Innovations in Multi-Modal Transit Mapping Margaret Carragher E.I.T Dr. Kari Watkins P.E.

Outline Introduction Literature Review Methodology Results & Conclusions Going Forward

INTRODUCTION IntroductionLiterature ReviewFuture ResearchMethodologyResults & Conclusions

Project Goal As transit systems become multi-modal, so must their system maps. Address multi-modal system maps Understand rider views on system maps Create a design guide for multi-modal, schematic maps

Overview Take a new look at schematic transit mapping Make it easier for riders to interact with information Create user-friendly maps including bus system to encourage multi- modal travel according to riders Examine rider reactions to these maps Determine methodologies for producing maps Tourist/new users Commuters Frequency

Project Motivation Zhan Guos Mind the Map Schematic maps impact traveler decisions Class project Affect bus/system awareness

Objectives Identify riders who would benefit from multi- modal maps Examine rider desires for frequency and/or destination maps Examine potential effects on bus ridership Develop methodologies for creating rider- specific maps

LITERATURE REVIEW IntroductionLiterature ReviewFuture ResearchResults & ConclusionsMethodology

Lit Review Alasdair Cain Importance of effective map design Not knowing/understanding bus maps contributes to non-ridership User Insights & Perception Skewed distances Unclear maps User perception of space

Interviews/Case Studies Cities with unique transit maps Boston Chicago Interviewed Map designer Agency who dictated the design/elements/criteria

Boston (MBTA) Key Bus Route Rules: Run 7 days/week 15 min headway during peak hours Easily connects to rail system Reach underserviced neighborhoods Figure Source : MBTA

Chicago (CTA) Bus routes with consistent service Categorize attractions Where people want to go Places that can accommodate a lot of people Hotels with a capacity threshold Figure Source : CTA

METHODOLOGY IntroductionLiterature ReviewFuture ResearchMethodologyResults & Conclusions

Methodology On-board MARTA rail survey of transit users Rail-only users Bus and rail users Conducted April 30-May 4, 2012 Randomly selected participants in all stations Asked ridership, map-based, demographic questions 356 Completed surveys

About the Survey Participants

Income Ethnicity

About the Survey Participants Car Ownership License Ownership

MARTA owned parking lots No frequency criteria Aimed at commuters

Based on new attractions list Not all 30 minute headways are included, only those reaching destinations

Most frequent MARTA map Frequencies minutes

Existing rail map

RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS IntroductionLiterature ReviewFuture ResearchResults & ConclusionsMethodology

Results Frequency vs. Popular Destinations Most useful map Potential future bus ridership

Frequency vs. Popular Destinations Question: Is it more important for maps to show the bus routes that reach popular destinations or buses that come often? Results: Frequent Service: 56% Popular Destinations: 35% Unsure:10%

Most Useful Map

Bus Ridership Question: If one of these maps replaced the current MARTA overall map, would you ride the bus more? Results: Yes: 42 % No: 49% Unsure: 8%

Summary & Conclusions Riders found the maps useful Frequency is important to riders These maps have the potential for some bus ridership increases

FUTURE RESEARCH IntroductionLiterature ReviewFuture ResearchResults & ConclusionsMethodology

Future Research Further data analysis Examine stated preference vs. acted preference Conduct mail home survey to reach non-riders and bus-only riders in affected areas Create a guide for designing criteria-based maps

Questions? Margaret Carragher E.I.T Dr. Kari Watkins P.E.