BaltimoreLink Implementation February 2018 Status …...- July Through December - 2016 vs. 2017 2016...

BaltimoreLink Implementation Status ReportReport to the Maryland State Legislature

Joint Chairmen’s Report J00H01

February 2018

BaltimoreLink PerformanceReport to the Maryland State Legislature

Executive Summary ES-1

Executive Summary

BaltimoreLink, implemented on June 18, 2017, is the complete overhaul and rebranding of the core transit system operating within Baltimore City and the greater Baltimore region. The purpose of this document is to provide the Maryland State Legislature with a summary of BaltimoreLink performance in its first full six months of operation (July 2017 to December 2017) based on three key metrics: Ridership, On-Time Performance, and Customer Satisfaction. An analysis of safety has also been provided. The analysis begins with July 2017 when a full month of data was available.

The performance analysis consists of an evaluation of performance at an MDOT MTA system-wide level as well as an evaluation of performance at the route and route category level (CityLink, LocalLink, Express BusLink). Further, the system-wide analysis also includes a comparison to data for the same six-month evaluation period in 2016.


ES-2 Executive Summary

Ridership Performance Snapshot

Average Daily Ridership – 2016 vs. 2017Weekday, Saturday, and Sunday ridership declined in 2017 when compared to 2016 for the six months evaluated. The weekday ridership decline between 2016 and 2017 was approximately 10%, the Saturday ridership decline was approximately 9%, and the Sunday ridership decline was approximately 5%. Consistent with other system redesigns throughout the country, declines were expected due to the transition to the new system, but also reflect national trends such as less expensive gas and the greater use of car-share services. Ridership is down 5% nationally during the same time period analyzed in this report. Similar systems throughout the country have also seen declines in ridership including Washington, D.C. (-9%), Cleveland (-11%), Philadelphia (-12%), and Miami (-13%). Out of the top 20 bus systems in the country, 19 out of 20 experienced ridership declines.

Average Daily Ridership by Month: 2016 vs. 2017

Monthly ridership declines in 2017 compared to 2016 reflect the overall declines in ridership during the 6-month evaluation period. However, there is a growing convergence in monthly ridership between 2016 and 2017 in the later months of the year, especially for weekend ridership.

Other Ridership Findings

CityLink – Daily Average Ridership by RouteCityLink routes were designed to be the backbone of the BaltimoreLink system, with high service frequencies throughout the day, extensive hours of service, and direct routing that connects major activity centers throughout the Baltimore region. Average daily weekday CityLink ridership ranges from 6,100 to 11,600. The highest ridership CityLink routes include the CityLink Red (11,600 riders), running between Towson and downtown Baltimore, the CityLink Gold (9,600 riders), which runs between Walbrook Junction and Canton via North Avenue and Wolfe and Washington Streets, and the CityLink Orange (9,500 riders), which runs between downtown Baltimore and Essex via Eastern Avenue.

LocalLink – Daily Average Ridership by RouteLocalLink routes provide service to a wide range of different transit markets and the service design of LocalLink routes reflect the markets they serve. A key trend identified in the LocalLink ridership analysis was that the highest ridership LocalLink routes (LocalLink routes 22 (8,300 riders), 80 (7,500 riders), and 54 (7,200 riders)) actually have average daily ridership that is comparable to, or exceeds, ridership on many CityLink routes, highlighting their importance within the BaltimoreLink system. Other LocalLink routes have ridership under 1,000 riders per day, highlighting the wide differences between individual LocalLink routes.

Average Daily Ridership – July Through December: Comparison of 2016 to 2017

Average Daily RidershipMonths of July Through December

2016 vs. 2017

Rid

ersh

ip

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

SundaySaturdayWeekday

2016 2017

209,916

122,321

79,936

232,776

134,411

84,372

Source: MDOT MTA Onboard Automatic Passenger Counting System

Ridership

The forecasted December 2017 average weekday ridership contained in the January 24, 2018 “Overview and Status Update” presented to the Legislature by MDOT MTA Administrator Kevin Quinn is higher than the actual presented above. Forecasted data was utilized in the presentation because actual data was not yet available as the presentation was being developed. The forecasted number used in the presentation was based on detailed analysis of ridership numbers on individual routes as well as overall ridership trends from previous months.

