.54 19 5 M 8 met289 Barringtn-CNW (634) 30 31.94 15 5 M 8 met290 CNW-Crystal L (607) 30 43.66 19 5 M 8 met292 Fox Lake-Union 2108 30 49.44 20 5 M 8 met293 Fox Lake-Union 2110 30 49.44 20 5 M 8 met294 Fox Lake-Union 2112 30 49.44 20 5 M 8 met295 Fox Lake-Union 2114 30 49.44 20 5 M 8 met296 Fox Lake-Union 2116 30 49.44 20 5 M 8 met297 Fox Lake-Union 2118 30 49.44 20 5 M 8 met298 Deerfield-Union 2120 30 23.9 13 5 M 8 met299 Fox Lake-Union 2122 30 49.44 20 5 M 8 met300 Deerfield-Union 2124 30 23.9 13 5 M 8 met301 Union-Deerfield 2105 30 23.9 13 5 M 8 met302 Union-Grayslake 2107 30 40.94 16 5 M 8 met303 LK FOREST N RUN 2101 30 28 14 5 M 8 met317 ELGIN E RUN 2216 30 38.49 23 5 M 8 met318 ELGIN E RUN 2218 30 30.1 20 5 M 8 met319 ELGIN E RUN 2220 30 23.9 17 5 M 8 met320 ELGIN E RUN 2222 30 38.49 23 5 M 8 met321 ELGIN E RUN 2224 30 13.2 11 5 M 8 met322 ELGIN E RUN 2226 30 35.29 22 5 M 8 met323 ELGIN W RUN 2207 30 38.49 23 5 M 8 met324 ELGIN W RUN 2209 30 38.49 23 5 M 8 met325 GENEVA-CNW 14 30 35.59 16 5 M 8 met326 GENEVA E RUN 16 30 30.09 15 5 M 8 met327 GENEVA-CNW 18 30 35.59 16 5 M 8 met328 GENEVA E RUN 20 30 30.09 15 5 M 8 met329 GENEVA-CNW 22 30 35.59 16 5 M 8 met330 GENEVA E RUN 24 30 30.09 15 5 M 8 met331 GENEVA-CNW 26 30 35.59 16 5
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 121 of 262 A KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 1.2. (Continued) CMAP Transit Routes in KRM Model
mode veh. line description speed length segs hdwy M 8 met332 GENEVA E RUN 28 30 15.99 8 5 M 8 met333 GENEVA E RUN 30 30 30.09 15 5 M 8 met334 ELGIN E RUN 2212 30 23.9 17 5 M 8 met335 ELGIN W RUN 2205 30 38.49 23 5 M 8 met336 ELGIN E RUN 2214 30 23.9 17 5 M 8 met337 GENEVA-CNW 32 30 35.59 16 5 M 8 met338 GENEVA E RUN 34 30 15.99 8 5 M 8 met339 GENEVA-CNW 36 30 35.59 16 5 M 8 met340 CNW-GENEVA 13 30 35.59 16 5 M 8 met341 CNW-GENEVA 15 30 35.59 16 5 M 8 met342 GENEVA W RUN 17 30 15.99 8 5 M 8 met343 GENEVA W RUN 19 30 15.99 8 5 M 8 met901 ANTIOCH S RUN 100 30 52.04 21 5 M 8 met902 ANTIOCH S RUN 102 30 52.04 21 5 M 8 met903 ANTIOCH S RUN 104 30 52.04 21 5 M 8 met904 ANTIOCH S RUN 106 30 52.04 21 5 Q 4 pex114 610 RVR RD-PRARIE 12 22.1 21 20 Q 4 pex115 616 CHANCELLORY W 12 14.79 21 25 Q 4 pex116 626 SKOKIE VALL N 12 17.91 30 22.5 Q 4 pex117 637 WOODDALE-RSMNT 12 12.55 21 30 Q 4 pex523 355 LANSING N 25 29.72 87 12.1 Q 4 pex524 391 NR WEST SUB-UPS 12 19.73 34 90 Q 4 pex525 392 LITTLE VILLAGE-U 12 18.09 25 90 Q 4 pex526 395 CTA 95TH ST-UPS 12 15.93 26 90 Q 4 pex567 877 S SRB OAK BRK 12 38.79 57 24 Q 4 pex568 888 TRI STATE FLYER 12 40.05 50 38 Q 4 pex626 210 LINCOLN AVE S 15 29.68 80 30 Q 4 pex700 636 Lake-Cook Rd Exp 12 21.66 27 25.5 Q 4 pex701 425 Cermak-Avon Exp 12 25.66 73 60 Q 4 pex901 355 LANSING S 25 30.03 85 60 Q 4 pex902 600 NORTHWEST EXP 12 15.57 19 30 Q 4 pex903 606 NRTHWST EXP W 12 13.73 20 13.9 Q 4 pex904 606 NRTHWST LTD E 12 16.08 29 29 Q 4 pex906 616 CHANCELLORY E 12 17.61 24 60 Q 4 pex907 626 SKOKIE VALL S 12 17.69 25 30 Q 4 pex908 737 W SUBRB LTD W 12 24.48 47 60 Q 4 pex909 747 DUPAGE CNNCT 12 38.35 86 28 Q 4 pex910 757 NWEST CONNECT 12 25.58 45 60 Q 4 pex911 767 CON/DG PRAIR 12 38.72 49 30 Q 4 pex912 855 I-55 FLYER 12 34.49 59 28.3 Q 4 pex913 833 JOLIET-UPS 12 24.12 35 90 Q 4 pex914 890 SOUTH SUB-UPS 12 25.84 32 90 L 5 plc019 552 N STATE SPRG HIL 12 9.3 14 60 L 5 plc051 602 HIGGINS-SALEM 12 7.13 12 40 L 5 plc054 522 MONTGOMERY 12 7.76 12 80 L 5 plc055 524 DOWNER 12 6.86 15 40 L 5 plc056 407 BLOOMNGTN-ROSLL 12 6.09 9 40 L 5 plc057 530 FOX VALLEY CNTR 12 15.89 38 60 L 5 plc058 471 HGHLND PK-DEERF 12 11.3 34 20.6
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 122 of 262 A KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 1.2. (Continued) CMAP Transit Routes in KRM Model
mode veh. line description speed length segs hdwy L 5 plc059 421 WILMETTE AVE 12 13.8 42 42 L 5 plc068 549 MCLEAN 12 13.34 26 30 L 5 plc069 547 WING PARK 12 6.98 18 35 L 5 plc070 546 SOUTH 12 4.83 21 35 L 5 plc071 548 HIGHLAND 12 4.6 18 35 L 5 plc072 545 WALNUT 12 4.47 17 35 L 5 plc073 541 DOUGLAS 12 4.93 19 35 L 5 plc074 543 DUNDEE 12 10.27 34 44.7 L 5 plc075 553 PARK/SUMMITT 12 3.55 18 35 L 5 plc076 544 CHICAGO ST. 12 5.85 20 32.5 L 5 plc077 542 GROVE 12 8.16 30 35 L 5 plc080 801 ELGIN-GENEVA 12 31.21 56 60 L 5 plc081 521 HIGH ST 12 6.44 14 40 L 5 plc083 523 N LAKE 12 5.73 14 40 L 5 plc085 525 FARNSWORTH 12 6.48 16 40 L 5 plc086 526 W GALENA 12 7.95 19 40 L 5 plc087 527 MOECHERVILLE 12 5.72 14 40 L 5 plc088 528 FIFTH ST 12 6.4 12 40 L 5 plc089 529 INDIAN TRAIL 12 6.7 12 40 L 5 plc092 532 SULLIVAN ROAD 12 9.02 16 40 L 5 plc093 533 MOLITOR 12 8.18 20 40 L 5 plc112 566 MCAREE-KELLER 12 12.24 22 30 L 5 plc130 561 CASTLCRT MCAREE 12 15.75 36 30 L 5 plc131 562 GURNEE V SUNSET 12 12.06 36 60 L 5 plc132 563 GREAT LKS NAVAL 12 9.36 24 38.7 L 5 plc133 564 JACKSON/14TH 12 12.98 40 60 L 5 plc134 565 GRAND AVE 12 14.64 50 60 L 5 plc136 568 LAKEHURST 12 11.88 34 23.1 L 5 plc137 569 LEWIS 12 15.92 36 30.7 L 5 plc138 570 FXLK-GURNEE MIL 12 35.08 64 60 L 5 plc139 571 ZION 12 15.78 42 60 L 5 plc141 573 GREEN BAY RD 12 13 22 30.7 L 5 plc144 472 HGHLAND PK HIGH 12 8.56 20 20.3 L 5 plc145 473 HGHLAND PK NBRK 12 13.1 36 44.7 L 5 plc147 421 WILMETTE AVE 12 13.84 42 38 L 5 plc148 422 LAKE AVE 12 11.14 31 20 L 5 plc149 423 SHERIDAN RD 12 15.12 44 20.1 L 5 plc250 534 FOX VLLY HWY 59 12 7.1 11 80 L 5 plc300 Route 1 Shuttle Bug 12 2.47 6 30.3 L 5 plc301 Route 2 Shuttle Bug 12 4.26 10 33.5 L 5 plc302 Route 3 Shuttle Bug 12 2.14 4 22.8 L 5 plc303 Route 4 Shuttle Bug 12 4.2 8 30.3 L 5 plc304 Route 5 Shuttle Bug 12 3.03 4 33.5 L 5 plc305 Route 6 Shuttle Bug 12 1.36 2 30 L 5 plc306 Route 7 Shuttle Bug 12 4.81 9 30 L 5 plc307 Route 12 Shuttle Bug 12 4.73 8 30 L 5 plc390 390 MIDWAY CTA - UPS 1 26.26 48 10 L 5 plc540 820 UNVRST HTS-LISL 12 4.08 6 60 L 5 plc544 362 S PARK FOREST 12 5.01 10 32.5
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 123 of 262 A KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 1.2. (Continued) CMAP Transit Routes in KRM Model
mode veh. line description speed length segs hdwy L 5 plc546 753 MATTESON FDR 12 5.24 8 38 L 5 plc548 787 NAPERVILLE 12 6.63 7 30 L 5 plc549 781 N NAPERVILL OFF 12 6.25 11 27 L 5 plc550 451 SE HOMEWOOD 12 2.52 5 54 L 5 plc551 452 NE HOMEWOOD 12 3.28 7 28.5 L 5 plc554 460 HAZELCREST FDR 12 5.19 13 27.5 L 5 plc564 750 CNTRY CLUB HILS 12 5.05 6 35 L 5 plc570 723 NE PALATINE-ARL 12 3.92 7 35 L 5 plc594 681 NPRVL-SAYBROOK 12 4 9 20 L 5 plc595 682 NPRVL-BROOKDALE 12 2.99 6 30 L 5 plc596 683 NPRVL-ASHBURY 12 7.02 14 25 L 5 plc597 684 NPRVL-MAPLBROOK 12 4.83 9 40 L 5 plc598 685 NPRVL-WEST WIND 12 4.72 10 41 L 5 plc599 686 NPRVL-OLD FARM 12 4.58 9 41 L 5 plc602 687 NPRVL-FARMSTEAD 12 4.52 10 43 L 5 plc605 688 NPRVL HUNTINGTN 12 2.84 5 40 L 5 plc647 677 NAPERVILLE-W GL 12 3.56 8 40 L 5 plc648 676 NAPERVLLE CRESS 12 5.45 13 40 L 5 plc650 501 FOREST PK N 12 9.75 28 30 L 5 plc653 501 W JEFFERSON 12 10.03 38 30 L 5 plc654 502 CASS ST 12 7.94 20 60 L 5 plc656 502 MARQUETTE W 12 10.23 33 30 L 5 plc658 503 BLACK RD-RAYNOR 12 12.09 35 61.5 L 5 plc662 504 S JOLIET N 12 9.68 24 60 L 5 plc663 689 NPRVL-HOBSN VIL 12 2.73 6 40 L 5 plc664 680 NAPERVILLE-KKN 12 3.04 7 40 L 5 plc665 678 NAPERVILLE-CARR 12 4.37 9 40 L 5 plc666 505 ROCKDALE 12 14.46 47 60 L 5 plc668 505 LIDICE 12 9.18 30 60 L 5 plc670 506 E WASHINGTON 12 16.75 35 60 L 5 plc686 694 CNTRAL-MT PRSPC 12 3.38 8 29.5 L 5 plc698 703 S CNTRL VILLA N 12 8.5 18 30 L 5 plc703 643 NW ELMHURST 12 3.02 6 40 L 5 plc704 645 ELMHURST INDUST 12 4 10 36 L 5 plc708 673 FORT HILL EXP 12 2.44 4 40 L 5 plc709 674 SW LOMBARD 12 3.65 7 40 L 5 plc710 675 ROUTE 59 EXPRESS 12 5.94 9 38 L 5 plc712 709 CRL STRM-N WHET 12 5.95 11 40 L 5 plc716 713 WHEATON-NPRVL 12 8.12 14 60 L 5 plc717 707 SW WHEATON 12 4.38 6 40 L 5 plc718 706 SW WHEATN-CLLGE 12 3.73 7 30 L 5 plc722 654 S CENTRL GLEN E 12 2.05 5 30 L 5 plc724 657 W GLENDALE HTS 12 5.03 9 21 L 5 plc726 653 BLMDL GLNDALE H 12 4.92 6 27.5 L 5 plc732 665 DARIEN WESTMONT 12 6.56 11 38 L 5 plc733 661 SW WESTMONT 12 2.1 4 20 L 5 plc734 662 SC WESTMONT 12 2.58 5 20 L 5 plc735 663 DARIEN CLRNDN 12 5.75 10 41 L 5 plc736 664 WILLOBRK CLRNDN 12 7.3 13 46
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 124 of 262 A KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 1.2. (Continued) CMAP Transit Routes in KRM Model
mode veh. line description speed length segs hdwy L 5 plc737 668 BURR RIDGE-HINSD 12 3.39 6 22.5 L 5 plc738 669 WSPRNG-IND HEAD 12 4.26 10 35 L 5 plc740 822 WOODRGD LISLE 12 7.1 15 22 L 5 plc741 824 BOLINGBRK LISLE 12 7.3 14 23 L 5 plc742 825 BOLINGBRK LISLE 12 9.68 17 20 L 5 plc743 819 HUNTR WOOD LISL 12 8.89 13 60 L 5 plc744 821 WOODRIDGE BLMNT 12 5.58 13 23 L 5 plc745 823 W BOLNGBRK LISL 12 11.3 20 30 L 5 plc746 826 S LISLE FEEDER 12 5.34 10 40 L 5 plc747 827 GREEN TRAIL LIS 12 3.07 6 35 L 5 plc748 828 N LISLE FEEDER 12 3.71 6 25 L 5 plc749 829 LISLE INDUSTIAL 12 4.73 10 30 L 5 plc754 803 CARPENTERSVILLE 12 13.6 21 30 L 5 plc901 507 PLAINFIELD 12 12.56 30 60 L 5 plc902 572 HAWTHORNE CTR E 12 18.64 40 25.4 L 5 plc903 601 WOODDALE OFFICE 12 2.05 4 30 L 5 plc904 712 WHEATON SHUTTLE 12 3.48 9 40 L 5 plc906 921 GENEVA SHUTTLE 12 4.68 8 35 L 5 plc918 802 AURORA ST CHARLS 15 28.09 54 60 P 3 prg017 230 S DES PLAINES 15 15.58 28 30 P 3 prg018 223 ELK GROVE W 15 15.94 26 22.1 P 3 prg023 223 ELK GROVE E 15 18.4 36 19.1 P 3 prg102 554 Elgin-Str-Schaum 12 15.22 27 30 P 3 prg503 379 W 79TH 15 22.94 38 30 P 3 prg504 382 CENTRAL S 15 8.48 15 30 P 3 prg505 384 NARRAGNST(ORLND) 15 40.06 52 60 P 3 prg507 385 87TH-111TH 15 53.72 92 60 P 3 prg509 386 SOUTH HARLEM S 15 16.86 25 30 P 3 prg511 349 S WESTERN 15 23.16 48 29.8 P 3 prg514 358 TORRENCE AVE 15 36.53 53 60 P 3 prg515 364 159TH ST 15 39.48 90 30 P 3 prg516 381 95TH STREET 15 26.5 52 30 P 3 prg519 352 S HLSTD-CHIC HTS 15 35.34 88 20.9 P 3 prg520 352 S HLSTD (170TH) 15 23.58 60 28.7 P 3 prg525 228 N HARLEM 15 12.6 28 25.2 P 3 prg527 448 S HOLLAND 15 5.6 11 28 P 3 prg529 353 CHGO HTS WASH SQ 15 29.86 60 17 P 3 prg532 353 CHGO HTS (138TH) 15 13.22 28 17 P 3 prg534 326 W IRVING PK 15 11.58 18 30 P 3 prg535 320 MADISON ST 15 4.98 16 30 P 3 prg536 318 W NORTH AVE 15 14.22 34 20 P 3 prg537 366 PK FOREST-CHGO H 15 8.8 14 30 P 3 prg539 367 UNIVERSITY PARK 15 18.58 26 35 P 3 prg541 699 PAL-WDFLD-ELK N 15 19.14 33 30 P 3 prg557 350 SIBLEY 15 14.4 36 24 P 3 prg558 359 ROBBINS-S KEDZIE 15 26.46 48 32 P 3 prg560 354 HARVEY/TINLEY PK 15 24.5 50 60 P 3 prg581 806 FOX LK-CRYSTAL L 15 42.06 56 60 P 3 prg582 808 CRYSTAL LK-HARVA 15 46.62 80 60
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 125 of 262 A KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 1.2. (Continued) CMAP Transit Routes in KRM Model
mode veh. line description speed length segs hdwy P 3 prg584 807 WOODSTK-MCHENRY 15 48.64 72 60 P 3 prg600 302 STANLEY OGDEN 15 16.54 38 30 P 3 prg601 312 OGDEN-31ST 15 7.76 18 30 P 3 prg604 315 AUSTN-RDGLND 15 18.36 46 30 P 3 prg607 303 MADSN ST-19TH AV 15 9.02 27 27.5 P 3 prg608 301 ROOSEVELT RD 15 10.82 26 20 P 3 prg609 305 CICERO-RIVER FOR 15 22.9 58 30 P 3 prg611 307 HARLEM N 15 24.76 62 30 P 3 prg613 308 MEDICAL CENTER 15 3.36 8 17 P 3 prg614 311 OAK PK AVE 15 17.68 42 15 P 3 prg615 304 CERMAK LAGRNG 15 16.68 34 30 P 3 prg616 309 LAKE ST 15 19.13 50 29.2 P 3 prg617 313 ST CHARLES RD 15 34.5 82 30 P 3 prg618 325 25TH AVE 15 18.56 36 24 P 3 prg619 332 ELMHURST YORK RD 15 28.66 56 60 P 3 prg620 319 GRAND AVE 15 18.2 34 25.2 P 3 prg622 331 CUMBERLAND-5TH 15 26.18 48 30 P 3 prg623 209 GOLF RD-WOODFLD 15 30.51 62 20 P 3 prg624 330 MANHEIM-LAGRANG 15 38.6 84 30 P 3 prg630 208 CHURCH ST-GOLF R 15 17.55 47 30.8 P 3 prg631 212 EVNST NRTHBRK CT 15 33.66 76 33 P 3 prg632 213 GREEN BAY RD 15 23.78 68 30 P 3 prg633 215 CRAWFORD-HOWARD 15 12.6 34 20 P 3 prg634 221 WOLF RD 15 25.2 41 29 P 3 prg635 234 WHEELING DES PL 15 33.34 60 30 P 3 prg636 226 OAKTON 15 28.68 64 30 P 3 prg637 225 CENTRAL-HOWARD 15 6.75 18 30 P 3 prg638 250 DEMPSTER 15 21.24 66 15 P 3 prg639 240 DEE ROAD 15 14.78 28 25 P 3 prg640 241 GREENWOOD-TALCOT 15 14.52 30 40 P 3 prg641 220 GLENVIEW-DES PL 15 31.66 75 30 P 3 prg643 270 MILWAUKEE 15 23.62 50 30 P 3 prg644 290 TOUHY 15 21.04 56 10 P 3 prg680 690 ARLINGTON HTS RD 15 19.36 32 35 P 3 prg687 696 WDFLD-ARLNGTN W 15 10.08 22 25 P 3 prg710 711 WHTN-CRL STRM-ST 15 14.05 33 60 P 3 prg719 715 CNTRL DUPAGE N 15 22.49 48 60 P 3 prg900 383 S CICERO (159TH) 15 25.2 52 27.2 P 3 prg901 382 CENTRAL N 15 8.48 15 60 P 3 prg902 386 SOUTH HARLEM N 15 16.86 25 60 P 3 prg903 397 BLUE ISLAND-UPS 15 20.76 29 90 P 3 prg906 699 PAL-WDFLD-ELK S 15 19.14 33 30 P 3 prg907 696 WDFLD-ARLNGTN E 15 10.68 23 60 P 3 prg908 715 CNTRL DUPAGE S 15 22.74 48 30 P 3 prg910 370 HARVEY-CHIC HTS 15 19.92 54 30 P 3 prg911 530 FOX VALLEY CNTR 15 19.11 42 60 P 3 prg912 322 CERMAK-YORKTOWN 15 26.1 48 22.7 P 3 prg913 357 LINCOLN HIGHWAY 15 16.88 26 30 P 3 prg914 310 MADSN ST HLLSD 15 10.68 26 17.8 P 3 prg915 834 JOLIET-YORKTOWN 15 51.92 104 60 P 3 prg916 831 JOLIET-MIDWAY 15 35.42 52 90 P 3 prg917 552 N STATE SPRG HLL 15 8.66 18 30 P 3 prg918 835 CHGO-ORLAND PK 15 27.67 72 26
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 126 of 262 A KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
APPENDIX 2
TRIP GENERATION
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 127 of 262 A KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT Table 2.1. Summary of Trips Produced by County, Household Size and Vehicle Available
Home-Based Work Home-Based Other Non Home-Based Trips Total Vehicles Available Total Vehicles Available Total Vehicles Available County Household Size - 1 2 or more All - 1 2 or more All - 1 2 or more All Kenosha 1 685 10,425 1,727 12,837 3,849 25,736 3,147 32,732 1,413 12,659 2,427 16,499 2 339 6,710 24,908 31,957 405 28,292 48,332 77,029 203 11,863 22,167 34,233 3 - 6,182 22,605 28,787 - 11,185 37,965 49,150 - 2,593 14,930 17,523 4 or more - 3,659 42,668 46,327 - 11,360 106,113 117,473 - 4,811 31,926 36,737 All 1,024 26,976 91,908 119,908 4,254 76,573 195,557 276,384 1,616 31,926 71,450 104,992 Racine 1 1,726 12,820 3,233 17,779 3,006 25,148 4,887 33,041 757 18,563 3,058 22,378 2 543 5,019 36,147 41,709 3,506 27,145 63,100 93,751 2,052 12,118 32,188 46,358 3 513 5,044 29,189 34,746 1,802 13,723 42,688 58,213 - 6,149 17,870 24,019 4 or more - 3,639 55,307 58,946 - 13,366 157,071 170,437 - 4,257 46,752 51,009 All 2,782 26,522 123,876 153,180 8,314 79,382 267,746 355,442 2,809 41,087 99,868 143,764 Milwaukee 1 12,307 95,503 12,517 120,327 49,687 172,885 21,306 243,878 15,702 114,201 16,124 146,027 2 11,460 54,818 150,633 216,911 25,204 175,246 238,454 438,904 8,306 74,969 132,682 215,957 3 4,008 31,174 110,905 146,087 17,263 98,920 183,445 299,628 4,705 24,385 72,506 101,596 4 or more 6,962 43,140 185,355 235,457 38,807 150,119 502,207 691,133 5,271 29,900 125,703 160,874 All 34,737 224,635 459,410 718,782 130,961 597,170 945,412 1,673,543 33,984 243,455 347,015 624,454 Other SEWRPC Counties 1 1,196 42,360 9,497 53,053 7,742 88,809 14,645 111,196 843 53,818 9,852 64,513 2 1,017 16,667 149,658 167,342 2,044 75,190 248,180 325,414 604 30,346 132,961 163,911 3 - 7,321 109,897 117,218 - 21,051 186,808 207,859 - 5,784 82,111 87,895 4 or more 99 7,348 189,943 197,390 240 29,049 551,458 580,747 188 9,581 166,642 176,411 All 2,312 73,696 458,995 535,003 10,026 214,099 1,001,091 1,225,216 1,635 99,529 391,566 492,730 All SEWRPC Counties 1 15,914 161,108 26,974 203,996 64,284 312,578 43,985 420,847 18,715 199,241 31,461 249,417 2 13,359 83,214 361,346 457,919 31,159 305,873 598,066 935,098 11,165 129,296 319,998 460,459 3 4,521 49,721 272,596 326,838 19,065 144,879 450,906 614,850 4,705 38,911 187,417 231,033 4 or more 7,061 57,786 473,273 538,120 39,047 203,894 1,316,849 1,559,790 5,459 48,549 371,023 425,031 All 40,855 351,829 1,134,189 1,526,873 153,555 967,224 2,409,806 3,530,585 40,044 415,997 909,899 1,365,940 Source: SEWRPC Household Survey and Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 128 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT Table 2.2. Summary of Households by County, Household Size and Vehicle Available
Total Vehicles Available County Household Size 012 or moreAll Kenosha 1 2,020 10,730 1,832 14,582 2 154 5,494 12,568 18,216 3 0 2,313 7,202 9,515 4 or more 0 1,885 13,185 15,070 All 2,174 20,422 34,787 57,383 Racine 1 2,689 12,381 2,461 17,531 2 876 6,452 16,785 24,113 3 502 2,264 9,056 11,822 4 or more 0 1,624 16,664 18,288 All 4,067 22,721 44,966 71,754 Milwaukee 1 31,720 83,748 10,116 125,584 2 10,533 40,901 63,964 115,398 3 4,657 17,245 34,592 56,494 4 or more 6,418 19,775 55,460 81,653 All 53,328 161,669 164,132 379,129 Other SEWRPC Counties 1 3,836 41,675 7,932 53,443 2 960 18,415 70,180 89,555 3 0 4,131 36,983 41,114 4 or more 84 3,871 63,212 67,167 All 4,880 68,092 178,307 251,279 All SEWRPC 1 40,265 148,534 22,341 211,140 2 12,523 71,262 163,497 247,282 3 5,159 25,953 87,833 118,945 4 or more 6,502 27,155 148,521 182,178 All 64,449 272,904 422,192 759,545 Source: SEWRPC Household Survey and Cambridge Systematics.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 129 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT Table 2.3. Unrefined Trip Production Rates
Home-Based Work Home-Based Other Non Home-Based Trips Total Vehicles Available Total Vehicles Available Total Vehicles Available County Household Size 012 or moreAll 012 or moreAll 012 or moreAll Kenosha 1 0.34 0.97 0.94 0.88 1.91 2.40 1.72 2.24 0.70 1.18 1.32 1.13 2 2.20 1.22 1.98 1.75 2.63 5.15 3.85 4.23 1.32 2.16 1.76 1.88 3 -- 2.67 3.14 3.03 -- 4.84 5.27 5.17 -- 1.12 2.07 1.84 4 or more -- 1.94 3.24 3.07 -- 6.03 8.05 7.80 -- 2.55 2.42 2.44 All 0.47 1.32 2.64 2.09 1.96 3.75 5.62 4.82 0.74 1.56 2.05 1.83 Racine 1 0.64 1.04 1.31 1.01 1.12 2.03 1.99 1.88 0.28 1.50 1.24 1.28 2 0.62 0.78 2.15 1.73 4.00 4.21 3.76 3.89 2.34 1.88 1.92 1.92 3 1.02 2.23 3.22 2.94 3.59 6.06 4.71 4.92 0.00 2.72 1.97 2.03 4 or more -- 2.24 3.32 3.22 -- 8.23 9.43 9.32 -- 2.62 2.81 2.79 All 0.68 1.17 2.75 2.13 2.04 3.49 5.95 4.95 0.69 1.81 2.22 2.00 Milwaukee 1 0.39 1.14 1.24 0.96 1.57 2.06 2.11 1.94 0.50 1.36 1.59 1.16 2 1.09 1.34 2.35 1.88 2.39 4.28 3.73 3.80 0.79 1.83 2.07 1.87 3 0.86 1.81 3.21 2.59 3.71 5.74 5.30 5.30 1.01 1.41 2.10 1.80 4 or more 1.08 2.18 3.34 2.88 6.05 7.59 9.06 8.46 0.82 1.51 2.27 1.97 All 0.65 1.39 2.80 1.90 2.46 3.69 5.76 4.41 0.64 1.51 2.11 1.65 Other SEWRPC 1 0.31 1.02 1.20 0.99 2.02 2.13 1.85 2.08 0.22 1.29 1.24 1.21 Counties 2 1.06 0.91 2.13 1.87 2.13 4.08 3.54 3.63 0.63 1.65 1.89 1.83 3 -- 1.77 2.97 2.85 -- 5.10 5.05 5.06 -- 1.40 2.22 2.14 4 or more 1.18 1.90 3.00 2.94 2.86 7.50 8.72 8.65 2.24 2.48 2.64 2.63 All 0.47 1.08 2.57 2.13 2.05 3.14 5.61 4.88 0.34 1.46 2.20 1.96 All SEWRPC 1 0.40 1.08 1.21 0.97 1.60 2.10 1.97 1.99 0.46 1.34 1.41 1.18 2 1.07 1.17 2.21 1.85 2.49 4.29 3.66 3.78 0.89 1.81 1.96 1.86 3 0.88 1.92 3.10 2.75 3.70 5.58 5.13 5.17 0.91 1.50 2.13 1.94 4 or more 1.09 2.13 3.19 2.95 6.01 7.51 8.87 8.56 0.84 1.79 2.50 2.33 All 0.63 1.29 2.69 2.01 2.38 3.54 5.71 4.65 0.62 1.52 2.16 1.80 Source: SEWRPC Household Survey and Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 130 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT Table 2.4. Refined Trip Production Rates
