Making Headways Smart Card Fare Payment and Bus Dwell Time in Los Angeles Daniel Shockley Fehr & Peers Julia Salinas Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Tysons Tysons Corner Circulator Study Board Transportation Committee June 12, 2012.
Advertisements

Los Angeles Bus Rapid Transit Tour Lessons Learned.
Cellular Mass Transit (CMT) CMT4Austin.org. SOLUTION: Cellular Mass Transit Circulator Routes would converge on each Transit Center.
Materials developed by K. Watkins, J. LaMondia and C. Brakewood Route Design Unit 4: Service Planning & Network Design.
Suburban Sub-centers and employment density in metropolitan Chicago Daniel P. McMillen (Tulane U) John F. McDonald (U of Illinois) Journal of Urban Eco,
Community Transit Solutions for the Suburbs APTA Annual Meeting September 30, 2013.
Lecture 5 Bus Rapid Transit, ridership estimation procedures and headway requirements Dr. Muhammad Adnan.
Regional Transportation Commission, Washoe County Lee Gibson, Executive Director Roger Hanson, Senior Planner.
Materials developed by K. Watkins, J. LaMondia and C. Brakewood TODs & Complete Streets Unit 6: Station Design & Access.
T-FLEX Workshop Roger Snoble, L.A. Metro Chief Executive Officer October 29, 2007 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
Swift BUS RAPID TRANSIT (BRT) ITS Washington November 12, 2008.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2009 The McGraw-Hill Companies, All Rights Reserved Chapter 11 Mass Transit.
SUBWAY SYSTEM IN NEW YORK CITY The Magical Subway.
Goal: 10,000 interactions in 2015 –Extensive civic engagement Goal: To develop a great regional transit system –Update every five years –All options considered.
1 AASHTO: SCOPT/MTAP Winter Meeting METRO Update: Light Rail Operations and the Status of Future Corridors Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Project Development.
GOING NOWHERE FAST? Roy Samaan 14 March 2011 UP 206 A Effects of Service Reduction on Transit Quality.
Beverly A. Scott, Ph.D. MBTA General Manager MassDOT Rail & Transit Administrator Richard A. Davey MassDOT Secretary and CEO Chairman of the MBTA Board.
Recent Evidence on Mass Transit Demand Ian Savage Northwestern University.
BART Briefing for Mayor’s Transportation 2030 Task Force April 30, 2013.
Southern California Regional Rail Authority Metrolink DOT T-3 Webinar April 26, 2012.
1 Presentation to TAC June 17, 2009 Overview of Rapid Bus Measures and Effectiveness And Case Studies.
Spider Maps: Summary of Best Practices and Guide to Design
June 2011  Route  Operations & Riders  Benefits  Construction  Operations & Maintenance  Potential System Manager  Next Steps & Conclusion Overview.
1 Research go bus Impact Study TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference Atlantic City, May 2015.
Bus Rapid Transit: Chicago’s New Route to Opportunity Josh Ellis, BRT Project Manager Metropolitan Planning Council.
THE MILESTONES OF MASS TRANSIT CS 410 Blue Group communicate 2Me.
Results of a Hedonic Regression Model That Estimates the Impact of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Stations on Surrounding Residential Property Values Along the.
Sketch Model to Forecast Heavy-Rail Ridership Len Usvyat 1, Linda Meckel 1, Mary DiCarlantonio 2, Clayton Lane 1 – PB Americas, Inc. 2 – Jeffrey Parker.
Introduction Nablus is the largest city in the West Bank after Jerusalem. 150,000 inhabitants live in Nablus. Nablus has the largest university in the.
Business Logistics 420 Public Transportation Lecture 20: Transit System Design.
Materials developed by K. Watkins, J. LaMondia and C. Brakewood Service Planning & Standards Unit 4: Service Planning & Network Design.
1 The Aggregate Rail Ridership Forecasting Model: Overview Dave Schmitt, AICP Southeast Florida Users Group November 14 th 2008.
TRB/APTA 2004 Bus Rapid Transit Conference When is BRT the Best Option? the Best Option? 1:30 – 2:40 p.m. Paul Larrousse Director, National Transit Institute.