Average Daily Weekday Ridership by Month - July Through December - 2016 vs. 2017

2016 2017

Average Daily Weekday RidershipJuly Through December 2016 vs. 2017

Rid

ers

hip

190,000

200,000

210,000

220,000

230,000

240,000

250,000

260,000

DECNOVOCTSEPAUGJUL

196,759194,114

215,406

203,343

222,547

228,743

241,282

226,106 225,322228,891

252,657

220,983

Average Daily Weekend Ridership by Month - July Through December - 2016 vs. 2017

Sour

ce: M

DO

T M

TA O

nboa

rd A

utom

atic

Pa

ssen

ger

Cou

ntin

g S

yste

m

Sour

ce: M

DO

T M

TA O

nboa

rd A

utom

atic

Pass

eng

er C

ount

ing

Sys

tem

Average Daily Weekend RidershipJuly Through December 2016 vs. 2017

Rid

ers

hip

170,000

180,000

190,000

200,000

210,000

220,000

230,000

240,000

250,000

DECNOVOCTSEPAUGJUL

2016 2017

206,879211,923

191,307

178,755

187,095

210,370

233,910

210,976

238,439

219,690

231,906

204,985



On-Time Performance Snapshot

Average System-Wide On-Time Performance – Six-Month Evaluation PeriodOn-time performance in 2017 exceeds on-time performance in 2016, for the six month evaluation period, showing the benefits of multiple elements of the overall BaltimoreLink redesign. Redesign elements helping the improvement in on-time performance include more proactive service management, changes to route structures to improve reliability, implementation of dedicated transit lanes, and implementation of transit signal priority. On-time performance improved 7 percentage points when comparing the 2016 and 2017 evaluation periods.

CityLink Service Reliability

High frequency CityLink routes are scheduled differently than LocalLink and Express BusLink routes. CityLink reliability performance monitoring is focused on how well the scheduled intervals between CityLink buses are maintained. The data shows that the average number of CityLink trips arriving at the scheduled interval over the evaluation period is 76%.

Other On-Time Performance Findings

On-Time Performance On LocalLink RoutesOn time performance on LocalLink routes ranges from a low of approximately 40% to a high of approximately 75%. The average across all LocalLink routes in 2017 was 66%. This compares to an average on-time performance on local routes in the same months of 2016 of 60%, an improvement on LocalLink routes of 6 percentage points.

Changes in On-Time Performance Due to Route Restructurings and Capital Improvements Such as Dedicated Transit LanesComparison of the on-time performance of pre-BaltimoreLink routes to new redesigned BaltimoreLink routes shows an improvement in on-time performance due to route restructuring, capital improvements, and reducing the number of bus stops on a route. Redesign examples include splitting long routes, restructuring routes serving large regional job centers, and providing dedicated transit lanes and transit signal priority

System-wide Bus On-Time Performance Comparison - July through December: 2016 vs. 2017

System-wide On-Time Comparison: July 2016 throughDecember 2016 (Pre-Baltimore Link) to July 2017 through

December 2017 (BaltimoreLink)

Perc

ent O

n Ti

me

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

20172016

Early On-Time Late

18.4%

59.5%

22.1%

66.4%

20.7%

12.9%


CityLink Headway Reliability – Percent of Trips Arriving at Scheduled Intervals Between Buses

CityLink Routes Headway ReliabilityJuly 2017 through December 2017

Percentage of Trips Arriving at Scheduled HeadwayTrend

Tues

. 12/12

/17

Wed

. 12/6/17

Mon

. 12/18

/17

Tues

. 1/9/18

Thur

s. 1/18

/18

Wed

. 1/24/18

Thur

s. 2/1/18

Wed

. 2/7/18

Wed

. 11/29

/17

Tues

. 11/21

/17

Thur

s. 11

/16/17

Mon

. 11/6/17

Mon

. 10/30

/17

Tues

. 10/24

/17

Wed

. 10/18

/17

Thur

s. 10

/12/17

Mon

. 10/2/17

Tues

. 9/26/17

Thur

s. 9/21

/17

Thur

s. 9/14

/17

Wed

. 9/6/17

Mon

. 8/28/17

Tues

. 8/22/17

Wed

. 8/16/17

Wee

k En

ding

7/16/17

Wee

k En

ding

7/9/17

Wee

k En

ding

7/2/17

60%

65%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

Source: Field Data Collection

On-Time Performance

System-wide on-time performance improved by approximately 7 percentage points in the first six months of BaltimoreLink operations compared to the same six months in 2016.



Other Customer Satisfaction Findings

Late, Early, No-Show Complaint EvaluationComplaints related to early buses, late buses, and no-shows over the six month evaluation period were lower in 2017 than in 2016 in each complaint category. Complaints related to early buses fell by 44%, complaints related to late buses fell by 3%, and complaints related to no-show buses fell by 32%.

Customer Satisfaction Snapshot

Total Bus-Related Complaints - 2016 vs. 20172017 passenger complaints covering all bus-related complaint types declined over the first six months of BaltimoreLink operations and also fell below 2016 in four of the six months evaluated. 2017 total bus-related complaints fell 49% between a high in September to the low in December. This trend shows the BaltimoreLink redesign changes resulted in greater passenger satisfaction.

2016 to 2017 Comparison - Complaints Related to Early and Late Bus Arrivals and Bus No-Shows

Operating-Related ComplaintsJuly Through December

2016 vs. 2017

Op

era

ting

-Rel

ate

d C

omp

lain

ts

0

500

1000

1,500

2,000

2,500

LateEarlyNo Show

2016 2017

168

784

1,368

303

812

2,026

Source: MDOT MTA Customer Complaint Database

2016 to 2017 Comparison - All Bus-Related Complaints Between July and December

Total Bus-Related Complaints BetweenJuly and December - 2016 vs. 2017

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

DECNOVOCTSEPAUGJUL

2016 2017

960

801

1,077

869983

1,392

739817

742

573639

552Com

pla

ints


Customer Satisfaction

Customer complaints were lower in 2017 in four of the six months evaluated. Compaints also consistently declined between September and December 2017, falling by 49% over the four month period.