Home-Based Work Home-Based Other Non Home-Based Trips Total Vehicles Available Total Vehicles Available Total Vehicles Available County Household Size 012 or moreAll 012 or moreAll 012 or moreAll Kenosha 1 0.42 0.97 0.97 0.89 1.60 2.30 2.30 2.21 0.57 1.18 1.33 1.12 2 0.95 1.22 1.98 1.74 2.49 4.25 4.25 4.24 0.57 1.88 1.88 1.87 3 1.02 2.67 3.14 3.03 3.70 5.18 5.18 5.18 0.87 1.88 1.88 1.88 4 or more 1.18 1.94 3.24 3.07 6.02 6.04 8.07 7.81 0.87 2.45 2.45 2.45 All 0.46 1.32 2.64 2.09 1.66 3.50 5.79 4.820.571.572.061.83 Racine 1 0.42 0.95 1.32 0.92 1.60 2.02 2.02 1.96 0.57 1.46 1.46 1.32 2 0.96 0.95 2.16 1.79 2.49 3.88 3.88 3.83 0.57 1.88 1.92 1.86 3 1.02 2.23 3.23 2.94 3.70 4.98 4.98 4.93 0.87 2.13 2.13 2.07 4 or more 1.18 2.25 3.33 3.23 6.01 8.23 9.43 9.32 0.87 2.80 2.80 2.80 All 0.61 1.17 2.76 2.13 2.05 3.29 6.06 4.950.611.742.262.00 Milwaukee 1 0.39 1.14 1.24 0.96 1.59 2.07 2.07 1.95 0.57 1.36 1.59 1.18 2 1.02 1.34 2.35 1.87 2.49 3.94 3.94 3.81 0.57 1.94 1.94 1.82 3 1.02 1.81 3.21 2.60 3.69 5.44 5.44 5.30 0.87 1.94 1.94 1.86 4 or more 1.08 2.18 3.34 2.88 6.00 7.58 9.05 8.45 0.87 2.07 2.07 1.98 All 0.65 1.39 2.80 1.90 2.48 3.58 5.87 4.410.631.661.971.65 Other 1 0.42 0.98 1.20 0.97 1.60 2.09 2.09 2.05 0.56 1.28 1.28 1.23 SEWRPC 2 0.95 0.98 2.13 1.88 2.49 3.65 3.65 3.64 0.56 1.60 1.89 1.82 Counties 3 1.02 1.77 2.97 2.85 3.70 5.06 5.06 5.06 0.87 1.60 2.22 2.15 4 or more 1.18 1.90 3.00 2.94 6.01 7.51 8.73 8.66 0.87 2.47 2.63 2.62 All 0.54 1.08 2.57 2.13 1.85 3.00 5.68 4.880.571.452.191.96 All SEWRPC 1 0.40 1.08 1.21 0.97 1.60 2.09 2.09 1.99 0.57 1.34 1.41 1.20 2 1.01 1.17 2.21 1.85 2.49 3.85 3.85 3.78 0.57 1.73 1.96 1.82 3 1.02 1.92 3.10 2.75 3.70 5.24 5.24 5.17 0.87 1.73 2.13 1.99 4 or more 1.09 2.13 3.19 2.95 6.01 7.51 8.87 8.56 0.87 1.79 2.50 2.33 All 0.63 1.29 2.69 2.01 2.38 3.39 5.81 4.650.621.522.161.80 Source: SEWRPC Household Survey and Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 131 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT Table 2.5. Trip Attraction Equation Summary by Geography
SEWRPC Area Zones (1-1076) Lake County (2501-2511) Lake County (2512-2516) All Other Externals (2517-2532) Purpose Variable Coefficient Adjusted R-Squared Coefficient Adjusted R-Squared Coefficient Adjusted R-Squared Coefficient Adjusted R-Squared HBW Total Employment 1.218 0.993 0.172 0.991 0.035 0.858 0.004 0.910 Total Employment 1.144 0.029 0.004 0.002 HBNW 0.943 0.055 0.302 0.942 Total Households 2.652 ------Total Employment 0.658 0.032 0.006 0.001 NHB 0.911 0.704 0.621 0.960 Total Households 0.701 ------Source: SEWRPC Household Survey and Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 132 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 2.6. Variation of Attraction Rate by Proximity to SEWRPC Region
Lake County (2501- Lake County (2512- All Other Externals (2517- Purpose 2511) 2516) 2532)
HBW 0.172 0.035 0.004 HBNW 0.029 0.004 0.002 NHB 0.032 0.006 0.001
Figure 2.1. Variation of Attraction Rate by Proximity to SEWRPC Region
Variation of Attraction Rates by Geography 0.200 HBW 0.180 HBNW
0.160 NHB
0.140
0.120
0.100
0.080 Attraction Rates Attraction 0.060
0.040
0.020
0.000 Lake County (2501-2511) Lake County (2512-2516) All Other Externals (2517-2532) External Zones
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 133 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 2.2. Groups of SEWRPC External Zones Used for Trip Attraction Rate Development
North Lake Rest of Lake County Zones All other CATS Counties
Source: SEWRPC Household Survey.
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 134 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
APPENDIX 3
TRIP DISTANCE DISTRIBUTIONS AND DESTINATION CHOICE MODELS BY PURPOSE
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 135 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 3.1. Mean Trip Distance and Freeflow Time by Purpose
Mean Trip Freeflow Mean Trip Congested Mean Trip Distance Trip Purpose Total Trips Time (Minutes) Time (Minutes) (Miles) Home-Based Work 1,526,873 19.99 21.76 11.01 Home-Based Non-Work 3,530,585 12.80 13.41 5.83 Non Home-Based 1,365,940 13.75 14.73 6.49 All 6,423,398 14.71 15.67 7.20
Table 3.2. Percent Intrazonal Trips by Purpose
Trip Purpose % Intrazonal Interzonal Trips Intrazonal Trips Total Trips Trips Home-Based Work 1,416,455 110,418 1,526,873 7.2% Home-Based Non-Work 2,954,003 576,582 3,530,585 16.3% Non Home-Based 1,147,271 218,669 1,365,940 16.0% All 5,517,729 905,669 6,423,398 14.1%
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 136 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 3.3. Destination Choice Model Estimation Results
HBW Destination Choice HBO Destination NHB Destination Choice Title Model Choice Model Model Observations 32,328 62,041 25,293 Final log (L) -174,221.80 -273,318.60 -119,714.30 D.O.F. 15 8 8 Rhoｲ(0) 0.288 0.425 0.383 Rhoｲ(c) 0.138 0.287 0.233 Distance Power Series Distance -0.153 (-25.6) -0.156 (-54.8) -0.120 (-31.0) DistSquare 9.3e-4 (6.5) 0 (*) 0 (*) DistCube -2.6e-6 (-2.4) 0 (*) 0 (*) Congested Time Power Series Time -0.0265 (-7.6) -0.0785 (-45.7) -0.0603 (-25.1) TimeSquare 2.1e-4 (5.3) 0 (*) 0 (*) TimeCube -6.1e-7 (-4.5) 0 (*) 0 (*) Intrazonal Dummy Variables IntraDummy 0.723 (24.9) 0.557 (33.8) 0.991 (39.9) Flag for Trip Attractions in IL WI_ILTrip 0.0257 (0.5) 0.286 (5.1) -1.95 (-13.6) Dummies for Downtown Attractors Along the Corridor Milwaukee Core and Collar Zones 0.0533 (2.3) Racine Downtown Zones 0.312 (3.2) Kenosha Downtown Zones 0.216 (2.2) Chicago Core Zones 0.339 (1.4) Chicago Collar Zones 0.785 (2.4) Size Multiplier SizeMult 0.926 (155.5) 0.895 (136.0) 0.961 (99.2) Size Variables Area Base (*) Base (*) Base (*) Total Employment -3.11 (-36.2) All Retail Employment -1.47 (-10.1) -3.39 (-51.5) All Non-Retail Employment -4.00 (-27.4) -6.06 (-84.0) All Households -2.99 (-20.7) -5.61 (-72.7)
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 137 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 3.1. HBW Trip Distance Distribution
HBW - Trip Distance Distribution
18.0%
16.0%
14.0% % Home Based Work 12.0%
10.0%
8.0% % Trips
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
s s e es es es es es es es es es es es iles les il il il il il il il il il il iles les iles les ile M Mil M Mil M M Miles M Miles M M M M M Miles M M M 9 Miles 99 99 99 99 99 99 9 99 99 99 M . 2. 4. 4 8.99 Mi 20.99 32.99 40.99 52.99 64.99 7 8 96.99 Miles 0-0.99 4-Miles8- - - 100.99104.99 Mi 112.99116.99 Mi 124.99128. Miles 12-12.16-16.9920 Miles24-24.28-28.9932 Miles36-36.9940- Miles44-44.48-48.9952- Miles56-56.60-60.9964- Miles68-68.9972- 76-76.80-80.9984- 88-88.92-92.9996- - - -108.99- Miles- -120.99- Miles- 08 20 100 104 1 112 116 1 124 128 Distance Category
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 138 of 262
KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 3.2. HBNW Trip Distance Distribution
HBNW - Trip Distance Distribution
18.0%
16.0% % Home-Based Non-Work 14.0%
12.0%
s 10.0%
8.0% % Trip
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
s s s s es es es es es es es es es s e ile il iles il iles il ile il ile il il il il iles il iles iles e Mil M M M M M M M Miles M M Miles M M Mil 9 9 9 9 Miles 99 99 M .99 .99 M .9 .99 Miles.99 M .99 .99 Miles.99 M .99 .99 Miles.99 M .99 .99 Miles.99 .99 .99 .9 .99 Miles.99 M .9 99 9 99 8. 6 8 2 0-0.99 4-4.Miles 8- 12 20 24 32 36 40 44 -48 52 56 -60 64 72 76 84 88 96 28. -108.99 1 12- 16-1 20- 24- 28-2 32- 36- 40- 44- 48 52- 56- 60 64- 68-68.9972- Miles76- 80-80.9984- Miles88- 92-9 96- 100-100.104-104.99108 Miles112-112.116-116.99120-120.99 Miles124-124.99 Miles128- Distance Category
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 139 of 262
KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 3.3. NHB Trip Distance Distribution
NHB - Trip Distance Distribution
18.0%
16.0%
14.0% % Non Home-Based Trips 12.0%
10.0%
8.0% % Trips
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
s s s s es es es es es es es es es es es es es s le e iles iles il iles iles iles iles iles l iles iles iles e Mi Mil Mil Mil Mil Mil Mil Mil Mil Mil Mil Mil Mil Mi Miles M M M Mil 9 9 9 9 Miles 99 99 99 M 99 99 M 99 M 99 M 99 M 99 99 M 99 99 M 99 99 M 99 9 99 0-0. 4-4.99 8-8.9Mile 20. 32. 44. -48. -60. -72. 28. 0- -108.99 120.99 1 12-12.9916-16.2 24-24.9928-28.32- 36-36.9940-40.44- 48 52-52.9956-56. Mile60 64-64.9968-68.72 76-76.9980-80.84-84.988-88.92-92.9996-96.9 Miles 0- 100-100.104-104.99108 Miles112-112.116-116.9912 Miles124-124.99128- Distance Category
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 140 of 262
KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 3.4. HBW Freeflow and Congested Time Distribution
HBW - Trip Time Distribution
20.0%
18.0%
16.0% HBW Freeflow Time Distribution 14.0% HBW Congested Time Distribution
12.0% s
10.0%
% Trip 8.0%
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
s s s es es es es es es es es es tes es es es es e ut inut inut inut inut inut inut inut inut inu inut inut inut n inutes inut M M M M M M M M M Minutes Mi M Minutes M Minutes 9 9 99 M 99 99 .99 M 99 99 .99 M 9 99 99 99 99 99 1. 7.99 9.99 -13.99 Minute 37 49.99 Minut 79 -91.99 Minute 0 15. 21. 27. 33. 39.9 0- 6- 8- 1 1 1 1 12 18-19. 24-25.9930-31. Minutes36- 42-43.994 54-55. 60-61.9966-67. Minutes72-73.9978- 84-85. 90 96-97. -1 102-103.99108-1 Minutes114- 120 126- 132- 138- Distance Category
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 141 of 262
KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 3.5. HBNW Freeflow and Congested Time Distribution
HBNW - Trip Time Distribution
20.0%
18.0%
16.0% HBNW Freeflow Time Distribution 14.0% HBNW Congested Time Distribution
12.0% s
10.0%
% Trip 8.0%
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
s s es e tes e es tes es es tes utes utes inut inutes inut inutes inutes inut inut in in inut inu M M M Minutes Minu M Minutes Minutes M M M Minutes Minu M M M 9 Minutes9 9 9 9 9 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 M 7. 13. 49. 67. 9. 0-1. 6- - - 13 12 18-19.9924-25. Minutes30-31.9936-37.99 Minutes42-43. 48- 54-55.960-61.966 72-73.9978-79. Minutes84-85. 90-91.9996-97. 102-103.99108-109.99 114-115.99 120-121.99 Minut126-127.99 132-133.99 Minutes138- Minutes Distance Category
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 142 of 262
KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 3.6. NHB Freeflow and Congested Time Distribution
NHB - Trip Time Distribution
20.0%
18.0%
16.0% NHB Freeflow Time Distribution 14.0% NHB Congested Time Distribution
12.0% s
10.0%
% Trip 8.0%
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
s s es e tes e es tes es es tes utes utes inut inutes inut inutes inutes inut inut in in inut inu M M M Minutes Minu M Minutes Minutes M M M Minutes Minu M M M 9 Minutes9 9 9 9 9 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 M 7. 13. 49. 67. 9. 0-1. 6- - - 13 12 18-19.9924-25. Minutes30-31.9936-37.99 Minutes42-43. 48- 54-55.960-61.966 72-73.9978-79. Minutes84-85. 90-91.9996-97. 102-103.99108-109.99 114-115.99 120-121.99 Minut126-127.99 132-133.99 Minutes138- Minutes Distance Category
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 143 of 262
KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 3.7. Variation of Utility of Attraction End by Congested Travel Time from Production End
Utility as a Function of Congested Travel Time Time (in Minutes) 0.000
0 5 5 0 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 5 6 6 7 7 80 85 90 95 100 -1.000 HBW Utility HBNW Utility -2.000 NHB Utility
-3.000
-4.000
Utility -5.000
-6.000
-7.000
-8.000
-9.000
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 144 of 262
KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 3.8. Variation of Utility of Attraction End by Distance from Production End
Utility as a Function of Distance Dista nce (in Mile s) 0.000
0 3 6 9 2 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 4 45 48 -1.000 HBW Utility
-2.000 HBNW Utility NHB Utility -3.000
-4.000
Utility -5.000
-6.000
-7.000
-8.000
-9.000
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 145 of 262
KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
APPENDIX 4
ESTIMATION OF WORK AND NON-WORK PURPOSE TRIPS
PRODUCED IN ILLINOIS AND ATTRACTED TO WISCONSIN
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 146 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 4.1. County-to-County Journey-to-Work Flows in the Vicinity of the KRM Corridor
Work Location in Illinois Work Location in Wisconsin Subtotals Cook Lake Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Waukesha Home Cook Co 2,077,798 64,253 453 141 513 164 2,143,322 Location in Lake Co Illinois 83,502 212,450 2,507 407 725 227 299,818 Kenosha Co 2,942 15,342 40,489 6,526 2,260 734 68,293 Home Racine Co 678 1,422 5,825 61,020 12,906 4,157 86,008 Location in Milwaukee Co Wisconsin 940 626 1,570 4,866 345,163 57,291 410,456 Waukesha Co 410 156 319 1,231 61,038 119,461 182,615 Subtotal 2,166,270 294,249 51,163 74,191 422,605 182,034 3,190,512
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 147 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 4.1. Geographical Distribution of Journey to Work Trip Production from Illinois to Wisconsin
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 148 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 4.2. Estimates of Home-Based Work, Home Based Other and Non-Home Based Trips from IL to WI Counties
METHOD 1 A HBO/NHB Trips Pivoting off JTW/CATS Model. "All IL" productions to "All WI" attractions. Single Trip Ratio for each Purpose. Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Waukesha Walworth Washington Ozaukee Totals JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB Lake Co 2,507 5,340 9,467 407 867 1,537 725 1,544 2,738 227 484 857 148 315 559 32 68 121 43 92 162 4,089 8,710 15,441 Cook Co 453 965 1,711 141 300 532 513 1,093 1,937 164 349 619 76 162 287 0 - - 23 49 87 1,370 2,918 5,173 McHenry 155 330 585 76 162 287 83 177 313 45 96 170 704 1,500 2,658 9 19 34 0 - - 1,072 2,283 4,048 DuPage 71 151 268 24 51 91 115 245 434 70 149 264 9 19 34 0 - - 0 - - 289 616 1,091 Will Co. 16 34 60 0 - - 49 104 185 27 58 102 16 34 60 0 - - 0 - - 108 230 408 Kane Co. 32 68 121 0 - - 50 107 189 8 17 30 16 34 60 9 19 34 24 51 91 139 296 525 Totals 3,234 6,888 12,212 648 1,380 2,447 1,535 3,270 5,796 541 1,152 2,043 969 2,064 3,659 50 107 189 90 192 340 7,067 15,053 26,686 Data source: CATS Trip Table
HBO/NHB Trips Pivoting off JTW/CATS Model. Four sets of ratios. Lake Productions to Kenosha Attractions; Lake Productions to Other WI Attractions. Other IL Productions to Kenosha METHOD 1 B Attractions; Other IL Productions to Other WI Attractions. Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Waukesha Walworth Washington Ozaukee Totals JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB Lake Co 2,507 3,709 6,589 407 605 1,084 725 1,077 1,930 227 337 604 148 220 394 32 48 85 43 64 114 4,089 6,059 10,801 Cook Co 453 801 1,438 141 300 532 513 1,093 1,937 164 349 619 76 162 287 0 - - 23 49 87 1,370 2,755 4,901 McHenry 155 274 492 76 162 287 83 177 313 45 96 170 704 1,500 2,658 9 19 34 0 - - 1,072 2,227 3,955 DuPage 71 126 225 24 51 91 115 245 434 70 149 264 9 19 34 0 - - 0 - - 289 590 1,049 Will Co. 16 28 51 0 - - 49 104 185 27 58 102 16 34 60 0 - - 0 - - 108 224 398 Kane Co. 32 57 102 0 - - 50 107 189 8 17 30 16 34 60 9 19 34 24 51 91 139 285 506 Totals 3,234 4,995 8,896 648 1,118 1,994 1,535 2,802 4,989 541 1,006 1,790 969 1,969 3,494 50 86 153 90 164 292 7,067 12,140 21,609 Data source: CATS Trip Table
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 149 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 4.2. (Continued) Estimates of Home-Based Work, Home Based Other and Non-Home Based Trips from IL to WI Counties
METHOD 2 A HBO/NHB Trips Pivoting off JTW/CATS Model. "All IL" productions to "All IL" attractions. Only Inter-County flows used in calculations. Single Trip Ratio for each Purpose. Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Waukesha Walworth Washington Ozaukee Totals JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB Lake Co 2,507 3,929 3,563 407 638 578 725 1,136 1,030 227 356 323 148 232 210 32 50 45 43 67 61 4,089 6,409 5,812 Cook Co 453 710 644 141 221 200 513 804 729 164 257 233 76 119 108 0 - - 23 36 33 1,370 2,147 1,947 McHenry 155 243 220 76 119 108 83 130 118 45 71 64 704 1,103 1,001 9 14 13 0 - - 1,072 1,680 1,524 DuPage 71 111 101 24 38 34 115 180 163 70 110 99 9 14 13 0 - - 0 - - 289 453 411 Will Co. 16 25 23 0 - - 49 77 70 27 42 38 16 25 23 0 - - 0 - - 108 169 154 Kane Co. 32 50 45 0 - - 50 78 71 8 13 11 16 25 23 9 14 13 24 38 34 139 218 198 Totals 3,234 5,069 4,597 648 1,016 921 1,535 2,406 2,182 541 848 769 969 1,519 1,377 50 78 71 90 141 128 7,067 11,076 10,045 Data source: CATS Trip Table
METHOD 2 B HBO/NHB Trips Pivoting off JTW/CATS Model. Six Trip Ratios for each Purpose. "Each IL County" productions to "All IL" attractions. Only Inter-County flows used in calculations. Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Waukesha Walworth Washington Ozaukee Totals JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB Lake Co 2,507 4,481 3,770 407 727 612 725 1,296 1,090 227 406 341 148 265 223 32 57 48 43 77 65 4,089 7,308 6,149 Cook Co 453 1,011 853 141 315 266 513 1,145 966 164 366 309 76 170 143 0 - - 23 51 43 1,370 3,057 2,580 McHenry 155 172 77 76 85 38 83 92 41 45 50 22 704 783 350 9 10 4 0 - - 1,072 1,193 532 DuPage 71 67 146 24 23 49 115 108 237 70 66 144 9 8 19 0 - - 0 - - 289 272 596 Will Co. 16 22 12 0 - - 49 66 37 27 36 20 16 22 12 0 - - 0 - - 108 145 81 Kane Co. 32 47 32 0 - - 50 73 51 8 12 8 16 23 16 9 13 9 24 35 24 139 202 140 Totals 3,234 5,799 4,891 648 1,149 965 1,535 2,780 2,422 541 935 845 969 1,271 762 50 80 62 90 163 132 7,067 12,177 10,078 Data source: CATS Trip Table
