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

Intr

oduc

tion

Litera

ture

Rev

iew

Futu

re R

esea

rch

Meth

odol

ogy

Resul

ts &

Con

clusio

ns

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 mapsTourist/new users

Commuters

Frequency

Project Motivation

Zhan Guo’s Mind the Map

Schematic maps impact traveler decisions

Class projectAffect 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

Intro

ducti

on

Litera

ture

Rev

iew

Futu

re R

esea

rch

Resul

ts &

Con

clusio

ns

Meth

odol

ogy

Lit Review

Alasdair CainImportance of effective map design

Not knowing/understanding bus maps contributes to non-ridership

User Insights & PerceptionSkewed distances

Unclear maps

User perception of space

Interviews/Case Studies

Cities with unique transit mapsBoston

Chicago

InterviewedMap 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 attractionsWhere people want to go

Places that can accommodate a lot of people

Hotels with a capacity threshold

Figure Source : CTA

METHODOLOGY

Intro

ducti

on

Litera

ture

Rev

iew

Futu

re R

esea

rch

Met

hodo

logy

Resul

ts &

Con

clusio

ns

Methodology

On-board MARTA rail survey of transit usersRail-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

5+ times times per week

Several times per week

About once per week 2-3 times per month 1 time or less per month

Never, just today0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

57%

21%

3%

7% 7%4%

38%

17%

5% 6% 6%

28%

Transit Ridership

Rail RidershipBus Ridership

About the Survey Participants

Income

Ethnicity

About the Survey Participants

Car Ownership

License Ownership

No cars; 20%

1 car; 29%2 cars;

20%

3 cars; 9%

4 cars or more; 3%

Did not answer;

16%

Yes; 66%

No; 13%

Did not an-

swer; 21%

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 12-20 minutes

Existing rail map

RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS

Intro

ducti

on

Litera

ture

Rev

iew

Futu

re R

esea

rch

Resul

ts &

Con

clusio

ns

Meth

odol

ogy

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%

Popular Destinations; 35%

Frequent Service; 56%

Unsure/No answer; 10%

Most Useful Map

A: Park and Ride B: Popular Destinations C: 20 Minute Frequency Map

Map D: Existing Map0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

19%

26%

35%

19%

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%

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

Intro

ducti

on

Litera

ture

Rev

iew

Futur

e Res

earc

h

Resul

ts &

Con

clusio

ns

Meth

odol

ogy

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.

mcarragher3@gatech.com

508-415-9122

Dr. Kari Watkins P.E.

kari.watkins@ce.gatech.edu