Safety Performance Snapshot

Total Bus Accidents Comparison: 2016 vs. 2017The number of total bus accidents in 2017 was lower than 2016 in each of the six months evaluated. The biggest difference between the two years occurred in November, where 2017 accidents were lower than 2016 by 30%. In addition, total accidents over the six month period in 2017 fell by 20% when compared to total accidents in the same period in 2016.

Bus Accident Comparison: 2016 vs. 2017 - Six Month Evaluation Period

2016 2017

Bus Accident Comparison:July 2016 through December 2016 vs.

July 2017 through December 2017

Bus

Acc

iden

ts

0

50

100

150

200

250

DECNOVOCTSEPAUGJULJUN

210

157 157

125

187

168

178

217

180

165

191

145

216

151

Source: MDOT MTA Accident Database

Bus Accident and Mileage Run by Division: 2017

2017 bus accidents have declined during the six month evaluation period at each of the four MDOT MTA bus divisions. This positive trend is bolstered even further by the fact that miles run from three of the four divisions have increased after BaltimoreLink implementation (while miles run at Eastern Division fell 5.1%, accidents there fell by more than 30%).

Bus Accidents and Mileage Comparison By Division: 2017

Bus Accident and Mileage by Division Comparison:July 2017 through December 2017

Mileage Accidents

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

NorthwestKirkEasternBush

7.9%

-14.2%

-5.1%

-31.4%

4.1%

-20.4%

0.7%

-14.0%

Source: MDOT MTA Accident Database

Other Safety Findings

System-Wide Mileage and Accidents ComparisonThe data in the table below shows system-wide accidents during the six month evaluation period fell by approximately 20% between 2016 and 2017, even while mileage run increased by 2.3%.

2016 2017 Change

Mileage 13,832,439 14,153,517 2.3 %

Accidents 1,358 1,089 -19.8%Total accidents over the 2017 six month evaluation period fell by 20% compared to total accidents in the same period in 2016.

Safety


Table of Contents i

Table of Contents

Introduction .....................................................................1

A. Ridership .....................................................................3

Average Daily Ridership By Day Of Week July Through December: 2016 vs. 2017 ..........................................................4

Average Daily Weekday Ridership By Month July Through December: 2016 vs. 2017 ..........................................................5

CityLink Routes Average Daily Weekday Ridership: July 2017 Through December 2017 .........6

LocalLink Routes Average Daily Weekday Ridership: July 2017 Through December 2017 .........7

Express BusLink Routes Average Daily Weekday Ridership: July 2017 Through December 2017 .........8

Top 10 Routes Average Weekday Daily Ridership: July 2017 Through December 2017 .........9

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by Route Category July Through December 2017 ........................................................................10

B. On-Time Performance and Headway Reliability .....11

System-wide Bus On-Time Performance Comparison July Through December: 2016 vs. 2017 ........................................................12

CityLink Route Headway Reliability July 2017 Through December 2017 ...............................................................13

LocalLink On-Time Performance Comparison July 2017 through December 2017 ...............................................................14

On-Time Performance Comparison Pre-BaltimoreLink 35 to BaltimoreLink LocalLink Routes 56 and 76 ............15

On-Time Performance Comparison Pre-BaltimoreLink Service and BaltimoreLink Service to Regional Job Centers .....................................................................................16

On-Time Performance Comparison Pre-BaltimoreLink Service to BaltimoreLink LocalLink Service ......................17

C. Customer Satisfaction ..............................................19

Total Bus-Related Complaints July Through December: Comparison of 2016 to 2017 .................................20

Operating-Related Complaints Comparison Early and Late Bus Arrivals, and Bus No-Shows - 2016 vs. 2017 ....................21

D. BaltimoreLink Capital Improvement Status ............23

Appendices ....................................................................27


ii Table of Contents

Table of Contents Figures

A. Ridership

Figure 1: Average Daily Ridership – July Through December: Comparison of 2016 to 2017 ........................ 4

Figure 2: Average Daily Weekday Ridership by Month – July Through December - 2016 vs. 2017 .............................................. 5

Figure 3: Average Daily Weekend Ridership by Month – July Through December - 2016 vs. 2017 .............................................. 5

Figure 4: Average Weekday Daily Ridership by CityLink Route – July through December 2017 ............................................................... 6

Figure 5: Average Weekday Daily Ridership by LocalLink Route – July 2017 through December 2017 ...................................................... 7

Figure 6: Express BusLink Daily Average Ridership by Route – July 2017 through December 2017 ...................................................... 8