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 150 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 4.2. (Continued) Estimates of Home-Based Work, Home Based Other and Non-Home Based Trips from IL to WI Counties
METHOD 3 A HBO/NHB Trips Pivoting off JTW/SEWRPC Survey. "All WI" productions to "all WI" attractions. Only Inter-County flows used in calculations. Single Trip Ratio for each Purpose. Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Waukesha Walworth Washington Ozaukee Totals JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB Lake Co 2,507 4,439 2,289 407 721 372 725 1,284 662 227 402 207 148 262 135 32 57 29 43 76 39 4,089 7,240 3,733 Cook Co 453 802 414 141 250 129 513 908 468 164 290 150 76 135 69 0 - - 23 41 21 1,370 2,426 1,251 McHenry 155 274 142 76 135 69 83 147 76 45 80 41 704 1,247 643 9 16 8 0 - - 1,072 1,898 979 DuPage 71 126 65 24 42 22 115 204 105 70 124 64 9 16 8 0 - - 0 - - 289 512 264 Will Co. 16 28 15 0 - - 49 87 45 27 48 25 16 28 15 0 - - 0 - - 108 191 99 Kane Co. 32 57 29 0 - - 50 89 46 8 14 7 16 28 15 9 16 8 24 42 22 139 246 127 Totals 3,234 5,726 2,953 648 1,147 592 1,535 2,718 1,401 541 958 494 969 1,716 885 50 89 46 90 159 82 7,067 12,513 6,452 Data source: SEWRPC Household Travel Survey
HBO/NHB Trips Pivoting off JTW/SEWRPC Survey. "Each WI County" productions to "all WI" attractions. Only Inter-County flows used in calculations. Seven Trip Ratios for each Purpose. METHOD 3 B Note: Same table format is used although WI counties as productions to calculate the ratios. Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Waukesha Walworth Washington Ozaukee Totals JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB Lake Co 2,507 5,723 2,511 407 723 264 725 1,358 869 227 383 215 148 285 62 32 43 16 43 85 35 4,089 8,599 3,973 Cook Co 453 1,034 454 141 250 91 513 961 615 164 276 155 76 146 32 0 - - 23 45 19 1,370 2,713 1,366 McHenry 155 354 155 76 135 49 83 155 99 45 76 43 704 1,354 296 9 12 5 0 - - 1,072 2,086 648 DuPage 71 162 71 24 43 16 115 215 138 70 118 66 9 17 4 0 - - 0 - - 289 555 295 Will Co. 16 37 16 0 - - 49 92 59 27 45 26 16 31 7 0 - - 0 - - 108 205 107 Kane Co. 32 73 32 0 - - 50 94 60 8 13 8 16 31 7 9 12 5 24 47 20 139 270 131 Totals 3,234 7,383 3,239 648 1,151 420 1,535 2,876 1,839 541 912 512 969 1,863 408 50 67 26 90 177 74 7,067 14,428 6,518 Data source: SEWRPC Household Travel Survey
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 151 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 4.2. (Continued) Estimates of Home-Based Work, Home Based Other and Non-Home Based Trips from IL to WI Counties
METHOD 4 A HBO/NHB Trips Pivoting off JTW/SEWRPC Survey. "All WI" productions to "all IL" attractions. Single Trip Ratio for each Purpose. Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Waukesha Walworth Washington Ozaukee Totals JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB Lake Co 2,507 2,085 459 407 338 75 725 603 133 227 189 42 148 123 27 32 27 6 43 36 8 4,089 3,401 749 Cook Co 453 377 83 141 117 26 513 427 94 164 136 30 76 63 14 0 - - 23 19 4 1,370 1,139 251 McHenry 155 129 28 76 63 14 83 69 15 45 37 8 704 585 129 9 7 2 0 - - 1,072 892 196 DuPage 71 59 13 24 20 4 115 96 21 70 58 13 9 7 2 0 - - 0 - - 289 240 53 Will Co. 16 13 3 0 - - 49 41 9 27 22 5 16 13 3 0 - - 0 - - 108 90 20 Kane Co. 32 27 6 0 - - 50 42 9 8 7 1 16 13 3 9 7 2 24 20 4 139 116 25 Totals 3,234 2,689 592 648 539 119 1,535 1,277 281 541 450 99 969 806 177 50 42 9 90 75 16 7,067 5,877 1,294 Data source: SEWRPC Household Travel Survey
METHOD 4 B HBO/NHB Trips Pivoting off JTW/SEWRPC Survey. "Each WI County" productions to "all IL" attractions. Seven Trip Ratios for each Purpose. Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Waukesha Walworth Washington Ozaukee Totals JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB Lake Co 2,507 1,753 308 407 240 37 725 1,159 340 227 442 229 148 150 29 32 18 3 43 99 84 4,089 3,861 1,031 Cook Co 453 317 56 141 83 13 513 820 241 164 319 166 76 77 15 0 - - 23 53 45 1,370 1,669 535 McHenry 155 108 19 76 45 7 83 133 39 45 88 45 704 712 138 9 5 1 0 - - 1,072 1,090 250 DuPage 71 50 9 24 14 2 115 184 54 70 136 71 9 9 2 0 - - 0 - - 289 393 137 Will Co. 16 11 2 0 - - 49 78 23 27 53 27 16 16 3 0 - - 0 - - 108 158 55 Kane Co. 32 22 4 0 - - 50 80 23 8 16 8 16 16 3 9 5 1 24 55 47 139 194 86 Totals 3,234 2,262 397 648 383 59 1,535 2,455 720 541 1,053 547 969 980 191 50 28 5 90 207 176 7,067 7,366 2,094 Data source: SEWRPC Household Travel Survey
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 152 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 4.2. (Continued) Estimates of Home-Based Work, Home Based Other and Non-Home Based Trips from IL to WI Counties
METHOD 4 C HBO/NHB Trips Pivoting off JTW/SEWRPC Survey. "All WI" productions to "Each IL County" attractions. Six Trip Ratios for each Purpose. Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Waukesha Walworth Washington Ozaukee Totals JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB Lake Co 2,507 1,958 360 407 318 58 725 566 104 227 177 33 148 116 21 32 25 5 43 34 6 4,089 3,194 587 Cook Co 453 373 87 141 116 27 513 423 99 164 135 32 76 63 15 0 - - 23 19 4 1,370 1,129 263 McHenry 155 127 39 76 62 19 83 68 21 45 37 11 704 575 179 9 7 2 0 - - 1,072 876 272 DuPage 71 147 52 24 50 18 115 238 84 70 145 51 9 19 7 0 - - 0 - - 289 599 212 Will Co. 16 - - 0 - - 49 - - 27 - - 16 - - 0 - - 0 - - 108 - - Kane Co. 32 90 9 0 - - 50 141 14 8 23 2 16 45 4 9 25 2 24 68 7 139 393 38 Totals 3,234 2,696 547 648 546 122 1,535 1,437 322 541 517 129 969 817 225 50 58 9 90 120 17 7,067 6,191 1,372 Data source: SEWRPC Household Travel Survey
METHOD 4 D HBO/NHB Trips Pivoting off JTW/SEWRPC Survey. "Each WI County" production to "Each IL County" attraction. Multiple Trip Ratios for each Purpose. Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Waukesha Walworth Washington Ozaukee Totals JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB Lake Co 2,507 1,960 309 407 222 67 725 867 295 227 86 67 148 155 7 32 25 5 43 34 6 4,089 3,349 754 Cook Co 453 175 38 141 93 23 513 685 216 164 741 216 76 66 8 0 - - 23 107 4 1,370 1,867 505 McHenry 155 102 24 76 111 10 83 68 21 45 37 50 704 675 208 9 7 2 0 - - 1,072 999 315 DuPage 71 34 17 24 50 8 115 1,481 327 70 305 586 9 19 7 0 - - 0 - - 289 1,889 945 Will Co. 16 13 3 0 - - 49 41 9 27 22 5 16 13 3 0 - - 0 - - 108 90 20 Kane Co. 32 90 9 0 - - 50 141 14 8 23 2 16 64 4 9 25 2 24 68 7 139 412 38 Totals 3,234 2,375 400 648 475 108 1,535 3,283 881 541 1,214 926 969 992 236 50 58 9 90 209 17 7,067 8,606 2,577 Data source: SEWRPC Household Travel Survey
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 153 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 4.2. (Continued) Estimates of Home-Based Work, Home Based Other and Non-Home Based Trips from IL to WI Counties
METHOD 5 A HBO/NHB Trips by Linear Regression models based on "all IL" Productions (HBOvs. HBW and NHB vs. HBW). Application uses JTW produced in IL and attracted to WI. Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Waukesha Walworth Washington Ozaukee Totals JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB Lake Co 2,507 - - 407 - - 725 - - 227 - - 148 - - 32 - - 43 - - 4,089 4,325 2,149 Cook Co 453 - - 141 - - 513 - - 164 - - 76 - - 0 - - 23 - - 1,370 12,910 6,416 McHenry 155 - - 76 - - 83 - - 45 - - 704 - - 9 - - 0 - - 1,072 912 453 DuPage 71 - - 24 - - 115 - - 70 - - 9 - - 0 - - 0 - - 289 3,381 1,680 Will Co. 16 - - 0 - - 49 - - 27 - - 16 - - 0 - - 0 - - 108 341 169 Kane Co. 32 - - 0 - - 50 - - 8 - - 16 - - 9 - - 24 - - 139 439 218 Totals 3,234 - - 648 - - 1,535 - - 541 - - 969 - - 50 - - 90 - - 7,067 22,308 11,086 Data source: CATS Trip Tables
HBO/NHB Trips by Three Linear Regression models based on "Lake Productions", Cook Productions", and "Other IL productions" (HBO vs. HBW and NHB vs. HBW). Application uses JTW METHOD 5 B produced in IL and attracted to WI. Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Waukesha Walworth Washington Ozaukee Totals JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB Lake Co 2,507 - - 407 - - 725 - - 227 - - 148 - - 32 - - 43 - - 4,089 4,438 1,951 Cook Co 453 - - 141 - - 513 - - 164 - - 76 - - 0 - - 23 - - 1,370 12,291 4,190 McHenry 155 - - 76 - - 83 - - 45 - - 704 - - 9 - - 0 - - 1,072 892 494 DuPage 71 - - 24 - - 115 - - 70 - - 9 - - 0 - - 0 - - 289 3,305 1,832 Will Co. 16 - - 0 - - 49 - - 27 - - 16 - - 0 - - 0 - - 108 333 185 Kane Co. 32 - - 0 - - 50 - - 8 - - 16 - - 9 - - 24 - - 139 429 238 Totals 3,234 - - 648 - - 1,535 - - 541 - - 969 - - 50 - - 90 - - 7,067 21,687 8,889 Data source: CATS Trip Tables
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 154 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 4.2. (Continued) Estimates of Home-Based Work, Home Based Other and Non-Home Based Trips from IL to WI Counties
METHOD 6 A HBO/NHB Trips by Linear Regression models based on "all IL Inter-County" Productions (HBOvs. HBW and NHB vs. HBW). Application uses JTW produced in IL and attracted to WI. Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Waukesha Walworth Washington Ozaukee Totals JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB Lake Co 2,507 - - 407 - - 725 - - 227 - - 148 - - 32 - - 43 - - 4,089 2,084 1,519 Cook Co 453 - - 141 - - 513 - - 164 - - 76 - - 0 - - 23 - - 1,370 6,221 4,535 McHenry 155 - - 76 - - 83 - - 45 - - 704 - - 9 - - 0 - - 1,072 440 320 DuPage 71 - - 24 - - 115 - - 70 - - 9 - - 0 - - 0 - - 289 1,629 1,188 Will Co. 16 - - 0 - - 49 - - 27 - - 16 - - 0 - - 0 - - 108 164 120 Kane Co. 32 - - 0 - - 50 - - 8 - - 16 - - 9 - - 24 - - 139 211 154 Totals 3,234 - - 648 - - 1,535 - - 541 - - 969 - - 50 - - 90 - - 7,067 10,749 7,836 Data source: CATS Trip Tables
HBO/NHB Trips by Three Linear Regression models based on "Lake Inter-County Productions", Cook Inter-County Productions", and "Other IL Inter-County productions" (HBO vs. HBW and NHB METHOD 6 B vs. HBW). Application uses JTW produced in IL and attracted to WI. Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Waukesha Walworth Washington Ozaukee Totals JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB JTW HBO NHB Lake Co 2,507 - - 407 - - 725 - - 227 - - 148 - - 32 - - 43 - - 4,089 3,534 1,799 Cook Co 453 - - 141 - - 513 - - 164 - - 76 - - 0 - - 23 - - 1,370 8,837 3,983 McHenry 155 - - 76 - - 83 - - 45 - - 704 - - 9 - - 0 - - 1,072 400 314 DuPage 71 - - 24 - - 115 - - 70 - - 9 - - 0 - - 0 - - 289 1,483 1,162 Will Co. 16 - - 0 - - 49 - - 27 - - 16 - - 0 - - 0 - - 108 150 117 Kane Co. 32 - - 0 - - 50 - - 8 - - 16 - - 9 - - 24 - - 139 192 151 Totals 3,234 - - 648 - - 1,535 - - 541 - - 969 - - 50 - - 90 - - 7,067 14,595 7,526 Data source: CATS Trip Tables
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 155 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
MODEL VALIDATION APPENDICES
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 156 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
APPENDIX 5
DISTRIBUTION OF TRIPS BY DISTANCE AND BY CONGESTED TIME:
OBSERVED DISTRIBUTIONS IN SEWRPC SURVEY VERSUS
MODELED ESTIMATES IN THE KRM MODEL
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 157 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 5.1. Distribution of Trips by Distance HBW HBNW NHB Observed HBW Observed HBNW Observed NHB Trips from Trips from Trips from SEWRPC HH Predicted HBW SEWRPC HH Predicted HBNW SEWRPC HH Predicted NHB P-A Distance Survey Trips from Model Survey Trips from Model Survey Trips from Model 0-0.99 Miles 2.7%2.1%8.1%5.7%8.7%8.3% 1-1.99 Miles 6.5% 6.1% 15.8% 13.5% 14.3% 10.6% 2-2.99 Miles 7.6% 7.6% 15.8% 14.3% 14.0% 11.3% 3-3.99 Miles 9.9% 9.7% 14.9% 15.2% 15.3% 13.2% 4-4.99 Miles 7.5% 7.8% 9.5% 10.6% 8.0% 9.9% 5-5.99 Miles 6.0%6.2%5.9%7.1%6.0%7.2% 6-6.99 Miles 5.8%6.2%5.3%6.4%4.9%6.6% 7-7.99 Miles 5.1%5.5%3.8%5.0%3.8%5.5% 8-8.99 Miles 4.9%5.1%3.5%4.1%3.4%4.5% 9-9.99 Miles 4.2%4.5%2.9%3.3%3.0%3.8% 10-10.99 Miles 3.8%3.9%2.5%2.5%2.4%3.0% 11-11.99 Miles 3.1%3.3%1.4%1.9%1.9%2.4% 12-12.99 Miles 2.9%3.1%1.3%1.6%1.7%2.1% 13-13.99 Miles 3.0%2.9%1.4%1.4%1.5%1.8% 14-14.99 Miles 2.5%2.6%1.0%1.1%1.3%1.4% 15-15.99 Miles 2.4%2.2%0.8%0.8%1.2%1.1% 16-16.99 Miles 2.1%1.9%0.7%0.7%0.9%1.0% 17-17.99 Miles 1.8%1.8%0.6%0.6%1.1%0.8% 18-18.99 Miles 2.0%1.6%0.6%0.5%0.8%0.7% 19-19.99 Miles 1.5%1.4%0.4%0.5%0.7%0.6% 20-20.99 Miles 1.5%1.3%0.4%0.4%0.5%0.6% 21-21.99 Miles 1.2%1.2%0.4%0.3%0.4%0.4% 22-22.99 Miles 1.2%1.1%0.3%0.3%0.5%0.4% 23-23.99 Miles 1.1%1.0%0.3%0.2%0.4%0.3% 24-24.99 Miles 0.9%0.9%0.3%0.2%0.4%0.3% 25-25.99 Miles 0.9%0.8%0.3%0.2%0.3%0.3% 26-26.99 Miles 0.7%0.7%0.1%0.2%0.2%0.2% 27-27.99 Miles 0.7%0.7%0.2%0.1%0.2%0.2% 28-28.99 Miles 0.6%0.6%0.2%0.1%0.2%0.2% 29-29.99 Miles 0.5%0.5%0.1%0.1%0.2%0.1%
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 158 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 5.1. (Continued) Distribution of Trips by Distance HBW HBNW NHB Observed HBW Observed HBNW Observed NHB Trips from Trips from Trips from SEWRPC HH Predicted HBW SEWRPC HH Predicted HBNW SEWRPC HH Predicted NHB P-A Distance Survey Trips from Model Survey Trips from Model Survey Trips from Model 30-30.99 Miles 0.7% 0.5% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.1% 31-31.99 Miles 0.4% 0.4% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 32-32.99 Miles 0.4% 0.4% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 33-33.99 Miles 0.3% 0.4% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.1% 34-34.99 Miles 0.3% 0.3% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 35-35.99 Miles 0.3% 0.3% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 36-36.99 Miles 0.3% 0.3% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 37-37.99 Miles 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 38-38.99 Miles 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 39-39.99 Miles 0.2% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 40-40.99 Miles 0.2% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 41-41.99 Miles 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 42-42.99 Miles 0.2% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 43-43.99 Miles 0.2% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 44-44.99 Miles 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 45-45.99 Miles 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 46-46.99 Miles 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 47-47.99 Miles 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 48-48.99 Miles 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 49-49.99 Miles 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 50-50.99 Miles 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 51-51.99 Miles 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 52-52.99 Miles 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 53-53.99 Miles 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 54-54.99 Miles 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 55-55.99 Miles 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 56-56.99 Miles 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 57-57.99 Miles 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 58-58.99 Miles 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 59-59.99 Miles 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 159 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 5.1. HBW Predicted vs. Observed Comparisons by Distance
Observed Vs. predicted Distribution of Trips by Distance
18.0%
16.0%
14.0%
12.0% s 10.0% Observ ed HBW Trips f rom SEWRPC HH Surv ey
8.0% Predicted HBW Trips from Model % Trip
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
s s s s s s s s s s e e e e s s s s ile le le ile le ile iles iles iles les les ile iles ile ile e M M M M M Miles M Mi M M M M Mil 9 9 Mi 9 9 Mi 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 .9 .99 Miles 9 9 9 .9 .9 .9 .9 .9 .99 Miles.9 .99 Miles .9 .9 .9 .9 .9 -0 -5 8. 8 3 8 3 8 3 8 8 3.99 Mi8 3 8 3 8 0 5 -4 -5 -6 -6 -7 -7 -8 0 0 1 1 2 2 8-38. 3-43.998 Mi 3-53. 8 3 8 3 8 8 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 10-10.9915-15.99 Mil 20-20.99 Miles25-25.99 Mil Mil 33-33.993 Mil 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 83-8 8 93-93.9998-9 Miles3 8 3 8 3 28- 10 10 11 11 12 1
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 160 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 5.2. HBNW Predicted vs. Observed Comparisons by Distance
Observed Vs. predicted Distribution of Trips by Distance
18.0%
16.0%
14.0%
12.0% s 10.0% Observed HBNW Trips from SEWRPC HH Survey
8.0% Predicted HBNW Trips from Model % Trip
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
s s s s s s s e e e e e s s s s e e les les les iles les les ile ile ile ile Mil Mil Mi Mi Mi Mil Mil Mil Mil Mil Mi Mi M M M M 9 9 9 9 9 9 Miles9 Miles9 Miles9 Miles9 M .99 .99 .99 .99 .99 .9 .9 .9 .9 .9 9 9 9 9 .9 .99 .99 .99 .99 5 3 8 8 3 8 3 8 -0 -5 -43 -48 -53 -58 -63 -68. -73. -78. -83. 13.99 18.99 2 2 0 5 5-2 3-3 8-3 3 8 3 8 3 8 3 8 3 10-10.9915-15.99 Miles20-20.99 Miles2 Miles 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 88-8 93-9 98-9 -1 -1 -1 -1 23 28 103-103.99108-108.99 Miles113 Miles118 1 1
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 161 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 5.3. NHB Predicted vs. Observed Comparisons by Distance
Observed Vs. predicted Distribution of Trips by Distance
18.0%
16.0%
14.0%
12.0% s 10.0% Observed NHB Trips from SEWRPC HH Survey
8.0% Predicted NHB Trips from Model % Trip
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
s s s s s s s s s s s s s s e e les les le e les le le e e les les le e e e e le les les Mil Mil Mi Mi Mi Mil Mi Mi Mi Mil Mil Mi Mi Mi Mil Mil Mil Mil Mi 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Mi 9 Mi .99 .99 .99 .99 .9 9 .99 .9 .9 9 9 .99 .99 .9 .9 9 .99 .9 .9 -0 -5 0 5 3 3 8 8 0 5 -20 -25. -48 -53 -58. -63. -8 -88 -93. 08.99 13.99 1 0-1 5-1 0 5 3-4 8 3 8 3 3-7 8-7 3 8 3 -1 -1 -1 1 1 2 2 33-33.9938-38.99 Miles4 Miles4 5 5 6 68-68.997 Miles7 83 8 9 98-98.99 Miles 3-123 8-128 18 2 2 103-103.99108 Miles113 1 1 1
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 162 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 5.2. Coincidence Ratio and Correlation by Trip Purpose by Distance
Trip Purpose Coincidence Ratio Correlation HBW 93.8% 99.8% HBNW 86.7% 98.9% NHB 81.1% 97.8%
