1. Cheryl Thole, Jennifer Flynn CUTR/NBRTI, Senior Research Associates Transit in GIS Conference September 14, 2011 St. Petersburg, Florida

2.  Greater station spacing for BRT 1/8 a mile versus ¼ to 2 miles  Replacement or complementary of local service  Decision on station locations/spacing  EmX case study

3.  Boston Silver Line, Washington St.  Las Vegas MAX  Oakland San Pablo Rapid  Cleveland HealthLine  Eugene  EmX

4.  Replaced Route 49  12 stops per direction Previously 20  High ridership increase along corridor  Riders 16 percent were new to transit for that trip Over 2/3rds rated as excellent or above average for reliability  Below average dropped from 27 to 8 percent

5.  Ridership increase from 44,431 to 132,718 within first six months  Station locations Ridership Physical characteristics Landscape Location Distance

6.  Complements Route 113 Previously served 7,300 passengers/day Boardings where stops adjacent to MAX decreased yet didn’t at other stops Operates 24/7  MAX from 5AM to 7PM  Passenger satisfaction on MAX 40 percent travel time improved by over 15 min

7.  Replaced 72L (limited) because of poor schedule adherence, complicated fare collection system  Stop spacing was ~800 feet With Rapid now ~2/3 mile  Other routes operate along corridor (72M)  End to end travel time reduced by 12 minutes

8.  Passenger satisfaction of Rapid Rating of 4.3 out of 5 for travel time Rated higher than conventional bus service agency wide Previously drove a car ~19 percent

9.  Aimed to improve service Frequency and travel time Reduce congestion Customer amenities  24 hour service to all 58 stops  Station location Boardings for Route 6 Trip generators Easy/convenient transfers Physical layouts

10.  Replaced Route 6  Ridership increase of over 45% first year, another 9.8% first eight months of year 2  Travel time decreased end to end by 10 minutes  Transit zone

11.  Replaced Route 11 Stop reduction from 18 to 10  To operate six minutes faster, 11 to 12 minutes within 20 years  Increased ridership 2,667 weekday ridership Route 11 vs. ~5,000 within first year  Operating hours increased

12.  On board surveys Compared Route 11 to EmX Small increase (2.6%) among riders with access to a vehicle EmX consistently ranked higher in customer satisfaction

13.  How did you get to this stop/station where you boarded the bus for this trip? Majority for both Route 11 and EmX walked Higher percentage of Route 11 walked ~80% versus ~47% More EmX riders transferred from another route

14.  How will you reach your final destination?  Majority of Route 11 walked (~75%), EmX (~55%)  More EmX riders transferred than Route 11

15.  How long will it take you to reach your destination?  Inverse relationship occurred, may be due to need for riders to transfer  Eventually a continual trip will be available

16.  Spatial analysis completed Boardings and alightings for both Route 11 and EmX  Blue circles represent boarding/alighting of EmX  Smaller circles show frequencies for Route 11

18.  Majority of Route 11 origins and destinations are in close proximity to current EmX stations  The majority of origins and destinations occurred on the EmX/Franklin corridor segment  Very few responses from Route 11 reported origins/destinations more then ¾ mile distance from Franklin corridor

19.  All BRT routes have experienced increases in ridership  Service frequencies have increased  No negatives for either replacement or complementary situations, depends on community needs Las Vegas (complementary)  Consistently report decrease in OVERALL travel time  Customer satisfaction surveys report high ratings for BRT

20. Thank you for your attention Cheryl Thole Senior Research Associate thole@cutr.usf.edu Tel: +1-813-974-9920 National Bus Rapid Transit Institute www.nbrti.org Center for Urban Transportation Research www.cutr.usf.edu University of South Florida Tampa, Florida, USA