Figure 7: Top 10 BaltimoreLink Ridership Routes – July 2017 through December 2017 ...................................................... 9

Figure 8: Average Daily Weekday Ridership by Route Category ........................... 10

B. On-Time Performance and Headway Reliability

Figure 9: System-wide Bus On-Time Performance Comparison – July through December: 2016 vs. 2017 .............................................. 12

Figure 10: CityLink Headway Reliability – Percent of Trips Arriving at Scheduled Intervals Between Buses ....... 13

Figure 11: LocalLink On-Time Performance by Route – July 2017 through December 2017 .................................................... 14

Figure 12: Express BusLink On-Time Performance by Route – July 2017 through December 2017 .................................................... 14

Figure 13: On-Time Performance Comparison – Pre-BaltimoreLink 35 to BaltimoreLink LocalLink Routes 56 and 76 .... 15

Figure 14: On-Time Performance Comparison – Pre-BaltimoreLink 7 to BaltimoreLink LocalLink Route 65 .................. 16

Figure 15: On-Time Performance Comparison – Pre-BaltimoreLink 17 to BaltimoreLink LocalLink Route 75 ................ 16



C. Customer Satisfaction

Figure 18: 2016 to 2017 Comparison – All Bus-Related Complaints Between July and December ................. 20

Figure 19: 2016 to 2017 Comparison – Complaints Related to Early and Late Bus Arrivals and Bus No-Shows .............................................. 21


Introduction 1

BaltimoreLink, implemented on June 18, 2017, is the complete overhaul and rebranding of the core transit system operating within Baltimore City and the greater Baltimore region. The purpose of this document is to provide the Maryland State Legislature with a summary of BaltimoreLink performance relative to three key metrics: Ridership, On-Time Performance and Customer Satisfaction.

The analysis and evaluation of each metric is based on the first full six months of BaltimoreLink operations (July 2017 to December 2017). The analysis begins with July rather than June because July was the first month of BaltimoreLink operations where a full month of data was available. In addition, there was concern that June data would be skewed by the fact that a free fare was in effect for the first two weeks of BaltimoreLink operations (the free fare was instituted as an incentive for existing riders as well as potential riders to become familiar with the redesigned system).

The analysis of each metric begins with a system-wide comparison of July through December data for 2017 versus data in the same months in 2016. This allows for a quick assessment of how BaltimoreLink ridership and operations compare to pre-BaltimoreLink ridership and operations. This high-level snapshot is followed by more detailed data for individual routes and route categories, summarized for the six months of operations. This more detailed analysis includes an analysis of 2017 data only as well as comparisons between 2016 and 2017.

Finally, even more detailed data breakdowns are contained in report appendices, with the summary data provided in the body of the report broken out by each month of BaltimoreLink operations.

It is important to note that the evaluation completed for this report is only a small part of the BaltimoreLink evaluation and monitoring process that has been undertaken by multiple MDOT MTA departments.

This monitoring work has focused on:

å On-time performance for LocalLink and Express BusLink routes

å Assessing whether the scheduled interval between high-frequency CityLink buses was being maintained (e.g. buses that are scheduled to arrive at a stop every 10 minutes are, in fact, arriving every 10 minutes)

å Ongoing interviews with passengers and drivers to assess potential operational issues

å Reviewing the impacts of Transit Signal Priority and other methods for providing transit exclusivity on travel times and reliability

å Tracking of passenger loads and potential overcrowding

Short-term modifications have been made where feasible and larger scale modifications were also made in the September 2017 and February 2018 schedule changes to reflect monitoring results.

The first metric requested for evaluation by the Legislature, Ridership, is outlined in Section A. On-time Performance and Passenger Satisfaction evaluations are presented in Sections B and C respectively. A summary of capital improvements to support BaltimoreLink is provided in Section D.

Introduction


Ridership 3

The ridership evaluation contained in this section focuses on two levels of data detail. The first evaluation provides a “snapshot” of ridership performance by comparing average daily ridership (for weekday, Saturday, and Sunday) for the first full six months of BaltimoreLink operations (July 2017 to December 2017) to the same months in 2016. This high-level snapshot allows for a quick assessment of how BaltimoreLink ridership compares to pre-BaltimoreLink ridership.

This high-level snapshot is followed by more detailed data for individual routes and route categories, summarized for the six months of BaltimoreLink operations. Some of the analysis in this more detailed evaluation involves comparisons between 2016 and 2017 while others rely just on a review of 2017 data. Also available in Appendix 1 is weekday ridership data at an even more detailed level, showing ridership data broken out by month. Comparable data for weekends is provided in Appendix 3.

A. Ridership


4 Ridership

The data in Figure 1 provides a high-level analysis of ridership performance before and after BaltimoreLink

implementation. The figure presents average daily ridership over the six month evaluation period (July

to December) for the years 2016 (pre-BaltimoreLink implementation) and 2017 (the first full six months of

BaltimoreLink operations). The data in the Figure shows that daily average weekday ridership is lower in 2017 than

in 2016, with the same holding true for Saturday and Sunday service. The data reflects expected declines in the first six

months of operations as riders became used to the redesigned system as well as declines in transit ridership overall because

of less expensive gas and the increased use of alternative transportation modes such as car share services. These declines in

transit ridership constitute a national trend.