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 163 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT Table 5.3. Distribution of Trips by Congested Time HBW HBNW NHB Observed HBW Trips Observed HBNW Observed NHB Trips from SEWRPC HH Predicted HBW Trips Trips from SEWRPC Predicted HBNW from SEWRPC HH Predicted NHB Trips Time Survey from Model HH Survey Trips from Model Survey from Model 0-1.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.9% 0.0% 3.1% 0.0% 2.5% 2-3.99 Minutes 1.0% 4.1% 3.6% 10.7% 3.6% 8.8% 4-5.99 Minutes 4.1% 7.1% 11.4% 14.4% 10.8% 10.9% 6-7.99 Minutes 7.5% 6.7% 17.1% 12.2% 16.1% 9.8% 8-9.99 Minutes 7.3% 7.1% 14.3% 11.0% 12.5% 11.0% 10-11.99 Minutes 7.6% 7.2% 11.8% 9.6% 10.4% 9.4% 12-13.99 Minutes 7.1% 7.2% 8.8% 8.1% 8.0% 8.3% 14-15.99 Minutes 6.7% 7.5% 6.4% 7.2% 6.6% 7.9% 16-17.99 Minutes 7.1% 6.3% 6.5% 5.1% 6.0% 5.8% 18-19.99 Minutes 6.2% 5.7% 3.8% 4.1% 4.1% 5.2% 20-21.99 Minutes 5.4% 5.3% 3.2% 3.2% 3.5% 4.1% 22-23.99 Minutes 5.4% 4.5% 2.6% 2.3% 3.3% 3.1% 24-25.99 Minutes 4.5% 3.9% 1.9% 1.7% 2.5% 2.5% 26-27.99 Minutes 4.2% 3.5% 1.5% 1.3% 2.0% 2.0% 28-29.99 Minutes 4.0% 2.9% 1.6% 0.9% 1.9% 1.5% 30-31.99 Minutes 3.2% 2.5% 1.0% 0.8% 1.5% 1.2% 32-33.99 Minutes 2.9% 2.1% 0.7% 0.6% 1.2% 1.0% 34-35.99 Minutes 2.5% 1.9% 0.7% 0.5% 1.1% 0.8% 36-37.99 Minutes 2.0% 1.6% 0.6% 0.4% 0.9% 0.6% 38-39.99 Minutes 2.0% 1.4% 0.5% 0.3% 0.7% 0.5% 40-41.99 Minutes 1.4% 1.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.6% 0.5% 42-43.99 Minutes 1.3% 1.1% 0.3% 0.2% 0.5% 0.3% 44-45.99 Minutes 1.1% 1.0% 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 46-47.99 Minutes 0.9% 0.8% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.3% 48-49.99 Minutes 0.7% 0.8% 0.2% 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 50-51.99 Minutes 0.6% 0.7% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 52-53.99 Minutes 0.6% 0.6% 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 54-55.99 Minutes 0.4% 0.5% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 56-57.99 Minutes 0.4% 0.4% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 58-59.99 Minutes 0.3% 0.4% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 60-61.99 Minutes 0.3% 0.4% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 62-63.99 Minutes 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 64-65.99 Minutes 0.1% 0.3% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 66-67.99 Minutes 0.2% 0.3% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 68-69.99 Minutes 0.1% 0.2% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1%
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 164 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT Table 5.3. (Continued) Distribution of Trips by Congested Time
HBW HBNW NHB Observed HBW Trips Observed HBNW Observed NHB Trips from SEWRPC HH Predicted HBW Trips Trips from SEWRPC Predicted HBNW from SEWRPC HH Predicted NHB Trips Time Survey from Model HH Survey Trips from Model Survey from Model 70-71.99 Minutes 0.1% 0.2% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 72-73.99 Minutes 0.1% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 74-75.99 Minutes 0.1% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 76-77.99 Minutes 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 78-79.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 80-81.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 82-83.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 84-85.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 86-87.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 88-89.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 90-91.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 92-93.99 Minutes 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 94-95.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 96-97.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 98-99.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100-101.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 102-103.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 104-105.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 106-107.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 108-109.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 110-111.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 112-113.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 114-115.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 116-117.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 118-119.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 120-121.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 122-123.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 124-125.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 126-127.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 128-129.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 130-131.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 132-133.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 134-135.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 136-137.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 138-139.99 Minutes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 140 Minutes or More 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0%
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 165 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 5.4. HBW Predicted vs. Observed Congested Time Distribution Comparisons
HBW Observed Vs. Predicted Congested Time Distributions
14.0%
12.0%
10.0%
8.0% Observ ed HBW Trips f rom SEWRPC HH Survey Predicted HBW Trips from Model
% Trips 6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s e e e e e te te te te te te te te te ime te te te te te t t tes tes t tes t ore u u u u u u u u u T u u u u u u u u in in in in in in inutesin in inutes inutes inutes inutes in in in in in in inu inu in in inu in inu M Minut M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M or 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 s .9 .9 .99 .9 .9 9 .99 .9 9 9 9 9 .99 .9 .99 .9 .9 .9 .9 e 3 7 1 5 9 7 1 1 5 3 7 9 3 5 0-1.99 4-5.9Minutes8-9.9 -1 -1 -2 -2 -2 -3 -4 -45. -57. -8 -8 -9 -9 0 1 2 2 6 0 4 8 6 0 6 0 4 2 6 -101.99 -1 -1 -1 1 1 2 2 2 32-33.3 4 44 48-49.52-53.995 Minutes60-61.64-65.9968-69.99 Minutes M 72-73.9976-77.99 Minutes8 M 8 88-89.999 Minute9 0 8 2 4 0 0 1 2 1 104-105.991 1 116-117.99120-121.99 1 Minute128-129.99132-133.99 136-137.99 Minute140 Minut Minutes
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 166 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 5.5. HBNW Predicted vs. Observed Congested Time Distribution Comparisons
HBNW Observed Vs. Predicted Congested Time Distributions
18.0%
16.0%
14.0%
12.0%
10.0% Observed HBNW Trips from SEWRPC HH Survey Predicted HBNW Trips from Model 8.0% % Trips
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s re tes te tes tes te te tes te e te te te e te o utes utes utes utes utes Time utes utes inutes inutes in in inu inu inu inu in in n inu inu inu in n inut inu inu inutesinu inut nu Minutes Mi Minutes Mi M M M M M M Mi Minute or M 9 M 9 M 9 M 9 M 9 M 9 Minute9 M 9 9 M 9 M 9 9 M 9 M 9 Minute9 M 9 9 M 9 9 9 9 9 .99 M .99 M .9 9 .9 .9 9 9 .9 .9 .9 9 9 .9 .99 .9 .9 tes 7.9 5.9 7.9 1.9 1.9 3.9 7.9 9.99 3.99 7.99 u 0-1.99 4-5Minu 8-9 -13 -1 -21. -25 -29 -37. -41. 4 -53 -5 6 -65 -69 -73. -77. 8 -89.99-9 Minute9 01 05 0 13.9 17 21 3 3 0 4 6 0 4 2 6 8 -1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -125.99 Minute-1 -1 Min 12 16 2 2 28 32-33.993 Minute4 44- 48-49.9952 Minutes56 60- 6 68 7 7 80- 84-85.998 Minutes92 96- 0 4 8 0 32 36 40 10 10 10 112- 116- 12 124 128-129.991 Minutes1 1
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 167 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 5.6. NHB Predicted vs. Observed Comparisons
NHB Observed Vs. Predicted Congested Time Distributions
18.0%
16.0%
14.0%
12.0%
10.0% Observed NHB Trips f rom SEWRPC HH Survey Predicted NHB Trips from Model 8.0% % Trips
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s e e e e re e tes e tes tes tes t im tes tes tes te e te te te ut ut ute ute u u ute u ute ut u T u u ute u ute u utes ut u ut u utes u utes Mo n inu n in in in n in in in in in in in in in n in r Mi M M M M M M M M M M M M Min Min M 9 9 Minutes 9 Min 9 Min 9 Minutes 9 M 9 Min 9 Min 9 9 9 9 9 Mi 9 9 99 99 9 99 99 9 99 Mi 9 99 9 99 99 9 99 Minute9 99 9 99 99 Minutes tes o . .9 ...... 9 . .9 .9 u -5 7. 9. 1. 9. 7. 7. 5. 3. 9.9 7.9 5.9 3.9 0-1 4 8-9.99 -13Mi 1 -21 -2 -4 -4 -53 5 -61 -69 -7 -8 -89 -9 -97 05 0 1 2 3 37 in 2 0 8 2 0 8 6 8 6 -1 -1 1 -129 -1 M 1 16- 2 24-25.992 Minutes32-33.9936-37.99 Minutes40 Minutes44-45 48 5 56- 6 64-65.996 Minutes 72-73.997 Minutes80-81 84 8 92 9 0-101.99 Min 6- 4-1 2-1 0 0 04 08 1 2 3 4 1 1 1 112-113.991 Min120-1211 128 1 136 1
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 168 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase APPENDIX B Table 5.4. Coincidence Ratio and Correlation by Trip Purpose by Congested Time
Trip Purpose Coincidence Ratio Correlation HBW 82.3% 96.4% HBNW 74.1% 93.0% NHB 79.0% 94.3%
Table 5.5. Intrazonal Comparisons
% Intrazonal Trips - % Intrazonal Trips - Iteration i+1 Trip Purpose Observed Predicted Iteration i Coefficient Coefficient Home-Based Work 7.2% 7.3% 0.7651 0.7589 Home-Based Non-Work 16.3% 16.9% 0.8083 0.7917 Non Home-Based 16.0% 16.2% 0.9177 0.9113
Table 5.6. Average Congested Time in Minutes
Average Time - Average Time - Iteration i+1 Trip Purpose Observed Predicted Iteration i Coefficient Coefficient Home-Based Work 21.8 22.7 -0.0470 -0.0481 Home-Based Non-Work 13.4 14.2 -0.0902 -0.0916 Non Home-Based 14.7 16.1 -0.0732 -0.0753
Table 5.7. Average Distance in Miles
Average Distance - Average Distance - Iteration i+1 Trip Purpose Observed Predicted Iteration i Coefficient Coefficient Home-Based Work 11.0 10.9 -0.1511 -0.1502 Home-Based Non-Work 5.8 5.9 -0.2080 -0.2108 Non Home-Based 6.5 6.6 -0.1783 -0.1817
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 169 of 262
KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
APPENDIX 6
COMPARISONS OF COUNTY-TO-COUNTY TRAVEL FLOWS
ESTIMATES OF HBW TRAVEL VERSUS
US CENSUS 2000 JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL FLOWS
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 170 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT Table 6.1. KRM Modeled HBW Person Trips
HBW Modeled PersonTrips Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Ozaukee Walworth Washington Waukesha Lake Cook DuPage Kane Kenosha 66,524 11,096 4,217 25 1,594 13 716 25,141 7,854 218 127 Racine 10,394 105,366 20,353 121 2,683 83 7,620 4,269 1,666 86 48 Milwaukee 2,663 8,549 595,099 11,602 423 5,345 90,305 1,850 2,316 38 9 Ozaukee 25 93 24,846 32,798 10 5,314 4,228 17 12 2 0 Walworth 1,366 3,053 2,858 27 55,389 45 5,391 1,071 604 142 243 Washington 19 79 17,410 6,917 31 55,882 15,703 14 10 2 1 Waukesha 384 2,870 91,286 1,754 2,658 5,552 191,800 198 94 17 17 Lake 3,268 489 841 19 948 9 455 347,696 139,927 7,886 2,849 Cook 991 340 402 5 126 2 74 116,146 3,586,010 230,160 17,402 DuPage 109 51 66 1 45 1 16 9,924 191,945 564,888 37,361 Kane 78 40 36 1 114 1 25 5,382 65,577 84,110 195,931 McHenry 2,003 708 333 4 2,431 4 247 26,319 42,752 213 40,334 Will 43 23 34 0 18 0 7 2,094 112,482 92,664 9,225 Total 87,866 132,755 757,780 53,274 66,470 72,250 316,586 540,122 4,151,249 980,425 303,547
Table 6.2. Journey to Work Interchanges
Journey to Work Interchanges Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Ozaukee Walworth Washington Waukesha Lake Cook DuPage Kane Kenosha 40,489 6,526 2,260 112 614 25 734 15,342 2,942 366 115 Racine 5,825 61,020 12,906 445 1,660 207 4,157 1,422 678 115 10 Milwaukee 1,570 4,866 345,163 7,411 857 4,266 57,291 626 940 112 31 Ozaukee 36 76 15,057 22,469 65 1,934 2,360 28 71 12 - Walworth 844 2,240 2,290 49 30,545 144 3,088 976 1,102 133 77 Washington 77 76 14,335 4,545 53 32,066 9,983 6 53 14 13 Waukesha 319 1,231 61,038 1,297 1,321 2,995 119,461 156 410 80 6 Lake 2,507 407 725 43 148 32 227 212,450 83,502 6,967 1,383 Cook 453 141 513 23 76 - 164 64,253 2,077,798 146,135 18,345 DuPage 71 24 115 - 9 - 70 5,377 152,433 277,934 16,539 Kane 32 - 50 24 16 9 8 3,012 34,361 34,318 107,807 McHenry 155 76 83 - 704 9 45 16,731 31,337 4,650 8,877 Will 16 - 49 - 16 - 27 1,128 76,574 43,498 3,432 Total 52,394 76,683 454,584 36,418 36,084 41,687 197,615 321,507 2,462,201 514,334 156,635
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 171 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 6.3. HBW to JTW Ratio
HBW/JTW Correspondence Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Ozaukee Walworth Washington Waukesha Lake Cook DuPage Kane Kenosha 1.64 1.70 1.87 0.22 2.60 0.52 0.98 1.64 2.67 0.59 1.11 Racine 1.78 1.73 1.58 0.27 1.62 0.40 1.83 3.00 2.46 0.75 4.75 Milwaukee 1.70 1.76 1.72 1.57 0.49 1.25 1.58 2.95 2.46 0.34 0.28 Ozaukee 0.69 1.22 1.65 1.46 0.15 2.75 1.79 0.61 0.17 0.17 - Walworth 1.62 1.36 1.25 0.55 1.81 0.31 1.75 1.10 0.55 1.07 3.16 Washington 0.24 1.04 1.21 1.52 0.59 1.74 1.57 2.31 0.19 0.13 0.06 Waukesha 1.20 2.33 1.50 1.35 2.01 1.85 1.61 1.27 0.23 0.22 2.82 Lake 1.30 1.20 1.16 0.44 6.41 0.28 2.01 1.64 1.68 1.13 2.06 Cook 2.19 2.41 0.78 0.20 1.65 - 0.45 1.81 1.73 1.57 0.95 DuPage 1.54 2.11 0.57 - 5.03 - 0.23 1.85 1.26 2.03 2.26 Kane 2.43 - 0.71 0.02 7.12 0.06 3.12 1.79 1.91 2.45 1.82 McHenry 12.92 9.31 4.01 - 3.45 0.49 5.48 1.57 1.36 0.05 4.54 Will 2.68 - 0.69 - 1.14 - 0.28 1.86 1.47 2.13 2.69 Total 1.68 1.73 1.67 1.46 1.84 1.73 1.60 1.68 1.69 1.91 1.94
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 172 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 6.4. Correlation between Modeled HBW and JTW interchanges by Production and Attraction Counties
County Production Correlations Attraction Correlations Kenosha 99.9% 99.9% Racine 100.0% 100.0% Milwaukee 100.0% 100.0% Ozaukee 99.6% 100.0% Walworth 99.9% 99.9% Washington 99.2% 99.9% Waukesha 100.0% 100.0% Lake 100.0% 100.0% Cook 100.0% 100.0% DuPage 98.3% 99.4% Kane 99.5% 98.7% McHenry 96.9% 99.5% Will 98.5% 99.4% Total 100.0% 100.0%
Table 6.5. Correlation between Modeled HBW and JTW interchanges by Production and Attraction Counties Within WI
County Production Correlations Attraction Correlations Kenosha 100.0% 100.0% Racine 100.0% 100.0% Milwaukee 100.0% 100.0% Ozaukee 99.6% 99.9% Walworth 100.0% 100.0% Washington 99.1% 99.8% Waukesha 99.9% 100.0% Lake 100.0% 100.0%
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 173 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
APPENDIX 7
HBW TRAVEL
COMPARISONS OF MODELED COUNTY-COUNTY FLOWS AGAINST OBSERVED FLOWS FROM THE HOUSEHOLD SURVEY
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 174 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 7.1. KRM Modeled HBW Person Trips HBW Modeled PersonTrips Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Ozaukee Walworth Washington Waukesha Lake Cook DuPage Kane McHenry Will Kenosha 66,524 11,096 4,217 25 1,594 13 716 25,141 7,854 218 127 2,316 6 Racine 10,394 105,366 20,353 121 2,683 83 7,620 4,269 1,666 86 48 539 2 Milwaukee 2,663 8,549 595,099 11,602 423 5,345 90,305 1,850 2,316 38 9 61 0 Ozaukee 25 93 24,846 32,798 10 5,314 4,228 17 12 2 0 2 0 Walworth 1,366 3,053 2,858 27 55,389 45 5,391 1,071 604 142 243 4,122 6 Washington 19 79 17,410 6,917 31 55,882 15,703 14 10 2 1 4 0 Waukesha 384 2,870 91,286 1,754 2,658 5,552 191,800 198 94 17 17 137 1 Total 81,374 131,106 756,068 53,244 62,788 72,234 315,762 32,559 12,555 505 445 7,180 15
Table 7.2. SEWRPC Household Survey HBW Trips HBW Observed PersonTrips Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Ozaukee Walworth Washington Waukesha Lake Cook DuPage Kane McHenry Will Kenosha 67,893 11,380 4,551 60 1,470 135 1,355 23,819 5,874 630 - 2,711 30 Racine 10,656 104,266 20,980 574 2,897 379 7,778 4,127 1,224 102 - 197 - Milwaukee 2,671 8,368 588,774 11,457 1,308 7,067 95,477 1,780 1,604 112 - 164 - Ozaukee - 212 23,073 33,843 - 2,920 5,281 - 49 - 136 - - Walworth 944 3,603 4,781 24 44,597 348 5,851 1,371 1,621 140 85 4,172 - Washington 94 59 22,806 6,361 36 50,745 20,035 - 305 88 - - - Waukesha 774 2,308 105,517 2,867 2,203 6,248 180,215 606 469 37 - 179 - Total 83,032 130,196 770,482 55,186 52,511 67,842 315,992 31,703 11,146 1,109 221 7,423 30
Table 7.3. Percentage Difference in HBW Trips % Difference Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Ozaukee Walworth Washington Waukesha Lake Cook DuPage Kane McHenry Will Kenosha -2% -2% -7% -58% 8% -90% -47% 6% 34% -65% 0% -15% -80% Racine -2% 1% -3% -79% -7% -78% -2% 3% 36% -16% 0% 173% 0% Milwaukee 0% 2% 1% 1% -68% -24% -5% 4% 44% -66% 0% -63% 0% Ozaukee 0% -56% 8% -3% 0% 82% -20% 0% -76% 0% -100% 0% 0% Walworth 45% -15% -40% 12% 24% -87% -8% -22% -63% 1% 186% -1% 0% Washington -80% 34% -24% 9% -14% 10% -22% 0% -97% -98% 0% 0% 0% Waukesha -50% 24% -13% -39% 21% -11% 6% -67% -80% -53% 0% -24% 0% Total -2% 1% -2% -4% 20% 6% 0% 3% 13% -54% 101% -3% -49%
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 175 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
APPENDIX 8
HBNW TRAVEL
COMPARISONS OF MODELED COUNTY-COUNTY FLOWS AGAINST OBSERVED FLOWS FROM THE HOUSEHOLD SURVEY
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 176 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 8.1. KRM Modeled HBNW Person Trips HBNW Modeled PersonTrips Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Ozaukee Walworth Washington Waukesha Lake Cook DuPage Kane McHenry Will Kenosha 238,440 17,124 3,455 - 1,263 - 28 10,730 2,240 - 1 2,960 - Racine 12,153 311,457 20,178 0 2,253 0 7,360 1,305 444 - 0 104 - Milwaukee 2,749 8,545 1,555,353 13,583 9 3,800 88,509 921 - - - - - Ozaukee - 0 25,849 120,088 - 6,153 2,258 ------Walworth 704 2,928 163 - 159,018 0 4,033 73 0 0 2 2,867 - Washington - 0 11,069 8,499 0 181,336 19,640 ------Waukesha 17 3,182 123,361 1,035 2,260 8,276 542,171 1 - - - 1 - Total 254,062 343,237 1,739,428 143,205 164,803 199,566 663,998 13,030 2,684 0 3 5,931 -
Table 8.2. SEWRPC Household Survey HBNW Trips HBNW Observed PersonTrips Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Ozaukee Walworth Washington Waukesha Lake Cook DuPage Kane McHenry Will Kenosha 238,878 17,554 3,569 38 2,615 162 505 10,523 1,284 172 81 1,003 - Racine 12,042 310,143 20,582 889 1,782 135 7,983 1,269 455 - - 162 - Milwaukee 2,734 8,557 1,536,504 18,449 2,195 8,701 93,096 1,203 1,210 815 79 - - Ozaukee 41 80 26,275 128,306 - 6,546 2,029 56 129 55 - - - Walworth 1,185 6,891 2,898 48 132,038 - 5,870 811 790 166 193 2,261 - Washington 122 122 12,462 4,972 31 168,269 19,742 - 123 - - - - Waukesha 69 4,328 95,701 1,592 3,221 9,249 587,126 130 1,198 91 - - - Total 255,071 347,675 1,697,991 154,294 141,882 193,062 716,351 13,992 5,189 1,299 353 3,426 -