1 Governance Council Meeting Fiscal Year 2004 LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY GATEWAY CITIES SERVICE SECTOR December 18, 2003.
Portland North Small Starts Alternatives Analysis Coordination Meeting June 16, 2009.
TRB 88th Annual Meeting, Washington DC January, 2009 Huan Li and Robert L. Bertini Transportation Research Board 88th Annual Meeting Washington, DC January.
West Phoenix / Central Glendale Transit Corridor Study Public Meetings May 2013.
Envision Central Texas Presentation Cellular Mass Transit (CMT) by Richard Shultz Concerned Citizen March 24, 2008.
Cal y Mayor y Asociados, S.C. Atizapan – El Rosario Light Rail Transit Demand Study October th International EMME/2 UGM.
1 Transit and Climate Change April 10, 2008 Deborah Lipman Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority.
Portland North Small Starts Alternatives Analysis Coordination Meeting June 15, 2009.
Using APC Data for NTD Reporting APC University, Houston, Texas 16 October, 2014 John D. Giorgis Director of Strategic Planning Federal Transit Administration.
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Overview of Metro’s Transportation Program Pam O’Connor Metro Chair July 25, 2007.
Metro’s Capital Improvement Needs Presented to the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board By Tom Harrington, Director of Long Range Planning.
1 Challenge the future Feed forward mechanisms in public transport Data driven optimisation dr. ir. N. van Oort Assistant professor public transport EMTA.
City of Alexandria, Virginia Crystal City Potomac Yard Transitway Montgomery County Rapid Transit Steering Committee April 30,
1 Mountain Metropolitan Transit Sustainability Committee March 20, 2009 Presented By: Sherre Ritenour & Tim McKinney.
Weighing the Scenarios: The Costs and Benefits of Future Transit Service Produced for MTDB by The Mission Group © 2000 by The Mission Group. 1 Dave Schumacher.
Downtown Shuttle (D-Link) Interlocal Agreement Transportation and Trinity River Project Committee October 26, 2015.
Materials developed by K. Watkins, J. LaMondia and C. Brakewood Frequency Determination Unit 5: Staff & Fleet Scheduling.
Express/Rapid Bus Opportunities for Priority Bus Transit in the Washington Region Sponsored by National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board Chun.
Transit Signal Priority: The Importance of AVL Data David T. Crout Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon (TriMet) Presented at Transportation.
December 4, 2008 Preserving the American Dream 1 1 Faster by Bus By Gabriel Roth.
T3 Webinar – April 26, 2012 Fare Integration A Regional Approach U.S. DOT Southern California Regional Rail Authority Orange County Transportation Authority.
Photos by Susie Fitzhugh Bell Times Analysis Task Force (Metro Service) (January 22, 2015date)
GRTC Bus Rapid Transit Project July 17, Agenda 1.BRT Concept 2.Project Goals 3.Project Benefits 4.Project Corridor 5.Proposed Multimodal Access.
Valley Metro Update Open House and Public Hearing March 9, 2007.
Transportation Fee FY2016 January 16, Services Provided by Transportation Stinger Buses - Three routes with 10 buses operating weekdays and two.
Metrô Rio & SuperVia March Location BRASIL Rio de Janeiro Rio Rio de Janeiro Metropolitan Region - Population: 11,6 million - Counties: %
Indianapolis Public Public Hearing – Proposed 2014 Budget Thursday, August 15, 2013 Transportation Corporation.
D Line Station Plan Overview
D Line Station Plan Overview
D Line Station Plan Overview
D Line Station Plan Overview
D Line and Station Plan overview
D Line Station Plan Overview
LRT, GRT, PRT Comparison Peter Muller, PE Ingmar Andreasson, Ph. D.
Mass Transit Usage According to IBISWorld, the public transportation industry increased 14.3%, from $63 billion during 2013 to $72 billion for 2017,
D Line Project Overview
Comparative Visualization
Presentation transcript:

Making Headways Smart Card Fare Payment and Bus Dwell Time in Los Angeles Daniel Shockley Fehr & Peers Julia Salinas Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority Brian D. Taylor UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies Transportation Research Board 2016 Annual Meeting Washington, D.C.

Agenda Overview Hypothesis Methodology – Data Sources – Route Selection – Exclusions Analysis – Variables – OLS Regression Findings & Interpretation Conclusions

Overview: Los Angeles Metro Metro Rail 350,000 average weekday boardings Six lines (four light rail and two heavy rail) 80 Stations (26 under construction) 87 miles of track Five extensions currently under construction

Overview: Los Angeles Metro Metro Bus Approx. one million average weekday boardings. Local Service: Frequent stops and infrequent headways. Rapid Service: Infrequent stops and frequent headways. Bus Rapid Transit: Two lines operating in exclusive right-of-way

Overview: Transit Access Pass (TAP) Smart Card Fare Payment System Stored cash value or pass. Accepted at 24 transit systems in Los Angeles County. Required for Metro Rail.

Dwell Time “the amount of time a transit vehicle spends at stops and stations serving passenger movements” Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual (TCQM)

Dwell Time Bus Transit Route Capacity Bus Loading Area Clearance Time Bus Time Variability Failure RateDwell Time Passenger Demand and Loading Bus Stop Spacing Fare Payment Procedures In-vehicle Circulation Bus StopsBus Facilities

Research Question & Hypothesis Question: All other factors held constant, what is the influence of the TAP card on transit bus dwell times? Hypothesis: TAP card usage can help to reduce bus transit dwell time by reducing the amount of time to board per person. Method: Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression analysis with Dwell Time as the dependent variable, while controlling for as many other determinants of dwell time as possible using the data at hand.

Why is this important? Time saved per stop… … lowers operating cost per route. … lowers headways per route. … reduces passenger waiting. … attracts more riders to faster service.

Methodology: Sources APC - Automatic Passenger Counter – Alighting/boarding – Load factor – Dwell time – New data points for each stop. UFS – Universal Farebox System – TAP/Cash fare payments – Bicycle, wheelchair tallies, etc. – New data points for each fare paid/tally recorded.

Methodology: Route Selection Downtown LA Metro Rapid 720 Infrequent stops, frequent headways. Avg. weekday ridership: 41,000 Avg. Saturday ridership: 29,000 Avg. Sunday ridership: 22,000 Serves many employment centers with connections to rail transit.

Methodology: Route Selection Metro Local 120 Frequent stops, infrequent headways. Avg. weekday ridership: 4,000 Avg. Saturday ridership: 2,000 Avg. Sunday ridership: 2,000 Serves mostly residential and major physical rehabilitation center. Connection to Metro Rail.

Methodology: Constructing the Data Constraints: Operator-dependent tallies may not be accurate. UFS and APC clocks may not be synchronized. UFS Record 1 TAP Fare payments UFS Record 2 Non-TAP Fare payments UFS Record 3 Bicycles, wheelchairs, etc. APC Record

Methodology: Exclusions Minimum Passenger Service Time (PST) <.5 second Dwell time is zero Stops at layovers, terminus, and time points. Abnormally long dwell time >= 180 seconds

Methodology: Summary of Data 342 operators 187 vehicles 540,407 farebox records 99,453 APC records (N)

Analysis: Descriptive Statistics

Analysis – Controlling for other factors Passenger Activity – Ons (no UFS) – Offs (Offs > Ons) – Dwell load – Bikes and wheelchairs loading and unloading – Abnormally long passenger boarding (>18s for one passenger) Service & Vehicle Characteristics – Peak hour service – Night-time service – Bus type (low/high floor/articulated/wide doors) – Service type (rapid/local)

Findings People paying with TAP Cards take less time to board. Articulated buses experience shorter dwells than non- articulated buses. Rapid routes had longer dwell time than local routes.

Passenger Congestion Filtering the sample to records with a load factor of 1 or higher. TAP fare payments take longer, however are still less than Non- TAP. Articulated busses reduce dwell time more than in prior model. Findings

Conclusion 1.People paying with TAP contribute fewer seconds to dwell time, which can equate to large benefits later. 2.On a per-stop level, other factors seemed more important. 3.Technology can be improved to assist future analyses.

Thank You! Contact: Daniel Shockley - Photo Credits Metro local bus 2 - Jonathan Riley Oran Viriyincy Metro Rail – Steve and Julie