Weekday, Saturday, and Sunday ridership declined in 2017 when compared to 2016 for the six months evaluated. Some declines

were expected due to the transition to the new system but the declines also reflect national transit trends.

Average Daily Ridership By Day Of Week July Through December: 2016 vs. 2017

Figure 1: Average Daily Ridership – July Through December: Comparison of 2016 to 2017

Average Daily RidershipMonths of July Through December

2016 vs. 2017

Rid

ersh

ip

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

SundaySaturdayWeekday

2016 2017

209,916

122,321

79,936

232,776

134,411

84,372



Ridership 5

The evaluations contained in the following pages provide a more detailed analysis of ridership trends both for 2017 alone as well as in comparison to 2016. The data in Figure 2 provides more detail on weekday average ridership for each of the months evaluated, for both 2016 and 2017. The data in Figure 2 underscores the lower ridership in 2017 compared to 2016, though it is important to note the trend of ridership between the two years more closely converging at the end of the analysis period. For example, the difference in ridership between the two years in September was approximately 23,000, but this declined to 19,000 in December. We believe this reflects riders becoming more comfortable with the system as they use it and learn how to gain the most benefit from it.

Figure 3 is a companion to Figure 2 and shows average daily weekend ridership (Saturday and Sunday combined) for the months July through December, for the years 2016 and 2017. As with weekday ridership, the data underscores the lower ridership overall in 2017, but also highlights the trend of convergence in ridership at the end of the analysis period, again reflecting, we believe, increased rider comfort with the redesigned system.

Average Daily Weekday Ridership By Month July Through December: 2016 vs. 2017

Figure 2: Average Daily Weekday Ridership by Month - July Through December - 2016 vs. 2017



2016 2017

Average Daily Weekday RidershipJuly Through December 2016 vs. 2017

Rid

ersh

ip

190,000

200,000

210,000

220,000

230,000

240,000

250,000

260,000

DECNOVOCTSEPAUGJUL

196,759194,114

215,406

203,343

222,547

228,743

241,282

226,106 225,322228,891

252,657

220,983

Figure 3: Average Daily Weekend Ridership by Month - July Through December - 2016 vs. 2017

Average Daily Weekend RidershipJuly Through December 2016 vs. 2017

Rid

ersh

ip

170,000

180,000

190,000

200,000

210,000

220,000

230,000

240,000

250,000

DECNOVOCTSEPAUGJUL

2016 2017

206,879211,923

191,307

178,755

187,095

210,370

233,910

210,976

238,439

219,690

231,906

204,985

While 2016 ridership is higher than 2017, there is a convergence in monthly ridership between 2016 and 2017 in the later months of the year, especially for weekend ridership.


6 Ridership

The next set of data provides more detail on how daily ridership is distributed among the routes in the

BaltimoreLink system. The data in Figure 4 shows average daily weekday ridership for each CityLink route

for the months July 2017 to December 2017, the first full six months of BaltimoreLink operations.

CityLink routes were designed to be the backbone of the system, with high service frequencies throughout the day,

extensive hours of service, and direct routing that connects major activity centers throughout the Baltimore region.

The data shows the highest ridership line during the period evaluated is CityLink Red, which runs between the University

of Maryland Transit Center in downtown Baltimore and Towson via Greenmount Avenue and York Road and generally mirrors

the 8 route from the pre-BaltimoreLink system. The second highest ridership CityLink route over the six months evaluated is CityLink

Gold, which runs between Walbrook Junction and Canton via North Avenue and the Wolfe/Washington one-way pair. It generally mirrors

the pre-BaltimoreLink 13 route. The third highest ridership CityLink route is CityLink Orange which generally mirrors the eastern portion of the pre-

BaltimoreLink 23 route.

More detail on weekday ridership on each CityLink route for each of the six months evaluated is provided in Appendix 1. Comparable data for weekends

is provided in Appendix 3.

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by CityLink RouteJuly Through December 2017

CityLink Routes

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

PinkLime YellowSilver Purple BrownNavyGreen Blue OrangeGold Red

9,598 9,5138,724

8,1427,648

7,1736,464 6,462 6,453 6,149 6,146

11,637

Rid

ersh

ip

Figure 4: Average Weekday Daily Ridership by CityLink Route - July through December 2017


CityLink Routes Average Daily Weekday Ridership: July 2017 Through December 2017

The highest ridership CityLink route during the evaluation period is the CityLink Red, which runs between Towson and downtown Baltimore and

mirrors the pre-BaltimoreLink 8 route.