Table 8.3. Percentage Difference in HBNW Trips % Difference Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Ozaukee Walworth Washington Waukesha Lake Cook DuPage Kane McHenry Will Kenosha 0% -2% -3% -100% -52% -100% -95% 2% 74% -100% -99% 195% 0% Racine 1% 0% -2% -100% 26% -100% -8% 3% -2% 0% 0% -36% 0% Milwaukee 1% 0% 1% -26% -100% -56% -5% -23% -100% -100% -100% 0% 0% Ozaukee -100% -100% -2% -6% 0% -6% 11% -100% -100% -100% 0% 0% 0% Walworth -41% -58% -94% -100% 20% 0% -31% -91% -100% -100% -99% 27% 0% Washington -100% -100% -11% 71% -100% 8% -1% 0% -100% 0% 0% 0% 0% Waukesha -76% -26% 29% -35% -30% -11% -8% -100% -100% -100% 0% 0% 0% Total 0% -1% 2% -7% 16% 3% -7% -7% -48% -100% -99% 73% 0%
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 177 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
APPENDIX 9
NHB TRAVEL
COMPARISONS OF MODELED COUNTY-COUNTY FLOWS AGAINST OBSERVED FLOWS FROM THE HOUSEHOLD SURVEY
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 178 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 9.1. KRM Modeled NHB Person Trips NHB Modeled PersonTrips Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Ozaukee Walworth Washington Waukesha Lake Cook DuPage Kane McHenry Will Kenosha 76,055 6,748 1,118 - 456 - 14 1,297 0 - 0 104 - Racine 5,482 100,449 5,926 0 699 0 937 91 - - - 5 - Milwaukee 1,034 5,753 617,295 8,451 26 2,824 51,438 214 - - - - - Ozaukee - 0 11,192 40,665 - 2,937 1,168 ------Walworth 376 915 73 - 56,472 0 1,253 4 0 - 0 164 - Washington - 0 4,233 3,147 0 59,155 5,991 ------Waukesha 21 1,359 58,595 917 1,025 4,243 211,405 0 - - - 0 - Total 82,968 115,224 698,432 53,180 58,679 69,160 272,206 1,606 0 - 0 273 -
Table 9.2. SEWRPC Household Survey NHB Trips NHB Observed PersonTrips Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Ozaukee Walworth Washington Waukesha Lake Cook DuPage Kane McHenry Will Kenosha 81,554 8,137 1,351 - 748 - 488 1,657 277 85 34 242 - Racine 6,551 115,635 6,257 140 1,128 138 1,636 143 113 19 - 15 - Milwaukee 1,459 7,242 582,935 11,547 757 5,428 59,110 409 381 180 - - - Ozaukee - 200 9,612 36,059 - 2,597 2,149 204 - - - - - Walworth 817 1,098 433 - 42,182 49 1,303 35 91 - - 695 - Washington 70 136 4,744 1,370 41 54,805 8,003 23 - - - - - Waukesha 575 1,321 50,833 2,039 1,707 7,639 223,388 101 349 175 - 112 - Total 91,026 133,769 656,165 51,155 46,563 70,656 296,077 2,572 1,211 459 34 1,064 -
Table 9.3. Percentage Difference in NHB Trips NHB Observed PersonTrips Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Ozaukee Walworth Washington Waukesha Lake Cook DuPage Kane McHenry Will Kenosha -7% -17% -17% 0% -39% 0% -97% -22% -100% -100% -100% -57% 0% Racine -16% -13% -5% -100% -38% -100% -43% -36% -100% -100% 0% -64% 0% Milwaukee -29% -21% 6% -27% -97% -48% -13% -48% -100% -100% 0% 0% 0% Ozaukee 0% -100% 16% 13% 0% 13% -46% -100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Walworth -54% -17% -83% 0% 34% -100% -4% -88% -100% 0% 0% -76% 0% Washington -100% -100% -11% 130% -100% 8% -25% -100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Waukesha -96% 3% 15% -55% -40% -44% -5% -100% -100% -100% 0% -100% 0% Total -9% -14% 6% 4% 26% -2% -8% -38% -100% -100% -99% -74% 0%
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 179 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
APPENDIX 10
MODE CHOICE MODEL VALIDATION
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 180 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 10.1. Mean Level of Service Attributes by Purpose for Actual Time of Departure
Home-Based Shop Home Based Work and Other trips, N = School trips, N = NHB Trips, N = trips, N = 32,329 50,820 12,813 23,800 Std Std Std Std Variable Label Mean Dev Min Max Mean Dev Min Max Mean Dev Min Max Mean Dev Min Max CTIME Congested Highway Time (Mins) 21.1 20.1 0.6 250.8 12.1 13.4 0.5 253.0 9.8 9.1 0.5 231.0 12.8 14.1 0.3 247.3 FFTIME Freeflow Highway Time (Cents) 18.9 14.2 0.5 185.2 11.5 10.5 0.5 187.1 9.5 8.3 0.5 173.7 11.8 11.2 0.3 188.0 DISTANCE Highway Distance(Miles) 11.5 11.2 0.2 153.3 6.5 8.0 0.1 171.9 5.1 5.5 0.2 153.6 6.6 8.4 0.1 161.8 w_IVTT Walk to Transit - IVTT (Mins) 7.2 18.1 0.0 279.7 3.7 10.9 0.0 312.2 3.7 10.0 0.0 136.4 5.7 14.8 0.0 283.8 w_IWAIT Walk to Transit - Initial Wait (Mins) 3.2 6.7 0.0 50.0 3.3 7.2 0.0 50.0 2.8 6.4 0.0 50.0 4.2 7.7 0.0 50.0 w_WALKTIME Walk to Transit - Walk Access Time(Mins) 3.3 5.9 0.0 20.0 3.4 6.2 0.0 20.0 3.4 6.2 0.0 20.0 4.0 6.3 0.0 20.0 w_WALK2 Walk to Transit - Other Walk Access Time (Mins) 0.2 1.0 0.0 21.8 0.1 0.8 0.0 15.8 0.1 0.6 0.0 8.8 0.2 1.1 0.0 16.2 w_AUTOTIME Walk to Transit - Auto Access Time (Mins) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 w_TOTTIME Walk to Transit - Total Time (Mins) 18.7 38.7 0.0 428.9 14.1 29.2 0.0 442.9 12.9 26.7 0.0 249.1 18.8 34.8 0.0 428.7 w_BOARDS Walk to Transit - Boardings(Mins) 0.5 1.0 0.0 7.0 0.4 0.8 0.0 6.0 0.4 0.8 0.0 5.0 0.5 0.9 0.0 6.0 w_XPEN Walk to Transit - Transfer Penalty (Mins) 1.8 4.4 0.0 41.8 1.2 3.3 0.0 35.2 1.1 3.1 0.0 30.8 1.7 4.1 0.0 39.6 w_XFERTIME Walk to Transit - Transfer Wait Time (Mins) 2.9 8.6 0.0 130.6 2.3 7.0 0.0 113.1 1.8 5.9 0.0 104.6 3.0 8.7 0.0 132.5 w_FARE Walk to Transit - Fare (Cents) 49.9 91.8 0.0 1195.0 42.2 80.6 0.0 1287.0 41.4 78.0 0.0 675.0 57.6 100.9 0.0 2515.0 w_DISTANCE Walk to Transit - Distance (Miles) 2.3 6.3 0.0 137.8 1.3 4.0 0.0 137.6 1.1 3.2 0.0 60.1 2.0 5.7 0.0 139.6 d_IVTT Drive to Transit - IVTT (Mins) 4.4 14.3 0.0 143.2 1.7 8.5 0.0 136.2 1.6 7.8 0.0 110.5 2.0 9.1 0.0 155.0 d_IWAIT Drive to Transit - Initial Wait (Mins) 1.4 5.0 0.0 50.0 0.8 4.1 0.0 50.0 0.7 3.5 0.0 50.0 0.8 3.9 0.0 50.0 d_WALKTIME Drive to Transit - Drive Access Time(Mins) 0.4 1.4 0.0 17.0 0.2 1.0 0.0 12.4 0.2 1.1 0.0 12.4 0.2 1.0 0.0 13.8 d_WALK2 Drive to Transit - Other Drive Access Time (Mins) 0.6 1.9 0.0 10.0 0.3 1.4 0.0 10.0 0.3 1.5 0.0 10.0 0.3 1.5 0.0 10.0 d_AUTOTIME Drive to Transit - Auto Access Time (Mins) 0.9 2.9 0.0 24.0 0.4 1.8 0.0 23.6 0.4 1.7 0.0 24.0 0.4 1.8 0.0 23.8 d_TOTTIME Drive to Transit - Total Time (Mins) 9.2 28.7 0.0 198.9 4.2 19.4 0.0 193.3 3.9 17.5 0.0 171.8 4.7 20.0 0.0 190.8 d_BOARDS Drive to Transit - Boardings(Mins) 0.2 0.6 0.0 4.0 0.1 0.4 0.0 3.0 0.1 0.4 0.0 3.0 0.1 0.4 0.0 4.0 d_XPEN Drive to Transit - Transfer Penalty (Mins) 0.7 2.6 0.0 24.2 0.4 1.9 0.0 24.2 0.3 1.7 0.0 17.6 0.4 1.9 0.0 24.2 d_XFERTIME Drive to Transit - Transfer Wait Time (Mins) 0.8 3.9 0.0 63.5 0.5 3.3 0.0 62.0 0.4 2.4 0.0 45.0 0.6 3.3 0.0 62.0 d_FARE Drive to Transit - Fare (Cents) 24.8 78.2 0.0 1044.0 10.6 50.0 0.0 864.0 10.2 45.9 0.0 524.0 12.7 55.0 0.0 864.0 d_DISTANCE Drive to Transit - Distance (Miles) 1.5 5.2 0.0 70.3 0.6 3.0 0.0 65.3 0.5 2.6 0.0 50.3 0.6 3.2 0.0 63.3
A.7 Page 181 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 10.2. Mean Level of Service Attributes by Purpose for Each Time Period
Home Based Work trips, Home-Based Shop and N = 32,329 Other trips, N = 50,820 School trips, N = 12,813 NHB Trips, N = 23,800
Variable Label Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max CTIME Congested Highway Time (Mins) 21.1 20.1 0.6 250.8 12.1 13.4 0.5 253.0 9.8 9.1 0.5 231.0 12.8 14.1 0.3 247.3 FFTIME Freeflow Highway Time (Cents) 18.9 14.2 0.5 185.2 11.5 10.5 0.5 187.1 9.5 8.3 0.5 173.7 11.8 11.2 0.3 188.0 DISTANCE Highway Distance(Miles) 11.5 11.2 0.2 153.3 6.5 8.0 0.1 171.9 5.1 5.5 0.2 153.6 6.6 8.4 0.1 161.8
w_IVTT_AM AM Walk to Transit - IVTT (Mins) 8.1 20.3 0.0 333.2 4.7 13.6 0.0 312.2 4.1 11.5 0.0 181.4 7.3 18.1 0.0 284.4 w_IWAIT_AM AM Walk to Transit - Initial Wait (Mins) 3.0 6.2 0.0 50.0 2.9 6.1 0.0 50.0 2.6 6.0 0.0 50.0 3.6 6.4 0.0 50.0 w_WALKTIME_AM AM Walk to Transit - Walk Access Time(Mins) 3.5 6.0 0.0 20.0 3.6 6.3 0.0 20.0 3.4 6.2 0.0 20.0 4.3 6.5 0.0 20.0 w_WALK2_AM AM Walk to Transit - Other Walk Access Time (Mins) 0.2 1.2 0.0 21.8 0.2 0.9 0.0 20.0 0.1 0.6 0.0 13.2 0.2 1.1 0.0 15.8 w_AUTOTIME_AM AM Walk to Transit - Auto Access Time (Mins) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 w_TOTTIME_AM AM Walk to Transit - Total Time (Mins) 19.7 40.8 0.0 462.8 14.8 30.8 0.0 442.9 13.2 27.5 0.0 275.3 20.2 37.2 0.0 428.7 w_BOARDS_AM AM Walk to Transit - Boardings(Mins) 0.5 1.0 0.0 7.0 0.4 0.8 0.0 6.0 0.4 0.8 0.0 5.0 0.6 0.9 0.0 6.0 w_XPEN_AM AM Walk to Transit - Transfer Penalty (Mins) 2.0 4.7 0.0 41.8 1.4 3.6 0.0 39.6 1.2 3.2 0.0 39.6 1.9 4.3 0.0 41.2 w_XFERTIME_AM AM Walk to Transit - Transfer Wait Time (Mins) 2.9 8.4 0.0 90.0 2.1 6.6 0.0 92.5 1.7 5.6 0.0 73.6 2.9 8.1 0.0 105.5 w_FARE_AM AM Walk to Transit - Fare (Cents) 53.5 97.7 0.0 1195.0 45.5 84.8 0.0 1287.0 42.2 78.7 0.0 780.0 63.4 113.1 0.0 2725.0 w_DISTANCE_AM AM Walk to Transit - Distance (Miles) 2.5 6.9 0.0 149.3 1.4 4.5 0.0 137.6 1.2 3.4 0.0 60.1 2.2 6.1 0.0 132.2
w_IVTT_MD MD Walk to Transit - IVTT (Mins) 5.3 13.8 0.0 279.7 3.2 9.5 0.0 278.4 3.0 8.0 0.0 141.5 4.9 13.6 0.0 296.2 w_IWAIT_MD MD Walk to Transit - Initial Wait (Mins) 3.4 7.6 0.0 50.0 3.5 7.7 0.0 50.0 3.3 7.7 0.0 50.0 4.4 8.4 0.0 60.0 w_WALKTIME_MD MD Walk to Transit - Walk Access Time(Mins) 3.1 5.8 0.0 20.0 3.3 6.1 0.0 20.0 3.3 6.1 0.0 20.0 3.9 6.3 0.0 20.0 w_WALK2_MD MD Walk to Transit - Other Walk Access Time (Mins) 0.1 0.8 0.0 15.8 0.1 0.8 0.0 15.8 0.1 0.6 0.0 10.0 0.2 1.1 0.0 18.0 w_AUTOTIME_MD MD Walk to Transit - Auto Access Time (Mins) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 w_TOTTIME_MD MD Walk to Transit - Total Time (Mins) 16.3 34.9 0.0 433.6 13.4 28.1 0.0 437.0 12.6 26.4 0.0 259.6 18.1 34.7 0.0 439.4 w_BOARDS_MD MD Walk to Transit - Boardings(Mins) 0.5 0.9 0.0 7.0 0.4 0.8 0.0 6.0 0.4 0.8 0.0 5.0 0.5 0.9 0.0 8.0 w_XPEN_MD MD Walk to Transit - Transfer Penalty (Mins) 1.5 3.9 0.0 39.6 1.1 3.1 0.0 33.0 1.0 2.9 0.0 26.4 1.6 3.9 0.0 46.2 w_XFERTIME_MD MD Walk to Transit - Transfer Wait Time (Mins) 2.9 9.4 0.0 133.2 2.2 7.1 0.0 118.1 2.0 6.7 0.0 104.6 3.1 9.3 0.0 132.5 w_FARE_MD MD Walk to Transit - Fare (Cents) 44.9 85.1 0.0 671.0 40.6 78.2 0.0 600.0 39.5 76.4 0.0 675.0 56.4 109.0 0.0 2750.0 w_DISTANCE_MD MD Walk to Transit - Distance (Miles) 2.0 5.8 0.0 137.8 1.2 3.9 0.0 135.8 1.1 3.0 0.0 60.1 1.9 6.0 0.0 146.8
A.7 Page 182 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 10.2. (Continued) Mean Level of Service Attributes by Purpose for Each Time Period
Home Based Work trips, Home-Based Shop and N = 32,329 Other trips, N = 50,820 School trips, N = 12,813 NHB Trips, N = 23,800
Variable Label Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max w_IVTT_PM PM Walk to Transit - IVTT (Mins) 7.8 19.2 0.0 239.6 4.6 13.0 0.0 250.9 4.0 10.8 0.0 174.5 7.2 17.4 0.0 330.5 w_IWAIT_PM PM Walk to Transit - Initial Wait (Mins) 3.1 6.3 0.0 50.0 3.0 6.1 0.0 50.0 2.6 6.0 0.0 50.0 3.7 6.5 0.0 60.0 w_WALKTIME_PM PM Walk to Transit - Walk Access Time(Mins) 3.4 6.0 0.0 20.0 3.5 6.2 0.0 20.0 3.4 6.1 0.0 20.0 4.2 6.4 0.0 20.0 w_WALK2_PM PM Walk to Transit - Other Walk Access Time (Mins) 0.2 1.1 0.0 21.8 0.1 0.9 0.0 14.8 0.1 0.6 0.0 9.8 0.2 1.1 0.0 16.2 w_AUTOTIME_PM PM Walk to Transit - Auto Access Time (Mins) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 w_TOTTIME_PM PM Walk to Transit - Total Time (Mins) 19.3 39.8 0.0 394.2 14.7 30.1 0.0 421.7 13.0 26.6 0.0 266.9 20.0 36.3 0.0 432.6 w_BOARDS_PM PM Walk to Transit - Boardings(Mins) 0.5 1.0 0.0 7.0 0.4 0.8 0.0 6.0 0.4 0.8 0.0 5.0 0.6 0.9 0.0 6.0 w_XPEN_PM PM Walk to Transit - Transfer Penalty (Mins) 2.0 4.7 0.0 41.2 1.4 3.6 0.0 35.2 1.2 3.2 0.0 35.2 1.9 4.4 0.0 41.2 w_XFERTIME_PM PM Walk to Transit - Transfer Wait Time (Mins) 2.9 8.5 0.0 106.7 2.1 6.3 0.0 109.3 1.6 5.1 0.0 75.0 2.8 7.7 0.0 95.3 w_FARE_PM PM Walk to Transit - Fare (Cents) 51.5 94.0 0.0 1195.0 45.2 83.5 0.0 1195.0 41.9 78.9 0.0 775.0 61.3 102.4 0.0 2384.0 w_DISTANCE_PM PM Walk to Transit - Distance (Miles) 2.4 6.6 0.0 114.9 1.4 4.3 0.0 122.1 1.2 3.2 0.0 60.1 2.1 6.0 0.0 138.5
w_IVTT_NT NT Walk to Transit - IVTT (Mins) 5.3 13.1 0.0 144.3 3.2 8.9 0.0 144.4 3.1 8.5 0.0 141.5 4.6 11.0 0.0 164.1 w_IWAIT_NT NT Walk to Transit - Initial Wait (Mins) 3.7 7.7 0.0 50.0 3.7 8.0 0.0 50.0 3.5 7.6 0.0 50.0 4.7 8.5 0.0 50.0 w_WALKTIME_NT NT Walk to Transit - Walk Access Time(Mins) 3.1 5.8 0.0 20.0 3.2 6.1 0.0 20.0 3.3 6.1 0.0 20.0 3.9 6.3 0.0 20.0 w_WALK2_NT NT Walk to Transit - Other Walk Access Time (Mins) 0.2 0.9 0.0 15.8 0.1 0.9 0.0 15.8 0.1 0.7 0.0 12.2 0.2 1.1 0.0 18.4 w_AUTOTIME_NT NT Walk to Transit - Auto Access Time (Mins) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 w_TOTTIME_NT NT Walk to Transit - Total Time (Mins) 16.9 35.1 0.0 291.7 14.0 28.9 0.0 280.2 13.2 27.7 0.0 267.6 18.1 32.6 0.0 310.2 w_BOARDS_NT NT Walk to Transit - Boardings(Mins) 0.5 0.9 0.0 5.0 0.4 0.8 0.0 5.0 0.4 0.8 0.0 4.0 0.5 0.9 0.0 5.0 w_XPEN_NT NT Walk to Transit - Transfer Penalty (Mins) 1.5 3.9 0.0 33.0 1.2 3.1 0.0 30.8 1.1 3.0 0.0 28.6 1.5 3.7 0.0 35.2 w_XFERTIME_NT NT Walk to Transit - Transfer Wait Time (Mins) 3.1 9.2 0.0 92.5 2.5 7.5 0.0 93.5 2.2 7.3 0.0 71.5 3.2 8.6 0.0 98.8 w_FARE_NT NT Walk to Transit - Fare (Cents) 44.0 84.0 0.0 525.0 39.7 77.9 0.0 524.0 38.5 76.0 0.0 510.0 52.4 86.8 0.0 600.0 w_DISTANCE_NT NT Walk to Transit - Distance (Miles) 2.0 5.3 0.0 65.1 1.2 3.5 0.0 63.1 1.1 3.2 0.0 60.1 1.7 4.4 0.0 70.1
A.7 Page 183 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 10.2. (Continued) Mean Level of Service Attributes by Purpose for Each Time Period
Home Based Work trips, Home-Based Shop and N = 32,329 Other trips, N = 50,820 School trips, N = 12,813 NHB Trips, N = 23,800
Variable Label Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max d_IVTT_AM AM Drive to Transit - IVTT (Mins) 5.7 16.3 0.0 143.2 2.8 10.8 0.0 136.2 2.1 9.1 0.0 119.5 3.2 11.5 0.0 155.0 d_IWAIT_AM AM Drive to Transit - Initial Wait (Mins) 1.6 5.0 0.0 50.0 1.0 4.6 0.0 50.0 0.7 3.4 0.0 50.0 1.1 4.5 0.0 50.0 d_WALKTIME_AM AM Drive to Transit - Drive Access Time(Mins) 0.5 1.4 0.0 18.2 0.3 1.2 0.0 12.4 0.3 1.2 0.0 12.4 0.4 1.3 0.0 12.4 d_WALK2_AM AM Drive to Transit - Other Drive Access Time (Mins) 0.7 2.1 0.0 10.0 0.4 1.7 0.0 10.0 0.4 1.6 0.0 10.0 0.5 1.8 0.0 10.0 d_AUTOTIME_AM AM Drive to Transit - Auto Access Time (Mins) 1.1 3.3 0.0 24.0 0.6 2.3 0.0 24.0 0.4 2.0 0.0 24.0 0.6 2.4 0.0 23.6 d_TOTTIME_AM AM Drive to Transit - Total Time (Mins) 11.4 31.5 0.0 194.0 6.3 23.4 0.0 193.3 4.8 19.6 0.0 172.1 7.1 24.3 0.0 190.8 d_BOARDS_AM AM Drive to Transit - Boardings(Mins) 0.2 0.6 0.0 4.0 0.1 0.5 0.0 4.0 0.1 0.4 0.0 3.0 0.2 0.5 0.0 4.0 d_XPEN_AM AM Drive to Transit - Transfer Penalty (Mins) 0.8 2.8 0.0 28.6 0.6 2.3 0.0 28.6 0.4 2.0 0.0 28.6 0.6 2.4 0.0 22.0 d_XFERTIME_AM AM Drive to Transit - Transfer Wait Time (Mins) 1.0 4.1 0.0 50.0 0.7 3.2 0.0 50.0 0.4 2.6 0.0 45.0 0.7 3.3 0.0 50.0 d_FARE_AM AM Drive to Transit - Fare (Cents) 32.0 89.5 0.0 1044.0 16.0 60.2 0.0 864.0 12.6 51.2 0.0 550.0 17.9 62.1 0.0 951.0 d_DISTANCE_AM AM Drive to Transit - Distance (Miles) 1.9 6.0 0.0 70.3 0.8 3.6 0.0 65.3 0.6 3.0 0.0 45.4 0.9 3.7 0.0 63.3
d_IVTT_md MD Drive to Transit - IVTT (Mins) 1.9 8.7 0.0 118.1 1.0 6.0 0.0 115.7 0.9 5.5 0.0 110.5 1.1 6.3 0.0 102.6 d_IWAIT_md MD Drive to Transit - Initial Wait (Mins) 0.8 4.2 0.0 50.0 0.6 3.7 0.0 50.0 0.5 3.4 0.0 50.0 0.6 3.6 0.0 50.0 d_WALKTIME_md MD Drive to Transit - Drive Access Time(Mins) 0.2 1.0 0.0 13.8 0.1 0.7 0.0 10.4 0.1 0.7 0.0 10.4 0.2 0.8 0.0 13.8 d_WALK2_md MD Drive to Transit - Other Drive Access Time (Mins) 0.3 1.4 0.0 10.0 0.2 1.3 0.0 10.0 0.2 1.3 0.0 10.0 0.2 1.3 0.0 10.0 d_AUTOTIME_md MD Drive to Transit - Auto Access Time (Mins) 0.4 1.8 0.0 23.2 0.2 1.3 0.0 21.4 0.2 1.2 0.0 19.0 0.2 1.4 0.0 23.3 d_TOTTIME_md MD Drive to Transit - Total Time (Mins) 4.4 19.4 0.0 184.4 2.7 15.2 0.0 184.4 2.5 13.9 0.0 179.1 3.1 15.8 0.0 174.7 d_BOARDS_md MD Drive to Transit - Boardings(Mins) 0.1 0.4 0.0 3.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 3.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 3.0 0.1 0.4 0.0 4.0 d_XPEN_md MD Drive to Transit - Transfer Penalty (Mins) 0.3 1.8 0.0 24.2 0.2 1.4 0.0 24.2 0.2 1.1 0.0 19.8 0.3 1.5 0.0 19.8 d_XFERTIME_md MD Drive to Transit - Transfer Wait Time (Mins) 0.4 3.3 0.0 63.5 0.4 2.9 0.0 62.0 0.3 2.7 0.0 46.5 0.4 3.1 0.0 62.0 d_FARE_md MD Drive to Transit - Fare (Cents) 12.8 56.2 0.0 650.0 7.1 41.0 0.0 677.0 6.6 36.3 0.0 520.0 8.7 44.9 0.0 520.0 d_DISTANCE_md MD Drive to Transit - Distance (Miles) 0.7 3.6 0.0 51.8 0.4 2.4 0.0 50.8 0.3 2.1 0.0 50.3 0.4 2.6 0.0 47.3
A.7 Page 184 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 10.2. (Continued) Mean Level of Service Attributes by Purpose for Each Time Period
Home Based Work trips, Home-Based Shop and N = 32,329 Other trips, N = 50,820 School trips, N = 12,813 NHB Trips, N = 23,800
Variable Label Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max d_IVTT_pm PM Drive to Transit - IVTT (Mins) 4.4 14.8 0.0 140.3 2.3 10.1 0.0 136.2 1.7 8.1 0.0 119.3 3.0 11.5 0.0 116.0 d_IWAIT_pm PM Drive to Transit - Initial Wait (Mins) 1.4 5.2 0.0 50.0 0.9 4.3 0.0 50.0 0.7 3.5 0.0 50.0 1.0 4.1 0.0 50.0 d_WALKTIME_pm PM Drive to Transit - Drive Access Time(Mins) 0.4 1.4 0.0 14.2 0.3 1.1 0.0 12.4 0.2 1.1 0.0 12.4 0.3 1.2 0.0 13.8 d_WALK2_pm PM Drive to Transit - Other Drive Access Time (Mins) 0.6 1.9 0.0 10.0 0.4 1.5 0.0 10.0 0.3 1.5 0.0 10.0 0.4 1.7 0.0 10.0 d_AUTOTIME_pm PM Drive to Transit - Auto Access Time (Mins) 0.9 3.0 0.0 23.7 0.5 2.2 0.0 24.0 0.4 1.8 0.0 22.1 0.6 2.3 0.0 23.8 d_TOTTIME_pm PM Drive to Transit - Total Time (Mins) 9.2 29.5 0.0 198.9 5.4 21.8 0.0 193.2 4.0 17.9 0.0 174.6 6.8 23.9 0.0 179.0 d_BOARDS_pm PM Drive to Transit - Boardings(Mins) 0.2 0.6 0.0 4.0 0.1 0.5 0.0 3.0 0.1 0.4 0.0 3.0 0.2 0.5 0.0 4.0 d_XPEN_pm PM Drive to Transit - Transfer Penalty (Mins) 0.7 2.8 0.0 24.2 0.5 2.1 0.0 28.6 0.3 1.8 0.0 22.0 0.6 2.4 0.0 22.0 d_XFERTIME_pm PM Drive to Transit - Transfer Wait Time (Mins) 0.8 3.7 0.0 56.0 0.6 3.0 0.0 50.0 0.4 2.3 0.0 30.0 0.7 3.4 0.0 50.0 d_FARE_pm PM Drive to Transit - Fare (Cents) 23.9 76.5 0.0 731.0 14.5 58.7 0.0 819.0 11.0 48.7 0.0 552.0 18.5 65.2 0.0 864.0 d_DISTANCE_pm PM Drive to Transit - Distance (Miles) 1.4 4.9 0.0 61.9 0.7 3.1 0.0 65.3 0.5 2.5 0.0 45.4 0.9 3.6 0.0 54.1
d_IVTT_nt NT Drive to Transit - IVTT (Mins) 2.9 10.8 0.0 120.2 1.5 7.8 0.0 121.9 1.4 7.4 0.0 110.5 1.7 8.1 0.0 118.7 d_IWAIT_nt NT Drive to Transit - Initial Wait (Mins) 1.4 5.2 0.0 50.0 0.8 4.1 0.0 50.0 0.7 3.9 0.0 50.0 0.9 4.2 0.0 50.0 d_WALKTIME_nt NT Drive to Transit - Drive Access Time(Mins) 0.4 1.4 0.0 17.0 0.2 1.0 0.0 17.0 0.2 1.0 0.0 14.2 0.3 1.2 0.0 17.0 d_WALK2_nt NT Drive to Transit - Other Drive Access Time (Mins) 0.5 1.7 0.0 10.0 0.3 1.4 0.0 10.0 0.3 1.4 0.0 10.0 0.3 1.5 0.0 10.0 d_AUTOTIME_nt NT Drive to Transit - Auto Access Time (Mins) 0.6 2.3 0.0 23.6 0.3 1.7 0.0 22.3 0.3 1.6 0.0 19.0 0.4 1.8 0.0 23.3 d_TOTTIME_nt NT Drive to Transit - Total Time (Mins) 6.9 24.8 0.0 189.6 3.9 19.1 0.0 185.6 3.7 18.0 0.0 172.8 4.5 19.9 0.0 189.1 d_BOARDS_nt NT Drive to Transit - Boardings(Mins) 0.1 0.5 0.0 3.0 0.1 0.4 0.0 3.0 0.1 0.4 0.0 3.0 0.1 0.4 0.0 3.0 d_XPEN_nt NT Drive to Transit - Transfer Penalty (Mins) 0.5 2.2 0.0 24.2 0.3 1.8 0.0 24.2 0.3 1.7 0.0 17.6 0.4 1.9 0.0 24.2 d_XFERTIME_nt NT Drive to Transit - Transfer Wait Time (Mins) 0.8 4.1 0.0 39.7 0.6 3.6 0.0 39.7 0.5 3.2 0.0 37.5 0.6 3.7 0.0 47.5 d_FARE_nt NT Drive to Transit - Fare (Cents) 17.2 62.8 0.0 524.0 8.7 43.9 0.0 645.0 8.3 41.3 0.0 524.0 10.7 48.1 0.0 524.0 d_DISTANCE_nt NT Drive to Transit - Distance (Miles) 1.1 4.4 0.0 53.0 0.6 3.1 0.0 53.6 0.5 2.9 0.0 50.3 0.6 3.2 0.0 52.4
A.7 Page 185 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 10.3. Mode Choice Validation Results for the HBW Trips – Originating in SEWRPC Region Coefficient - Observed Predicted Coefficient - Next Round Mode Observed Trips Market Share Predicted trips Market Share Current Round (with DA as 0) Drive Alone 1,171,519 77.62% 1,171,514 77.62% 0.0000 0.0000 Shared Ride 241,204 15.98% 241,206 15.98% -1.5804 -1.5804 Walk to Transit 54,836 3.63% 54,838 3.63% -0.7431 -0.7431 Drive to Transit 2,198 0.15% 2,199 0.15% -2.8209 -2.8211 Non-Motorized 39,486 2.62% 39,487 2.62% 0.4457 0.4457 Total 1,509,244 100.00% 1,509,244 100.00%
Table 10.4. Mode Choice Validation Results for the HBW Trips – Within Cook, DuPage, McHenry and Will Coefficient - Observed Predicted Coefficient - Next Round Mode Observed Trips Market Share Predicted trips Market Share Current Round (with DA as 0) Drive Alone 3,972,934 70.27% 3,972,209 70.25% 0.0000 0.0000 Shared Ride 820,219 14.51% 818,258 14.47% -1.5799 -1.5777 Walk to Transit 519,054 9.18% 518,828 9.18% -0.0385 -0.0386 Drive to Transit 208,569 3.69% 212,177 3.75% -0.6375 -0.6559 Non-Motorized 133,286 2.36% 132,589 2.35% 1.4933 1.4981 Total 5,654,061 100.00% 5,654,061 100.00%
Table 10.5. Mode Choice Validation Results for the HBW Trips – Originating in Lake plus All Other Trip interchanges Coefficient - Observed Predicted Coefficient - Next Round Mode Observed Trips Market Share Predicted trips Market Share Current Round (with DA as 0) Drive Alone 545,656 77.32% 545,595 77.31% 0.0000 0.0000 Shared Ride 112,345 15.92% 112,098 15.88% -1.5825 -1.5804 Walk to Transit 6,488 0.92% 6,507 0.92% -0.3115 -0.3150 Drive to Transit 22,828 3.23% 23,191 3.29% 0.7306 0.7138 Non-Motorized 18,391 2.61% 18,316 2.60% 1.3328 1.3365 Total 705,708 100.00% 705,708 100.00%
A.7 Page 186 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 10.6. Mode Choice Validation Results for the HBNW Trips – Originating in SEWRPC Region Coefficient - Observed Predicted Coefficient - Next Round Mode Observed Trips Market Share Predicted trips Market Share Current Round (with DA as 0) Drive Alone 1,395,084 39.46% 1,395,120 39.46% 0.0000 0.0000 Shared Ride 1,646,879 46.58% 1,646,876 46.58% 0.1659 0.1659 Walk to Transit 60,466 1.71% 60,470 1.71% -1.4403 -1.4403 Drive to Transit 2,832 0.08% 2,833 0.08% -2.7545 -2.7545 Non-Motorized 430,290 12.17% 430,253 12.17% 2.1662 2.1663 Total 3,535,552 100.00% 3,535,552 100.00%
Table 10.7. Mode Choice Validation Results for the HBNW Trips – Within Cook, DuPage, McHenry and Will Coefficient - Observed Predicted Coefficient - Next Round Mode Observed Trips Market Share Predicted trips Market Share Current Round (with DA as 0) Drive Alone 4,578,807 38.52% 4,578,945 38.52% 0.0000 0.0000 Shared Ride 5,411,318 45.52% 5,411,729 45.53% 0.1671 0.1670 Walk to Transit 474,571 3.99% 474,655 3.99% -0.3713 -0.3714 Drive to Transit 22,845 0.19% 22,859 0.19% -2.0013 -2.0019 Non-Motorized 1,399,080 11.77% 1,398,432 11.76% 2.6334 2.6340 Total 11,886,621 100.00% 11,886,621 100.00%
Table 10.8. Mode Choice Validation Results for the HBNW Trips – Originating in Lake plus All Other Trip interchanges Coefficient - Observed Predicted Coefficient - Next Round Mode Observed Trips Market Share Predicted trips Market Share Current Round (with DA as 0) Drive Alone 577,932 39.95% 577,969 39.96% 0.0000 0.0000 Shared Ride 682,242 47.17% 682,266 47.17% 0.1659 0.1659 Walk to Transit 2,508 0.17% 2,509 0.17% -2.7938 -2.7940 Drive to Transit 5,544 0.38% 5,549 0.38% -1.5773 -1.5780 Non-Motorized 178,253 12.32% 178,187 12.32% 2.7249 2.7254 Total 1,446,480 100.00% 1,446,480 100.00%
A.7 Page 187 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 10.9. Mode Choice Validation Results for the NHB Trips – Originating in SEWRPC Region Coefficient - Observed Predicted Coefficient - Next Round Mode Observed Trips Market Share Predicted trips Market Share Current Round (with DA as 0) Drive Alone 771,461 57.07% 771,464 57.07% 0.0000 0.0000 Shared Ride 507,703 37.56% 507,700 37.56% -0.4184 -0.4184 Walk to Transit 15,815 1.17% 15,815 1.17% -1.6817 -1.6817 Drive to Transit 884 0.07% 884 0.07% -3.0642 -3.0643 Non-Motorized 55,861 4.13% 55,861 4.13% 0.4324 0.4324 Total 1,351,724 100.00% 1,351,724 100.00% Table 10.10. Mode Choice Validation Results for the NHB Trips – Within Cook, DuPage, McHenry and Will Coefficient - Observed Predicted Coefficient - Next Round Mode Observed Trips Market Share Predicted trips Market Share Current Round (with DA as 0) Drive Alone 3,871,006 56.62% 3,871,129 56.62% 0.0000 0.0000 Shared Ride 2,546,892 37.25% 2,546,821 37.25% -0.4187 -0.4186 Walk to Transit 130,764 1.91% 130,767 1.91% -0.9792 -0.9792 Drive to Transit 11,653 0.17% 11,657 0.17% -2.0743 -2.0746 Non-Motorized 276,983 4.05% 276,924 4.05% 0.2247 0.2250 Total 6,837,299 100.00% 6,837,299 100.00%
Table 10.11. Mode Choice Validation Results for the NHB Trips – Originating in Lake plus All Other Trip interchanges Coefficient - Observed Predicted Coefficient - Next Round Mode Observed Trips Market Share Predicted trips Market Share Current Round (with DA as 0) Drive Alone 468,773 57.67% 468,776 57.67% 0.0000 0.0000 Shared Ride 308,502 37.96% 308,501 37.96% -0.4184 -0.4184 Walk to Transit 1,161 0.14% 1,161 0.14% -2.2088 -2.2088 Drive to Transit 414 0.05% 414 0.05% -3.0367 -3.0368 Non-Motorized 33,944 4.18% 33,942 4.18% 0.2767 0.2768 Total 812,794 100.00% 812,794 100.00%
A.7 Page 188 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
APPENDIX 11
TRAFFIC VOLUME AND TRAFFIC COUNTS FOR KRM CORRIDOR
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 189 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 11.1. Control Locations for Traffic Volume for KRM Corridor
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 190 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 11.2. SEWRPC External Auto Trips Survey Locations
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 191 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 11.3. Distribution of Trip Ends for Trips Originated in WI and Destined to IL (Destinations at KRM 2193 TAZ System)
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 192 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 11.1. County to County Level Trip Table for Interstate Auto Trips by Time Periods
DESTINATION COUNTIES
Cook Lake Kenosha Milwaukee Racine All Weighted Occupants* Home BasedHome BasedNon-Home Home BasedHome BasedNon-Home Home BasedHome BasedNon-Home Home BasedHome BasedNon-Home Home BasedHome BasedNon-Home Home BasedHome BasedNon-Home Work Other Based Work Other Based Work Other Based Work Other Based Work Other Based Work Other Based TOTALS
Cook 06:00-08:59 ...... 557 113 64 63 128 700 . . 1,321 383 241 446 2,008
09:00-14:59 ...... 866 1,029 1,220 291 264 905 509 1,128 168 ,488 2,035 6,380 2,857 1
15:00-18:00 ...... 1,279 521 171 270 238 376 239 . 284 1,893 1,044 3,378 441
All - - - - - 2,702 - 1,854 525 82 1,843 704 1,367 9211,6 168 5,249 11,766 4,142 2,375
06:00-08:59 ...... 2,318 1,865 315 650 310 711 64 149 49 1,014 3,339 6,431 2,078
09:00-14:59 ...... 3,892 5,143 2,031 124 321 232 509 1,060 152 307 4,445 13,464 6,712 2,
15:00-18:00 ...... 12,296 3,388 1,116 67 502 904 162 254 33 ,216 13,702 18,722 3,804 1
All - - - - - 18,506 - 10,396 3,462 1 1,133 1,847 735 1,463 84 234 21,486 38,617 12,594 4,537
06:00-08:59 634 444 106 11,969 . 3,414 . 226 ...... 12,603 3,858 332 16,793
09:00-14:59 832 515 86 5,006 . 6,573 . 1,004 ...... 5,838 7,088 1,090 14,016
Lake 15:00-18:00 479 450 105 5,239 . 3,091 . 436 ...... 5,718 3,541 541 9,800
All 1,945 1,409 297 22,214 13,078 1,666 ------24,159 3 - 40,609 14,487 1,96
06:00-08:59 270 . 162 582 . 53 ...... 852 53 162 1,067 Kenosha 09:00-14:59 598 1,126 768 268 . . 527 ...... 866 1,653 768 3,287
15:00-18:00 340 658 317 214 . 95 . 106 ...... 554 753 423 1,730
MilwaukeeAll 1,208 1,784 1,247 1,064 - 675 - 106 - - - - - 1,353 - 6,084 - 2,272 2,459
06:00-08:59 81 107 . 1,294 100 . 100 ...... 1,375 207 100 1,682
09:00-14:59 312 681 . 505 1,006 . 157 ...... 817 1,687 157 2,661 Racine 15:00-18:00 60 36 157 717 . 239 . 56 ...... 777 275 213 1,265
All 453 824 157 2,516 - 1,345 - 313 - - - - - 470 - 5,608 - 2,969 2,169
All 06:00-08:59 985 551 268 13,845 3,567 326 2,875 1,978 378 1,010 64 1,033 775 277 49 19,490 6,437 2,054 27,981
09:00-14:59 1,742 2,322 854 5,779 4,758 8,106 6,363 1,161 2,322 1,226 1,637 1,569 1,153 320 496 14,001 19,997 5,810 39,808
15:00-18:00 879 1,144 579 6,170 13,575 3,425 3,909 598 1,287 740 401 337 1,280 538 33 22,644 9,417 2,834 34,895
All 3,606 4,017 1,701 25,794 15,098 2,085 21,208 12,250 3,987 2,384 2,976 402 2,102 56,135 2,523 35,851 2,551 10,698 102,684
* Weights provided by SEWRPC (TRTOTFA )
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 193 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 11.2. Comparison of Estimates of County-to-County Flows by Journey-to-Work, SWERPC HHTS, and External Auto Survey Estimates
JTW Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Lake Cook AM Peak 12,666 2,265 Kenosha All 15,342 2,942 AM Peak 1,225 534 Racine All 1,422 678 AM Peak 595 679 Milwaukee All 626 940 AM Peak 1,808 345 618 Lake All 2507 407 725 AM Peak 354 121 357 Cook All 453 141 513
SWRPC HHTS Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Lake Cook AM Peak - - Kenosha All 23,819 5,874 AM Peak - - Racine All 4,127 1,224 AM Peak - - Milwaukee All 1,780 1,604 AM Peak Lake All AM Peak Cook All
External Auto Survey (HBW)* Kenosha Racine Milwaukee Lake Cook AM Peak 11,969 634 Kenosha All 22,214 1,945 AM Peak 1,294 81 Racine All 2,516 453 AM Peak 582 270 Milwaukee All 1,064 1,208 AM Peak 2,318 711 310 Lake All 18,506 1,847 1,133 AM Peak 557 64 700 Cook All 2,702 704 1,843 * Weighted Occupants
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 194 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
APPENDIX 12
2001 SEWRPC BUS TRANSIT ON-BOARD SURVEY ANALYSIS
ALL SURVEYED SYSTEMS
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 195 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 12.1. Boardings by All Surveyed Systems
Boardings by Surveyed Systems 200,000 180,350 180,000
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000 7,342 6,528 318 373 2,730 225 1,073 - Kenosha Transit Milwaukee County Ozaukee County Racine Belle Washington Waukesha Metro Wisconsin Coach Wisconsin Coach Transit System Urban System County Commuter Transit Lines Mil.-Racine- Lines Waukesha Express Kenosha County
SYSTEMID
Frequency Percent Kenosha Transit 7,342 3.7 Milwaukee County Transit System 180,350 90.7 Ozaukee County 318 0.2 Racine Belle Urban System 6,528 3.3 Washington County Commuter Express 373 0.2 Waukesha Metro Transit 2,730 1.4 Wisconsin Coach Lines Mil.-Racine-Kenosha 225 0.1 Wisconsin Coach Lines Waukesha County 1,073 0.5 Totals 198,939 100.0
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 196 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 12.2. Boardings to All Surveyed Systems by Time of Day
Boardings by System and Time of Day
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Kenosha Transit Milwaukee County Ozaukee County Racine Belle Urban Washington County Waukesha Metro Wisconsin Coach Wisconsin Coach Transit System System Commuter Express Transit Lines Mil.-Racine- Lines Waukesha Kenosha County
AM Peak Hour Middle Day PM Peak Hour Evening
Table of SYSTEMID by TOD TOD (Time of Day) SYSTEMID AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening Total Kenosha Transit 2,900 2,096 2,231 115 7,342 Milwaukee County Transit System 40,731 61,145 47,932 30,542 180,350 Ozaukee County 138 53 87 40 318 Racine Belle Urban System 3,001 2,135 551 841 6,528 Washington County Commuter Express 86 68 59 160 373 Waukesha Metro Transit 579 1,019 789 343 2,730 Wisconsin Coach Lines Mil.-Racine-Kenosha 104 76 31 14 225 Wisconsin Coach Lines Waukesha County 558 109 304 102 1,073 Total 48,097 66,701 51,984 32,157 198,939
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 197 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 12.3. Boardings to All Surveyed Systems by Trip Purpose
Boarding by System and Trip Purpose
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% Kenosha Transit Milwaukee County Ozaukee County Racine Belle Urban Washington County Waukesha Metro Wisconsin Coach Wisconsin Coach Transit System System Commuter Express Transit Lines Mil-Racine- Lines Waukesha Kenosha County
HBW HBO NHB
Table of SYSTEMID by TripPur TripPur(Trip Purpose) SYSTEMID HBW HBO NHB Total Kenosha Transit 1,243 5,402 697 7,342 Milwaukee County Transit System 78,925 79,009 22,416 180,350 Ozaukee County 291 9 18 318 Racine Belle Urban System 2,916 3,138 474 6,528 Washington County Commuter Express 333 33 7 373 Waukesha Metro Transit 972 1,315 443 2,730 Wisconsin Coach Lines Mil-Racine-Kenosha 96 113 16 225 Wisconsin Coach Lines Waukesha County 781 236 56 1,073 Total 85,557 89,255 24,127 198,939
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 198 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 12.4. Trip Purpose Distribution for All Surveyed Systems
Trip Purpose - ALL SURVEYED SYSTEMS
100,000
90,000
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
- Home-based work trips Home-based other trips Non-home based trips
Weighted by Total Boardings
Trip Purpose Frequency Percent Home-based work trips 85,557 43.0 Home-based other trips 89,255 44.9 Non-home based trips 24,127 12.1 Total 198,939 100.0
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 199 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 12.5. Time of Day Distribution of Trips by All Surveyed Systems
Time of Day - ALL SURVEYED SYSTEMS
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
- AM Peak Hour Middle Day PM Peak Hour Evening
Weighted by Total Boardings
Time of Day Frequency Percent AM Peak Hour 48,097 24.2 Middle Day 66,701 33.5 PM Peak Hour 51,984 26.1 Evening 32,157 16.2 Total 198,939 100.0
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 200 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 12.6. Time of Day Distribution of Trips by All Surveyed Systems
Shares of Trip Purposes by Time of Day 100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening
Home-based work trips Home-based other trips Non-home based trips
Table of TripPur by TOD TOD (Time of Day) TripPur(Trip Purpose) AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening Total Home-based work trips 24,977 20,537 25,021 15,022 85,557 Home-based other trips 19,387 36,037 19,997 13,834 89,255 Non-home based trips 3,733 10,127 6,966 3,301 24,127 Total 48,097 66,701 51,984 32,157 198,939
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 201 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 12.7. Vehicle Ownership and Trips by Time of Day for All Surveyed Systems
Vehicle Ownership and Time of Day
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening Total
Zero Vehicles One Vehicle Two or More Vehicles
Table of Hhautos by TOD TOD(Travel of Day) Number of Vehicles in Household AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening Total Zero Vehicles 16,107 23,786 18,301 11,938 70,132 One Vehicle 13,479 19,265 15,072 9,155 56,971 Two or More Vehicles 11,590 13,085 13,020 6,165 43,860 Total 41,176 56,136 46,393 27,258 170,963
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 202 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 12.8. Vehicle Ownership and Trip Purpose for All Surveyed Systems
Trip Purposes and Vehicle Ownership
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0% HBW HBO NHB Total Zero Vehicles One Vehicle Two or More Vehicles
Table of Hhautos by TripPur TripPur(Trip Purpose) Number of Vehicles in Household HBW HBO NHB Total Zero Vehicles 31,002 30,486 8,644 70,132 One Vehicle 27,388 23,658 5,925 56,971 Two or More Vehicles 14,689 22,938 6,233 43,860 Total 73,079 77,082 20,802 170,963
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 203 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 12.9. Driver's License and Trips by Time of Day by All Surveyed Systems
Driver's License Status by Time of Day 100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0% AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening Total Yes No
Table of License by TOD TOD(Travel of Day) Licensed Driver ? AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening Total Yes 19,751 27,068 23,480 14,377 84,676 No 27,014 37,777 27,640 17,127 109,558 Total 46,765 64,845 51,120 31,504 194,234
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 204 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 12.10. Driver's License Ownership and Trip Purpose for All Surveyed Systems
Driver's License Status by trip Purpose 100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0% HBW HBO NHB Total Yes No
Table of License by TripPur TripPur(Trip Purpose) Licensed Driver HBW HBO NHB Total Yes 39,313 34,118 11,245 84,676 No 44,217 52,904 12,437 109,558 Total 83,530 87,022 23,682 194,234
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 205 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 12.11. Mode of Access and Trips by Time of Day for All Surveyed Systems
Mode of Access By Time of Day
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening Total