Ridership 7

The data in Figure 5 is a companion to the data in Figure 4 and shows average daily weekday ridership

on LocalLink routes over the time period July 2017 through December 2017. LocalLink routes provide

service to a wide range of different transit markets and therefore differ in their service frequencies, route

directness, and hours of service. The highest ridership LocalLink routes have service characteristics comparable

to CityLink routes while other LocalLink routes have lower frequencies and shorter hours of service. In each instance, the

service design reflects the markets being served.

One key trend in the data is that the three highest ridership LocalLink routes (LocalLink routes 22, 80, and 54) actually have

average daily ridership that is comparable to, or exceeds, ridership on many of the CityLink routes, highlighting their importance within

the BaltimoreLink system. The highest ridership LocalLink route, the 22 , is a crosstown route that runs between the Mondawmin Metro

Station and the Johns Hopkins Bayview campus. This high ridership highlights the importance of providing transit connections between job

and activity centers outside of downtown Baltimore, a key focus of the BaltimoreLink redesign. The second highest ridership LocalLink route is the

80, which runs between the Rogers Avenue Metro Station and downtown through northwest Baltimore. The 54, which is the third highest ridership

LocalLink route, runs between the Loch Raven area and downtown Baltimore, predominantly via Harford Road.

More detail on weekday ridership on each LocalLink route for each of the months evaluated is provided in Appendix 1. Comparable data for weekends is provided

in Appendix 3.

LocalLink Routes Average Daily Weekday Ridership: July 2017 Through December 2017

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by LocalLink RouteJuly Through December 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

38925257959133673475599373712169945165828979877781706278367637832853315629302685548022

LocalLink Routes

Rid

ersh

ip

Figure 5: Average Weekday Daily Ridership by LocalLink Route – July 2017 through December 2017


The highest ridership LocalLink route during the evaluation period is the LocalLink 22, which is a crosstown route between Mondawmin and the Johns

Hopkins Bayview Campus.


8 Ridership

The data in Figure 6 shows ridership by route for the final bus route category in the BaltimoreLink system,

Express BusLink. These routes are commuter services that are run by the MDOT MTA in the Baltimore area (in

contrast to commuter services such as routes between Southern Maryland and Washington DC that are run by

contract operators).

The data shows the highest ridership Express BusLink route over the six months evaluated is the 120 route, which runs

between White Marsh and downtown Baltimore via Interstate 95. The second highest ridership route over the six months

evaluated is the 154, which runs between the Carney Park and Ride and downtown Baltimore, predominantly via Harford Road

(the Express BusLink 154 follows the same routing as the LocalLink 54 route, which is among the highest ridership LocalLink routes). The

third highest ridership Express BusLink route is the 103, which runs between the Cromwell Bridge Park and Ride in Towson and downtown

Baltimore, predominantly via Loch Raven Boulevard.

More detail on weekday ridership on each Express BusLink route for each of the months evaluated is provided in Appendix 1.

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by Express BusLink RouteJuly Through December 2017

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

104164107105106102150160115103154120

434 431

271 267228 212 192

152

30 2024

529

Rid

ersh

ip

Express BusLink Routes

Figure 6: Express BusLink Daily Average Ridership by Route – July 2017 through December 2017


Express BusLink Routes Average Daily Weekday Ridership: July 2017 Through December 2017


Ridership 9

The data in Figure 7 shows the top 10 highest ridership routes for the July 2017 to December 2017

evaluation period. The data in Figure 7 shows that seven of the top 10 routes in the evaluation period are

CityLink routes, while the top three highest ridership LocalLink routes round out the top 10. This data highlights

that while the CityLink routes are designed to be the backbone of the system, LocalLink routes also play an

important role in supporting ridership demand.

More detail on the top 10 ridership routes for each of the months evaluated is provided in Appendix 1. Comparable data

for weekends is provided in Appendix 3.

Average Top 10 Highest Weekday Ridership RoutesJuly through December 2017

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

Brown5480NavyGreen 22Blue OrangeGold Red

9,598 9,5138,724 8,297 8,142

7,648 7,493 7,1737,219

11,637

BaltimoreLink Routes

Ried

ersh

ip

Figure 7: Top 10 BaltimoreLink Ridership Routes – July 2017 through December 2017


Top 10 Routes Average Weekday Daily Ridership: July 2017 Through December 2017

Seven of the 10 highest weekday ridership routes are CityLink routes, but three are LocalLink routes, highlighting

LocalLink routes’ importance in meeting passenger demand.


10 Ridership

The final ridership metric evaluated is the breakdown in ridership among the three BaltimoreLink bus categories over the six-month evaluation period. The data in Figure 8 shows that the highest percentage of average daily weekday ridership occurs on the LocalLink routes at 53%, followed by the CityLink routes at 45%. Express BusLink routes carry about 1% of daily weekday riders. The data shows that while CityLink routes carry a smaller portion of overall BaltimoreLink ridership, the 45% of the daily ridership they do carry occurs on only 12 routes, while there are 42 LocalLink routes. This highlights the fact that while the LocalLink routes carry a larger percentage of ridership,

the CityLink routes do play an substantial role in carrying people relative to the number of CityLink routes. This reflects the original focus of the BaltimoreLink redesign, which was to concentrate resources on those routes serving the largest rider markets and carrying the highest ridership by providing high service frequencies throughout the day, direct routing, and longer hours of service. More detail on the breakdown of weekday ridership between route categories is provided in Appendix 1. Comparable data for weekends is provided in Appendix 3.