Transferred Walked Private Auto/Truck Other
Table of GOTTOBUS by TOD TOD(Travel of Day) Mode of Access AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening Total Transferred 10,447 14,974 12,797 7,770 45,988 Walked 34,294 48,944 37,416 22,803 143,457 Private Auto/Truck 2,535 1,407 868 907 5,717 Other 317 381 415 383 1,496 Total 47,593 65,706 51,496 31,863 196,658
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 206 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 12.12. Mode of Access and Trip Purpose for All Surveyed Systems
Mode of Access by Trip Purpose
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0% HBW HBO NHB Total
Transferred Walked Private Auto/Truck Other
Table of GOTTOBUS by TripPur TripPur(Trip Purpose) Mode of Access HBW HBO NHB Total Transferred 20,595 19,254 6,139 45,988 Walked 61,354 65,457 16,646 143,457 Private Auto/Truck 2,089 2,802 826 5,717 Other 437 915 144 1,496 Total 84,475 88,428 23,755 196,658
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 207 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 12.13. Transfer Rates and Time of Day Distribution of Trips by All Surveyed Systems
Transfer Rates by Time of Day
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0% AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening Total
Zero Transfer One Transfer Two or More Transfers
Table of Num_trans by TOD TOD(Travel of Day) Number of Transfers AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening Total Zero Transfer 22,665 29,379 24,695 14,041 90,780 One Transfer 17,106 25,832 18,638 12,250 73,826 Two or More Transfers 7,826 10,796 8,195 5,505 32,322 Total 47,597 66,007 51,528 31,796 196,928
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 208 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 12.14. Transfer Rates and Trips Purpose for All Surveyed Systems
Transfer Rates by Trip Purpose
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% HBW HBO NHB Total
Zero Transfer One Transfer Two or More Transfers
Table of Num_trans by TripPur TripPur(Trip Purpose) Number of Transfers HBW HBO NHB Total Zero Transfer 36,325 42,725 11,730 90,780 One Transfer 33,613 32,367 7,846 73,826 Two or More Transfers 14,558 13,523 4,241 32,322 Total 84,496 88,615 23,817 196,928
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 209 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 12.15. Trip Length Distribution of Trips by All Surveyed Systems
Trip Length Distribution 45,000
40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000 Riders
15,000
10,000
5,000
0 0.0 -0.5 Miles 0.5 - 1.0 Mile 1.0 - 1.5 Miles 1.5 - 2.0 Miles 2.0 - 3.0 Miles 3.0 - 5.0 Miles 5.0 - 7.5 Miles 7.5 - 10.0 10.0 - 15.0 15.0 - 20.0 20.0 - 25.0 25.0 - 30.0 30.0 - 40.0 40 or More Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Distance Categories
l_dis_cat Frequency Percent 0.0 -0.5 Miles 2518 1.44 0.5 - 1.0 Mile 3511 2.01 1.0 - 1.5 Miles 9024 5.17 1.5 - 2.0 Miles 12196 6.99 2.0 - 3.0 Miles 30924 17.73 3.0 - 5.0 Miles 28533 16.36 5.0 - 7.5 Miles 42634 24.45 7.5 - 10.0 Miles 23635 13.55 10.0 - 15.0 Miles 15440 8.85 15.0 - 20.0 Miles 3405 1.95 20.0 - 25.0 Miles 1033 0.59 25.0 - 30.0 Miles 392 0.22 30.0 - 40.0 Miles 920 0.53 40 or More Miles 230 0.13
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 210 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 12.16. Origins of AM Peak HBW Riders Using All Surveyed Systems
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 211 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 12.17. Destinations of AM Peak HBW Riders Using All Surveyed Systems
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 212 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
APPENDIX 13
2001 SEWRPC BUS TRANSIT ON-BOARD SURVEY ANALYSIS
KENOSHA TRANSIT, RACINE URBAN BELLE, AND WISCONSIN COACH LINE KENOSHA-RACINE-MILWAUKEE LINES
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 213 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 13.1. Boardings by Transit System
Boardings by Kenosha and Racine Systems and Wisconsin Coach Line 16,000
14,095 14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000 7,342 6,528 6,000
4,000
2,000
225 - Kenosha Transit Racine Belle Urban System Wisconsin Coach Lines Mil.-Racine- Totals Kenosha Weighted by Total Boardings
SYSTEMID
Frequency Percent Kenosha Transit 7,342 3.7 Racine Belle Urban System 6,528 3.3 Wisconsin Coach Lines Mil.-Racine-Kenosha 225 0.1 Totals 14,095 7.1
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 214 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 13.2. Boardings by Transit System and Time of Day
Boardings by System and Time of Day
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Kenosha Transit Racine Belle Urban System Wisconsin Coach Lines Mil.-Racine-Kenosha
Weighted by Total Boardings AM Peak Hour Mid-Day PM Peak Hour Evening
Table of SYSTEMID by TOD TOD (Time of Day) SYSTEMID AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening Total Kenosha Transit 2,900 2,096 2,231 115 7,342 Racine Belle Urban System 3,001 2,135 551 841 6,528 Wisconsin Coach Lines Mil.-Racine-Kenosha 104 76 31 14 225 Total 6,005 4,307 2,813 970 14,095
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 215 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 13.3. Boardings by Transit System and Trip Purpose
Boardings by System and Trip Purpose
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% Kenosha Transit Racine Belle Urban System Wisconsin Coach Lines Mil-Racine-Kenosha
Weighted by Total Boardings HBW HBO NHB
Table of SYSTEMID by TripPur TripPur(Trip Purpose) SYSTEMID HBW HBO NHB Total Kenosha Transit 1,243 5,402 697 7,342 Racine Belle Urban System 2,916 3,138 474 6,528 Wisconsin Coach Lines Mil-Racine-Kenosha 96 113 16 225 Total 4,255 8,653 1,187 14,095
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 216 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 13.4. Trip Purpose Distribution by Transit System
Trip Purpose - ALL SURVEYED SYSTEMS
10000
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0 Home-based work trips Home-based other trips Non-home based trips
Weighted by Total Boardings
Trip Purpose Frequency Percent Home-based work trips 4,255 30.2 Home-based other trips 8,653 61.4 Non-home based trips 1,187 8.4 14,095 100.0 Total
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 217 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 13.5. Time of Day Distribution of Trips by Transit System
Time of Day - ALL SURVEYED SYSTEMS
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0 AM Peak Hour Middle Day PM Peak Hour Evening
Weighted by Total Boardings
Time of Day Frequency Percent AM Peak Hour 6,005 42.6 Middle Day 4,307 30.6 PM Peak Hour 2,813 20.0 Evening 970 6.9 Total 14,095 100.0
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 218 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 13.6. Time of Day Distribution of Trips by Transit System
Shares of Trip Purposes by Time of Day 100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening
Home-based work trips Home-based other trips Non-home based trips
Weighted by Total Boardings
Table of TripPur by TOD TOD (Time of Day) TripPur(Trip Purpose) AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening Total Home-based work trips 2,131 1,180 543 401 4,255 Home-based other trips 3,530 2,585 2,029 509 8,653 Non-home based trips 344 542 241 60 1,187 Total 6,005 4,307 2,813 970 14,095
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 219 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 13.7. Vehicle Ownership and Time of Day Distribution by Transit System
Vehicle Ownership and Time of Day
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening
Zero Vehicles One Vehicle Two or More Vehicles
Weighted by Total Boardings
Table of Hhautos by TOD TOD(Travel of Day) Number of Vehicles in Household AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening Total Zero Vehicles 1,525 1,621 658 507 4,311 One Vehicle 1,628 1,237 575 245 3,685 Two or More Vehicles 2,145 1,009 1,300 118 4,572 Total 5,298 3,867 2,533 870 12,568
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 220 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 13.8. Vehicle Ownership and Trip Purpose by Transit System
Trip Purposes and Vehicle Ownership
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% HBW HBO NHB Total
Zero Vehicles One Vehicle Two or More Vehicles Weighted by Total Boardings
Table of Hhautos by TripPur TripPur(Trip Purpose) Number of Vehicles in Household HBW HBO NHB Total Zero Vehicles 1,691 2,109 511 4,311 One Vehicle 1,347 2,166 172 3,685 Two or More Vehicles 591 3,582 399 4,572 Total 3,629 7,857 1,082 12,568
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 221 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 13.9. Driver's License Ownership and Time of Day Distribution by Transit System
Driver's License Status by Time of Day
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0% AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening
Weighted by Total Boardings Yes No
Table of License by TOD TOD(Travel of Day) Licensed Driver ? AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening Total Yes 1,181 1,370 610 339 3,500 No 4,653 2,821 2,151 593 10,218 Total 5,834 4,191 2,761 932 13,718
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 222 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 13.10. Driver's License Ownership and Trip Purpose by Transit System
Driver's License Status by Trip Purpose 100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% HBW HBO NHB
Weighted by Total Boardings Yes No
Table of License by TripPur TripPur(Trip Purpose) Licensed Driver HBW HBO NHB Total Yes 1,444 1,771 285 3,500 No 2,699 6,623 896 10,218 Total 4,143 8,394 1,181 13,718
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 223 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 13.11. Mode of Access and Time of Day by Transit System
Mode of Access By Time of Day
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening Total
Transferred Walked Private Auto/Truck Other Weighted by Total Boardings
Table of GOTTOBUS by TOD TOD(Travel of Day) Mode of Access AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening Total Transferred 537 687 381 181 1,786 Walked 5,296 3,433 2,228 750 11,707 Private Auto/Truck 82 21 72 5 180 Other 76 82 103 34 295 Total 5,991 4,223 2,784 970 13,968
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 224 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 13.12. Mode of Access and Trip Purpose by Transit System
Mode of Access by Trip Purpose
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% HBW HBO NHB Total
Weighted by Total Boardings Transferred Walked Private Auto/Truck Other
Table of GOTTOBUS by TripPur TripPur(Trip Purpose) Mode of Access HBW HBO NHB Total Transferred 603 844 339 1,786 Walked 3,486 7,471 750 11,707 Private Auto/Truck 66 76 38 180 Other 68 212 15 295 Total 4,223 8,603 1,142 13,968
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 225 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 13.13. Transfer Rates by Time of Day and Transit System
Transfer Rates by Time of Day
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0% AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening Total
Zero Transfer One Transfer Two or More Transfers Weighted by Total Boardings
Table of Num_trans by TOD TOD(Travel of Day) Number of Transfers AM Peak Mid-Day PM Peak Evening Total Zero Transfer 3,325 2,050 1,956 395 7,726 One Transfer 1,463 1,280 431 289 3,463 Two or More Transfers 1,201 910 383 286 2,780 Total 5,989 4,240 2,770 970 13,969
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 226 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 13.14. Transfer Rates by Trip Purpose and Transit System
Transfer Rates by Trip Purpose
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% HBW HBO NHB Total
Zero Transfer One Transfer Two or More Transfers Weighted by Total Boardings
Table of Num_trans by TripPur TripPur(Trip Purpose) Number of Transfers HBW HBO NHB Total Zero Transfer 1,999 5,256 471 7,726 One Transfer 1,122 2,009 332 3,463 Two or More Transfers 1,088 1,336 356 2,780 Total 4,209 8,601 1,159 13,969
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 227 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 13.15. Trip Length Distribution by Transit System
Trip Length Distribution 3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
Riders 1,500
1,000
500
0 0.0 -0.5 Miles 0.5 - 1.0 Mile 1.0 - 1.5 Miles 1.5 - 2.0 Miles 2.0 - 3.0 Miles 3.0 - 5.0 Miles 5.0 - 7.5 Miles 7.5 - 10.0 Miles 10.0 - 15.0 Miles 15.0 - 20.0 Miles 20.0 - 25.0 Miles 25.0 - 30.0 Miles 30.0 - 40.0 Miles 40 or More Miles Distance Categories Weighted by Total Boardings
l_dis_cat Frequency Percent 0.0 -0.5 Miles 220 1.8 0.5 - 1.0 Mile 382 3.1 1.0 - 1.5 Miles 676 5.4 1.5 - 2.0 Miles 862 6.9 2.0 - 3.0 Miles 3,036 24.3 3.0 - 5.0 Miles 2,189 17.5 5.0 - 7.5 Miles 2,440 19.5 7.5 - 10.0 Miles 1,336 10.7 10.0 - 15.0 Miles 1,056 8.5 15.0 - 20.0 Miles 99 0.8 20.0 - 25.0 Miles 13 0.1 25.0 - 30.0 Miles 49 0.4 30.0 - 40.0 Miles 106 0.9 40 or More Miles 21 0.2 Total 12,485 100.0
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 228 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 13.16. Origins of Kenosha Transit, Racine Belle and Wisconsin Coach Milwaukee- Racine-Kenosha Line Riders During AM Peak For HBW Trips
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 229 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 13.17. Destinations of Kenosha Transit, Racine Belle and Wisconsin Coach Milwaukee-Racine-Kenosha Line Riders During AM Peak For HBW Trips
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 230 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 13.1. Number of Kenosha Transit, Racine Belle and Wisconsin Coach Milwaukee- Racine-Kenosha Line Riders whose Origin and Destination are Located Within the KRM Commuter Rail Catchment Areas Defined by Different Assumptions
Walk Access / Walk Access / Transit Access / Transit Access / Park n Ride Access / Park n Ride Access / SYSTEMID Walk Egress Transit Egress Walk Egress Transit Egress Walk Egress Transit Egress Kenosha Transit 25 66 252 883 330 1,178 Racine Belle Urban System 5 68 111 616 138 818 Wisconsin Coach Lines Milwaukee-Racine-Kenosha 7 9 46 68 46 83 Total 37 142 408 1,567 514 2,079
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 231 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
APPENDIX 14
METRA ON-BOARD ORIGIN-DESTINATION SURVEY ANALYSIS
UPN LINE
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 232 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 14.1. All AM Boardings in the UPN Line by Direction of Travel
1200 Inbound Outbound 1000
800
600
400
200
0
o s ff a ill h d an ide ds k t on on rn nsin bor ark t or oo o Zion egan Blu rid wood P nst w c Har k hicag e Forest h ilw a anston s k nd Ravinia raes lybou B Glencoe Wilmette v en C Wis op h C eat Lake La She Hig Winne Indian H Evanst , Wau r Ken , Ev thr G Lake Rogers Park tation Center Fort St. Rav r ha in Nort Highla l St., n St., E os W Hubbard Woo tra ai n avis en D M K Ce ie Transpo Weighted by Total Boardings ilv Og
ALL AM BOARDINGS Direction of Travel Boarding Station Inbound Outbound Total Kenosha, Wisconsin 292 . 292 Winthrop Harbor 76 . 76 Zion 99 . 99 Waukegan 667 . 667 North Chicago 98 . 98 Great Lakes 25 1 26 Lake Bluff 302 3 305 Lake Forest 369 . 369 Fort Sheridan 205 5 210 Highwood 158 13 171 Highland Park 743 6 749 Ravinia 261 4 265 Braeside 216 6 222
Glencoe 568 . 568
Hubbard Woods 303 4 307 Winnetka 509 6 515 Indian Hill 262 2 264 Kenilworth 389 10 399 Wilmette 1,177 23 1,200 Central St., Evanston 1,097 51 1,148 Davis St., Evanston 657 150 807 Main St., Evanston 579 103 682 Rogers Park 709 146 855 Ravenswood 735 538 1,274 Clybourn 31 335 366
Ogilvie Transportation Center 4 747 751 All 10,530 2,155 12,685
Source: Metra & Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 233 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 14.2. AM Peak Boardings in the UPN Line by Direction of Travel
1200 Inbound Outbound 1000
800
600
400
200
0 r r s n d k s th rk e sin ion an go e a ide oe d r ton a od t n bo Z k id oo inia s c s n ar ca orest Par v e n Hill nston hi F er hw a lwo an s P swo Ce ukeg h Ra Glen va at La S and Bra Winnetka eni Wilmette E Ev en Clybourn l ger Wa e Lake Bluff t Hig h Indi K , o v hrop H Gr Lake g t. a orth C For i bbard Woo S R R rtation ha, Wisco nt N H u o s al p Wi H ain St., s Davis St., EvanstonM an Keno Centr r Weighted by Total Boardings lvie T Ogi
AM PEAK BOARDINGS Direction of Travel Boarding Station Inbound Outbound Total Kenosha, Wisconsin 261 . 261 Winthrop Harbor 73 . 73 Zion 94 . 94 Waukegan 502 . 502 North Chicago 71 . 71 Great Lakes 15 1 16 Lake Bluff 248 2 250 Lake Forest 324 . 324 Fort Sheridan 180 2 182 Highwood 118 9 127 Highland Park 658 6 664 Ravinia 227 2 228 Braeside 181 4 185
Glencoe 492 . 492
Hubbard Woods 271 2 274 Winnetka 424 6 430 Indian Hill 227 . 227 Kenilworth 335 11 345 Wilmette 1,041 18 1,059
Central St., Evanston 1,011 49 1,061 Davis St., Evanston 606 132 738 Main St., Evanston 514 99 612 Rogers Park 664 124 788 Ravenswood 694 516 1,209
Clybourn 27 311 338 Ogilvie Transportation Center . 517 517 All 9,259 1,809 11,068 Source: Metra & Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 234 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 14.3. AM Peak Alightings for Outbound Travel
300
250
200
150
100
50
0 Zion Ravinia Glencoe Wilmette Braeside Clybourn Winnetka Hill Indian Highwood Lake Bluff Waukegan Kenilworth Rogers Park Great Lakes Fort Sheridan Park Highland Ravenswood North Chicago Hubbard Woods Main St., Evanston St., Main Lake Forest (UP-N) Davis Evanston St., Kenosha, Wisconsin Central St., EvanstonCentral St.,
Ogilvie Transportation Center
AM PEAK ALIGHTINGS Direction of Travel
Alighting Station Outbound Inbound All Kenosha, Wisconsin 14 . 14 Zion 2.2 Waukegan 94 12 106 North Chicago 62 7 69 Great Lakes 52 21 73 Lake Bluff 160 10 170 179 52 232 Lake Forest (UP-N) Fort Sheridan 37 13 50 Highwood 41 21 62 Highland Park 196 82 278 Ravinia 31 23 54 Braeside 64 45 109 Glencoe 88 18 105 Hubbard Woods 46 18 64 70 19 89 Winnetka Indian Hill 24 60 84 Kenilworth 18 2 20 Wilmette 98 14 111 Central St., Evanston 46 36 82 Davis St., Evanston 265 207 472 Main St., Evanston 12 10 22 Rogers Park 7310 60 45 106 Ravenswood Clybourn 7188195 Ogilvie Transportation Center 6 7,726 7,732 All 1,681 8,629 10,310 Source: Metra & Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 235 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 14.4. Transfer Rates in the UPN Line by Direction of Travel
Transfer Rates by Boarding Direction
100% Two or More Transfers 90% One Transfer
80% Zero Transfer
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% Inbound Outbound Weighted by Total Boardings
Direction of Travel Transfer Rates Inbound Outbound All Zero Transfer 8,214 1,072 9,286 One Transfer 983 645 1,628 Two or More Transfers 62 92 155 All 9,259 1,809 11,068
Source: Metra & Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 236 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 14.5. Shares of Modes of Access in the UPN Line by Direction of Travel
45.0% Inbound Outbound 40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0% Walk Drove Alone Dropped Off Carpool as Carpool as CTA/Pace CTA Rapid Taxicab Private Boat/River Bicycle Another Other Driver Passenger Transit Shuttle Taxi Metra Train Bus/Van Weighted by Total Boardings
Direction of Travel Access Mode Inbound Outbound All No Response 51 16 67
Walk 3,872 672 4,544
Drove Alone 3,426 231 3,657
Dropped Off 1,161 236 1,397
Carpool as Driver 178 10 188 Carpool as Passenger 134 14 148
CTA/Pace 211 197 408 CTA Rapid Transit 7 155 162
Taxicab 38 38 75 Private Shuttle Bus/Van 022
Boat/River Taxi 101 Bicycle 153 23 176
Another Metra Train 6 205 211 Other 20 11 31
All 9,259 1,809 11,068
Source: Metra & Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 237 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 14.6. Shares of Mode of Access trip Lengths by Direction of Travel
25.0% Weighted by Total Boardings Inbound Outbound
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0% 0.00 - 0.25 - 0.50 - 0.75 - 1.00 - 1.50 - 2.00 - 3.00 - 4.00 - 5.00 - 6.00 - 7.50 - 10.0 - 12.5 - 15.0 - 20.0 - 25.0 - 30 or 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.50 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.50 10.0 12.5 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 more Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles
Direction of Travel Distance Categories Inbound Outbound All 0.00 - 0.25 Miles 1,230 218 1,448 0.25 - 0.50 Miles 1,832 243 2,075
0.50 - 0.75 Miles 1,275 162 1,438 0.75 - 1.00 Miles 807 104 911 1.00 - 1.50 Miles 1,184 191 1,375 1.50 - 2.00 Miles 779 134 913
2.00 - 3.00 Miles 565 98 663 3.00 - 4.00 Miles 253 29 282 4.00 - 5.00 Miles 88 41 130 5.00 - 6.00 Miles 95 16 111 6.00 - 7.50 Miles 97 45 142 7.50 - 10.0 Miles 104 74 178
10.0 - 12.5 Miles 28 22 50 12.5 - 15.0 Miles 37 19 56 15.0 - 20.0 Miles 20 28 48 20.0 - 25.0 Miles 13637 25.0 - 30.0 Miles 42327 30 or more Miles 23 33 55 All 8,424 1,515 9,939 Source: Metra & Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 238 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 14.7. Distribution of Mean Access Trip Length by Station for Inbound Travel
Mean Access Distance in Inbound Direction 7
6
5 4 (miles) 3
2
1
0 t l n in r n s d rk e s a th n n n o s o an e o ide o d tk r to to o ti n rb Zio g r idan inia s e o s a o e icago r v nc n n Hil w ns nst c k d Pa n ia l lmette a a swood St s n Ra Gle d n Brae rd Woo Wi In Wi Evan Wi Wau th Ch Lake Bluffake Fo Highwo hla Keni , Ev , hrop Ha r L g . t., rding t i ba S Rogers ParkRave a n No Fort She H b l St a is in St., Ev Bo osha Wi Hu tr n n av D Ma Ke Ce
Figure 14.8. Distribution of Mean Access Trip Length by Station for Outbound Travel
Mean Access Distance in Outbound Direction
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0 f n d ia th te n k uf n t ton ar Bl oo Park P ourn e b lybour d Ravi nnetka ilme vans s ighw C Lak Braeside Wi enilwor W Cly H K , Evanston oger ighlan t., Evansto Fort Sheridan S St., E R Ravenswood H s n Hubbard Woods i ai av D M Central St. Source: Metra & Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 239 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 14.9. Distribution of In Vehicle Trip Length Distribution by Direction of Travel
40.0% Inbound Weighted by Total Boardings Outbound 35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0% 0.0 - 1.0 1.0 - 2.0 2.0 - 3.0 3.0 - 5.0 5.0 - 7.5 7.5 - 10.0 10.0 - 15.0 15.0 - 20.0 20.0 - 25.0 25.0 - 30.0 30.0 - 40.0 40 or More Mile Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles
IVTD Direction of Travel dis_cat Inbound Outbound All
0.0 - 1.0 Mile 404 1.0 - 2.0 Miles 505 2.0 - 3.0 Miles 37 32 69 3.0 - 5.0 Miles 46 15 61 5.0 - 7.5 Miles 733 161 894 7.5 - 10.0 Miles 703 166 869
10.0 - 15.0 Miles 3,254 472 3,726
15.0 - 20.0 Miles 1,805 252 2,057 20.0 - 25.0 Miles 1,184 334 1,518 25.0 - 30.0 Miles 503 176 680 30.0 - 40.0 Miles 687 114 800 40 or More Miles 284 18 301 All 9,245 1,740 10,984
Source: Metra & Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 240 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 14.10. Commuter Rail Riders’ Access and Egress Distance for Inbound Travel
Access and Egress Distances by Inbound UPN Riders 5,000 3 Mile Egress 4,500 Walk Egress
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0 Walk Access Access Witihin 3 Miles Access Within 5 miles
Figure 14.11. Commuter Rail Riders’ Access and Egress Distance for Outbound Travel
Access and Egress Distances by Outbound UPN Riders 450 3 Mile Egress 400 Walk Egress
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0 Walk Access Access within 3 Miles Access within 5 Miles
Source: Metra & Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 241 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
APPENDIX 15
METRA ON-BOARD ORIGIN-DESTINATION SURVEY ANALYSIS
UPN LINE LAKE COUNTY AND KENOSHA STATIONS
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 242 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 15.1. Kenosha Station Rider Origins and Destinations
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 243 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 15.2. Winthrop Harbor Station Rider Origins and Destinations
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 244 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 15.3. Waukegan Station Rider Origins and Destinations
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 245 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 15.4. Transfer Rates in the UPN Line by Direction of Travel
Transfer Rates by Direction of Travel Two or More Transfers One Transfer Zero Transfer 100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% Inbound Outbound
Direction of Travel Transfer Rates Inbound Outbound All Zero Transfer 2,950 22 2,972 One Transfer 469 3 471 Two or More Transfers 26 0 26 All 3,445 25 3,470 Source: Metra & Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 246 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 15.5. Shares of Modes of Access in the UPN Line by Direction of Travel
60.0%
Inbound Outbound
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0% Walk Drove Alone Dropped Off Carpool as Carpool as CTA/Pace CTA Rapid Taxicab Boat/River Bicycle Another Other Driver Passenger Transit Taxi Metra Train Weighted by Total Boardings
Direction of Travel Access Mode Inbound Outbound All No Response 34 0 34 Walk 724 12 736 Drove Alone 1,839 2 1,841 Dropped Off 569 7 576 Carpool as Driver 72 0 72 Carpool as Passenger 67 3 70 CTA/Pace 66 0 66 CTA Rapid Transit 202 Taxicab 23 1 23 Boat/River Taxi 101 Bicycle 34 0 34 Another Metra Train 404 Other 10 0 10 All 3,445 25 3,469 Source: Metra & Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 247 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 15.6. Shares of Mode of Access Trip Lengths by Direction of Travel
6.0% Weighted by Total Boardings Inbound Outbound 5.0%
4.0%
3.0%
2.0%
1.0%
0.0% 0.00 - 0.25 - 0.50 - 0.75 - 1.00 - 1.50 - 2.00 - 3.00 - 4.00 - 5.00 - 6.00 - 7.50 - 10.0 - 12.5 - 15.0 - 20.0 - 25.0 - 30 or 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.50 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.50 10.0 12.5 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 more Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles
Direction of Travel Distance Categories Inbound Outbound All 0.00 - 0.25 Miles 337 2 338 0.25 - 0.50 Miles 438 7 445 0.50 - 0.75 Miles 397 2 399 0.75 - 1.00 Miles 238 0 238 1.00 - 1.50 Miles 396 3 399 1.50 - 2.00 Miles 393 0 393 2.00 - 3.00 Miles 280 4 283 3.00 - 4.00 Miles 176 0 176 4.00 - 5.00 Miles 74 0 74 5.00 - 6.00 Miles 75 0 75 6.00 - 7.50 Miles 82 3 85 7.50 - 10.0 Miles 89 0 89 10.0 - 12.5 Miles 19 0 19 12.5 - 15.0 Miles 35 0 35 15.0 - 20.0 Miles 17 2 19 20.0 - 25.0 Miles 101 25.0 - 30.0 Miles 404 30 or more Miles 19 0 19 All 3,070 23 3,091 Source: Metra & Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 248 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 15.7. Distribution of In Vehicle Trip Length by Direction of Travel
40.0% Weighted by Total Boardings Inbound Outbound 35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0% 1.0 - 2.0 2.0 - 3.0 3.0 - 5.0 5.0 - 7.5 7.5 - 10.0 10.0 - 15.0 15.0 - 20.0 20.0 - 25.0 25.0 - 30.0 30.0 - 40.0 40 or More Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles
In Vehicle Travel Direction of Travel Distance Categories Inbound Outbound All 1.0 - 2.0 Miles 202 2.0 - 3.0 Miles 202 3.0 - 5.0 Miles 41 3 44 5.0 - 7.5 Miles 25 6 31 7.5 - 10.0 Miles 34 0 34 10.0 - 15.0 Miles 87 9 95 15.0 - 20.0 Miles 590 3 593 20.0 - 25.0 Miles 1,184 0 1,184 25.0 - 30.0 Miles 503 5 508 30.0 - 40.0 Miles 687 0 687 40 or More Miles 284 0 284 All 3,439 26 3,464
Source: Metra & Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 249 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 15.8. Access and Egress Distances by Lake County and Kenosha Riders
Access and Egress Distances by Lake County and Kenosha Riders
1,400 3 Mile Egress Walk Egress 1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
Walk Access Access within 3 Miles Access within 5 Miles
Source: Metra & Cambridge Systematics
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 250 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
APPENDIX 16
HIGHWAY AND TRANSIT TRAVEL TIME RUNS
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 251 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 16.1. Map of Selected Zones
1 TAZ 1 - Milwaukee
TAZ 818 - Racine
818 TAZ 832 - Suburban Racine 832
TAZ 980 - Kenosha
951 TAZ 951 - Suburban Kenosha 980
TAZ 1774 – Abbott Labs
1774
TAZ 1128 – Chicago
1128
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 252 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 16.1. Highway Travel Time Runs - A Summary for Selected O-D Pairs
Congested Time (mins.) Location Zone No Milwaukee Racine Kenosha Abbott Labs Chicago Milwaukee 1 -- 46.88 52.08 88.86 229.15 Racine 818 48.56 -- 27.26 76.12 219.37 Kenosha 980 53.20 26.57 -- 57.58 205.50 Abbott Labs 1774 77.98 63.22 45.37 -- 154.40 Chicago 1128 176.26 164.03 146.18 109.72 --
Free Flow Time (mins.) Location Zone No Milwaukee Racine Kenosha Abbott Labs Chicago Milwaukee 1 -- 43.66 48.91 66.80 114.99 Racine 818 45.54 -- 27.24 57.21 108.22 Kenosha 980 50.24 26.55 -- 38.69 94.94 Abbott Labs 1774 68.34 56.52 38.69 -- 49.99 Chicago 1128 113.63 93.41 75.58 49.43 --
Distance (miles) Location Zone No Milwaukee Racine Kenosha Abbott Labs Chicago Milwaukee 1 -- 29.67 38.76 56.14 96.79 Racine 818 29.90 -- 10.84 34.59 83.03 Kenosha 980 38.94 10.65 -- 23.43 70.27 Abbott Labs 1774 56.37 34.40 23.43 -- 38.00 Chicago 1128 97.01 67.72 56.75 37.73 --
Speed (mph) Location Zone No Milwaukee Racine Kenosha Abbott Labs Chicago Milwaukee 1 -- 37.97 44.65 37.91 25.34 Racine 818 36.94 -- 23.86 27.26 22.71 Kenosha 980 43.92 24.05 -- 24.41 20.52 Abbott Labs 1774 43.37 32.65 30.99 -- 14.77 Chicago 1128 33.02 24.77 23.29 20.63 --
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 253 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 16.2. Transit Travel Time Runs - A Summary for Selected O-D Pairs for AM Peak
AM Peak Period In Vehicle Other Walk Walk Transfer Travel Time Initial Wait Access Access Total Time Penalty Transfer Distance Origin Destination (Mins) Time (Mins) Time (Mins) Time (Mins) (Mins) (Mins) Time (Mins) Fare ($) (Miles) Milwaukee Racine 65.73 1.48 2.8 4 125.73 0 51.72 2 25.8 Milwaukee Suburban Racine 88.31 1.48 2.8 11.4 177.31 6.6 66.72 3 32.47 Milwaukee Kenosha 103.9 1.48 2.8 3.6 163.5 0 51.72 2 36.75 Milwaukee Chicago 110.37 1.48 4.4 3.8 178.77 0 58.72 1.5 85.31 Milwaukee Abbott Labs 140.48 1.48 5.6 9.8 212.58 0 55.22 2 55.55 Racine Milwaukee 78.15 5 1.6 3.2 122.81 11 23.86 2.5 31.24 Racine Suburban Racine 22.58 15 0 12.2 49.78 0 0 1.5 6.67 Racine Suburban Kenosha 43.93 6 5.6 12.6 163.08 0 94.95 2.5 16.17 Racine Kenosha 35.9 6 3.8 4.6 95.3 0 45 1.5 10.81 Racine Chicago 139.56 6 7.2 3.2 204.13 0 48.17 1.5 62.59 Racine Abbott Labs 72.48 6 6.6 10.8 144.38 0 48.5 1.5 29.61 Suburban Racine Milwaukee 121.51 15 5.2 11.4 176.97 0 23.86 2.5 40.91 Suburban Racine Racine 29.96 15 2.8 11.4 74.16 0 15 1 9.49 Suburban Racine Suburban Kenosha 65.88 15 5.4 19.8 201.03 0 94.95 2.5 21.45 Suburban Racine Kenosha 57.85 15 3.6 11.8 133.25 0 45 1.5 16.09 Suburban Racine Abbott Labs 94.43 15 6.4 18 182.33 0 48.5 1.5 34.89 Suburban Kenosha Racine 46.22 45 1.8 12.4 127.92 0 22.5 2 16.31 Suburban Kenosha Kenosha 15.41 45 0 17.4 77.81 0016 Suburban Kenosha Abbott Labs 54.06 45 11 18.2 131.76 0 3.5 1 25.01 Kenosha Milwaukee 115.9 3 1.6 5.8 161.16 11 23.86 3 41.7 Kenosha Racine 35.61 3 0 6.6 78.71 11 22.5 2 10.73 Kenosha Suburban Racine 49.25 3 0 14 121.35 17.6 37.5 3 15.86 Kenosha Suburban Kenosha 17.51 3 0 14.2 91.26 6.6 49.95 1 6.2 Kenosha Chicago 105.73 1.67 2.6 5.6 117.1 0 1.5 5 51.99 Kenosha Abbott Labs 38.65 2 2 13.2 57.35 0 1.5 5 19.01 Chicago Milwaukee 92.02 2 0.8 4 148.82 0 50 1.5 84.37 Chicago Racine 141.83 1.5 3.4 3 182.23 0 32.5 1.75 62.73 Chicago Suburban Racine 155.47 1.5 3.4 10.4 224.87 6.6 47.5 2.75 67.86 Chicago Suburban Kenosha 121.12 1.5 11.6 10.6 204.77 0 59.95 1.75 57.99 Chicago Kenosha 105.73 1.5 2.6 5.6 125.43 0 10 1.75 51.99 Chicago Abbott Labs 72.54 1.5 4.6 8.8 93.94 0 6.5 1.75 35.08 Abbott Labs Milwaukee 109.48 1.5 4.4 10 202.51 13.2 63.93 1.25 89.67 Abbott Labs Racine 70.9 1.5 5.2 10.6 120.7 0 32.5 1.25 27.77 Abbott Labs Suburban Racine 84.54 1.5 5.2 18 163.34 6.6 47.5 2.25 32.9 Abbott Labs Suburban Kenosha 50.19 1.5 13.4 18.2 143.24 0 59.95 1.25 23.03 Abbott Labs Kenosha 34.8 1.5 4.4 13.2 63.9 0 10 1.25 17.03 Abbott Labs Chicago 75.91 1.5 4.6 8.8 93.56 0 2.75 1.25 35.08
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 254 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Table 16.3. Transit Travel Time Runs - A Summary for Selected O-D Pairs for PM Peak
PM Peak Period In Vehicle Other Walk Walk Transfer Travel Time Initial Wait Access Access Total Time Penalty Transfer Distance Origin Destination (Mins) Time (Mins) Time (Mins) Time (Mins) (Mins) (Mins) Time (Mins) Fare ($) (Miles) Milwaukee Racine 65.73 1.27 2.8 4 108.13 0 34.33 2 25.8 Milwaukee Suburban Racine 88.31 1.27 2.8 11.4 174.71 6.6 64.33 3 32.47 Milwaukee Suburban Kenosha 111.93 1.27 4.6 11.6 208.73 0 79.33 3 42.11 Milwaukee Kenosha 103.9 1.27 2.8 3.6 145.9 0 34.33 2 36.75 Milwaukee Abbott Labs 140.48 1.27 5.6 9.8 220.98 0 63.83 2 55.55 Racine Milwaukee 80.24 5 0.6 3.2 133.54 11 33.5 2.8 31.55 Racine Suburban Racine 20.9 6 0 12.4 75.9 6.6 30 1 6.72 Racine Suburban Kenosha 43.93 6 5.6 12.6 138.13 0 70 2.5 16.17 Racine Kenosha 35.9 6 3.8 4.6 75.3 0 25 1.5 10.81 Racine Chicago 139.56 6 7.2 3.2 192.96 0 37 1.5 62.59 Racine Abbott Labs 72.48 6 6.6 10.8 150.38 0 54.5 1.5 29.61 Suburban Racine Milwaukee 123.6 15 4.2 11.4 187.7 0 33.5 2.8 41.22 Suburban Racine Racine 29.96 15 2.8 11.4 74.16 0 15 1 9.49 Suburban Racine Suburban Kenosha 65.88 15 5.4 19.8 176.08 0 70 2.5 21.45 Suburban Racine Kenosha 57.85 15 3.6 11.8 113.25 0 25 1.5 16.09 Suburban Racine Abbott Labs 94.43 15 6.4 18 188.33 0 54.5 1.5 34.89 Suburban Kenosha Racine 46.22 40 1.8 12.4 132.92 0 32.5 2 16.31 Suburban Kenosha Kenosha 15.41 40 0 17.4 72.81 0 0 1 6 Suburban Kenosha Abbott Labs 54.06 40 11 18.2 152.76 0 29.5 1 25.01 Kenosha Milwaukee 117.99 3 0.6 5.8 171.89 11 33.5 3.3 42.01 Kenosha Racine 35.61 3 0 6.6 88.71 11 32.5 2 10.73 Kenosha Suburban Racine 54.95 3 0 14 137.05 17.6 47.5 2 15.69 Kenosha Suburban Kenosha 17.51 3 0 14.2 86.31 6.6 45 1 6.2 Kenosha Chicago 105.73 10 2.6 5.6 125.93 0 2 5 51.99 Kenosha Abbott Labs 38.65 10 2 13.2 83.35 0 19.5 5 19.01 Chicago Milwaukee 170.78 2.5 0.8 4 238.08 0 60 1.5 84.37 Chicago Racine 141.83 2 3.4 3 186.06 0 35.83 1.75 62.73 Chicago Suburban Kenosha 121.12 2 11.6 10.6 193.65 0 48.33 1.75 57.99 Chicago Kenosha 105.73 2 2.6 5.6 119.26 0 3.33 1.75 51.99 Chicago Abbott Labs 72.54 2 4.6 8.8 109.11 0 21.17 1.75 35.08 Abbott Labs Racine 70.9 19.5 5.2 10.6 142.03 0 35.83 1.25 27.77 Abbott Labs Suburban Racine 90.24 19.5 5.2 18 190.37 6.6 50.83 1.25 32.73 Abbott Labs Suburban Kenosha 50.19 19.5 13.4 18.2 149.62 0 48.33 1.25 23.03 Abbott Labs Kenosha 34.8 19.5 4.4 13.2 75.23 0 3.33 1.25 17.03 Abbott Labs Chicago 75.91 19.5 4.6 8.8 113.31 0 4.5 1.25 35.08
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 255 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
APPENDIX 17
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM USER BENEFITS
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 256 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 17.1. Employment Changes Between 2000 and 2035
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 257 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 17.2. Changes in the Number of Households Between 2000 and 2035
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 258 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 17.3. Total User Benefits for Origins by Traffic Analysis Zone
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 259 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 17.4. Total User Benefits for Destinations by Traffic Analysis Zone
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 260 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT Figure 17.5. Home-Based Work User Benefits by Origin Zone
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 261 of 262 KRM Alternatives Analysis EIS and Project Development Phase RIDERSHIP FORECASTING REPORT
Figure 17.6. Home-Based Work User Benefits by Destination Zone
in association with HNTB and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Page 262 of 262