Average Daily Weekday Ridershipby Route Category

July through December 2017

CityLink LocalLink Express BusLink

46% 53%

1%

Figure 8: Average Daily Weekday Ridership by Route Category


Average Weekday Daily Ridership by Route Category July Through December 2017


On Time Performance 11

On-time performance and headway reliability is the second performance metric requested by the Maryland State Legislature for evaluation. The on-time performance and reliability evaluation contained in this section focuses on two levels of data detail. The first evaluation provides a “snapshot” of on-time performance by comparing on-time performance for the first full six month of BaltimoreLink operations (July 2017 to December 2017) to the same six months in 2016. This high-level “snapshot” allows for a quick understanding of how BaltimoreLink on-time performance compares to pre-BaltimoreLink on-time performance.

This high-level snapshot is followed by more detailed data for individual routes and route categories, summarized for the six months of BaltimoreLink operations. Also available in Appendix 2 is on-time performance data at an even more detailed level, showing on-time data broken out by month for different types of routes.

It should be noted that the CityLink routes are scheduled differently than LocalLink and Express BusLink services and therefore their reliability is also measured differently. More detail is provided in the discussion of Figure 10.

B. On-Time Performance and Headway Reliability


12 On Time Performance

Outlined first in Figure 9 is a comparison of average system-wide on-time performance over the first

six months of BaltimoreLink operations (July 2017 to December 2017) to on-time performance in the

same six months in 2016. The data shows that on-time performance in 2017 has improved compared to 2016.

This improvement reflects a range of factors, including:

Service reliability and buses arriving when they are supposed to was a primary complaint of pre-BaltimoreLink riders and thus was a key focus

of the redesign. The improvement in on-time performance is a positive trend that the MDOT MTA will continue to work on to achieve even greater

improvements.

å More proactive management of service through the Operations Control Center and on-street supervision

å Implementation of transit signal priority, also focused on improving transit speeds and reliability

å Changes to route structures made during the BaltimoreLink redesign such as cutting overly long routes in half to make them more reliable

å Implementation of dedicated transit lanes through downtown Baltimore to improve transit speeds and reliability

System-wide Bus On-Time Performance Comparison July Through December: 2016 vs. 2017

Figure 9: System-wide Bus On-Time Performance Comparison July through December: 2016 vs. 2017

System-wide On-Time Comparison: July 2016 throughDecember 2016 (Pre-Baltimore Link) to July 2017 through

December 2017 (BaltimoreLink)

Perc

ent O

n Ti

me

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

20172016

Early On-Time Late

18.4%

59.5%

22.1%

66.4%

20.7%

12.9%


On-time performance has improved by approximately 7 percentage points since BaltimoreLink implementation due to more proactive line

management, changes to route structure to improve reliability, dedicated transit lanes, and transit signal priority.



The next set of data provides headway maintenance data for the CityLink routes. As noted in the introduction to this section,

CityLink routes are scheduled differently than LocalLink and Express BusLink routes, and therefore their reliability performance

is monitored differently.

Specifically, CityLink routes are scheduled such that a person waiting at a stop would see a bus arrive at their stop at specific

scheduled intervals, usually 10 minutes apart in the peak periods (this scheduled interval is also called a headway). This scheduling

approach is in contrast to LocalLink and Express BusLink routes, where passengers use a timetable to understand the specific time they should

arrive at a stop to board the bus. This CityLink scheduling approach reflects higher service frequencies on CityLink routes, which allows

passengers to arrive at a CityLink stop without a timetable, based on the understanding that a bus will arrive within a reasonable time given the highly

frequent service.

Because the CityLink routes are scheduled with a focus on maintaining the correct scheduled intervals between buses, the data presented in Figure 10

focuses on how well these scheduled intervals are maintained. The detriment of not maintaining the scheduled interval is that if buses arrive at a stop at an interval

less than the scheduled interval (also known as bunching), there will be a large gap after the trailing buses in the bunch, meaning passengers who arrived at a stop after

the bunch has passed will have to wait longer than the scheduled headway for a bus to arrive.

The data in Figure 10 shows the percentage of CityLink trips arriving correctly separated between the bus in front and the bus behind based on field data collected over the

evaluation period. The average number of trips arriving at the scheduled interval during this period was approximately 76%. The MDOT MTA has already implemented a number

of initiatives to maintain and improve reliability and correct scheduled intervals, including dedicated bus lanes, stricter enforcement of traffic and parking regulations, transit signal

priority, and more proactive management of bus separation through a combination of on-street supervision and the Operations Control Center (OCC). In an effort to achieve reliability

improvements, the MDOT MTA is expanding the network of dedicated transit lanes and transit signal priority and also evaluating the supervision efforts of the OCC and on-street supervisors to

identify potential improvements in their methods.

CityLink Route Headway Reliability July 2017 Through December 2017

Figure 10: CityLink Headway Reliability – Percent of Trips Arriving at Scheduled Intervals Between Buses

CityLink Routes Headway ReliabilityJuly 2017 through December 2017

Percentage of Trips Arriving at Scheduled HeadwayTrend

Tues

. 12/12

/17

Wed

. 12/6/17

Mon

. 12/18

/17

Tues

. 1/9/18

Thur

s. 1/18

/18

Wed

. 1/24/18

Thur

s. 2/1/18

Wed

. 2/7/18

Wed

. 11/29

/17

Tues

. 11/21

/17

Thur

s. 11

/16/17

Mon

. 11/6/17

Mon

. 10/30

/17

Tues

. 10/24

/17

Wed

. 10/18

/17

Thur

s. 10

/12/17

Mon

. 10/2/17

Tues

. 9/26/17

Thur

s. 9/21

/17

Thur

s. 9/14

/17

Wed

. 9/6/17

Mon

. 8/28/17

Tues

. 8/22/17

Wed

. 8/16/17

Wee

k En

ding

7/16/17

Wee

k En

ding

7/9/17

Wee

k En

ding

7/2/17

60%

65%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

Source: Field Data Collection



The next set of analyses evaluates data at the route and route category level to provide an understanding of how individual routes are performing. The first set of data, shown in Figure 11, summarizes on-time performance by LocalLink route. The data shows that on-time performance by route ranges from a low of approximately 40% to a high of approximately 75%. The average across all LocalLink routes is 66%.

The data in Figure 12 is a companion to the data in Figure 11 and shows on-time performance for each Express BusLink route. The data shows that on-time performance ranges from a low of approximately 47% to a high of 66%. The average across all Express BusLink routes is 56%. Part of the lower Express BusLink on-time performance can be attributed to the fact that many of these routes run at least partially on the interstate highways in the Baltimore region, which experience a wide variability in congestion based on traffic accidents and other incidents, thus impacting average on-time performance. The nature of the network on which these trips run can make it difficult to mitigate poor on-time performance.

Figure 11: LocalLink On-Time Performance by Route July 2017 through December 2017

LocalLink On-Time PerformanceJuly Through December 2017

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

38925470565126306995942965807622713652673159627553372128733489938177838578828779915733

LocalLink Routes

Perc

enta

ge

of T

rips

On

Tim

e

Figure 12: Express BusLink On-Time Performance by Route July 2017 through December 2017

Express BusLink On-Time PerformanceJuly Through December 2017

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

120106107154150102115103160104164105

61% 61% 60% 59% 58% 58% 57%

52% 51%

47%48%

66%

Perc

enta

ge

of T

rips

On

Tim

e




LocalLink On-Time Performance Comparison July 2017 through December 2017

LocalLink on-time performance in 2017 averaged 66%, versus 60% in the 2016 six-month evaluation period. This is an improvement of 6 percentage points.



The next set of data focuses on the impacts of the BaltimoreLink redesign on specific routes through a

comparison of pre-BaltimoreLink and BaltimoreLink routes serving the same corridor or destination. The first,

shown in Figure 13, provides an on-time comparison of the pre-BaltimoreLink route 35 to the post-implementation

BaltimoreLink routes 56 and 76. The 35 route was quite long, and was broken in half in the redesign to improve reliability.

This resulted in two routes, the LocalLink routes 56 and 76. The data in Figure 13 shows that on-time performance improved

on both of the new routes when compared to the original 35 route. Route restructurings such as this were one method used to

improve reliability and on-time performance in the BaltimoreLink development.

On-Time Performance Comparison Pre-BaltimoreLink 35 to BaltimoreLink LocalLink Routes 56 and 76

Figure 13: On-Time Performance Comparison – Pre-BaltimoreLink 35 to BaltimoreLink LocalLink Routes 56 and 76

Comparsion of Pre-BaltimoreLink Route 35On-Time Performance to

BaltimoreLink Replacement Routes 56 and 76

Perc

ent O

n Ti

me

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Current Route 76Current Route 56Old Route 35

Early On-Time Late

12.6%

58.9%

28.5%

63.3%

22.3%

63.3%

22.9%

14.3% 13.8%


The split of the pre-BaltimoreLink 35 route resulted in improved on-time performance on the two BaltimoreLink

routes comprising the old route, reflecting the benefits of this type of redesign in BaltimoreLink.



The next comparison of Pre-BaltimoreLink routes to new BaltimoreLink routes focuses on services to regional job centers. The first of these, shown in Figure 14, focuses on the Amazon fulfillment center located in southeast Baltimore. Pre-BaltimoreLink Amazon was served by the 7 route. Given the importance of Amazon as a job center, the BaltimoreLink redesign resulted in a more direct and frequent LocalLink 65 route. The data in Figure 14 shows an improvement in overall on-time performance as well as a steep decline in late trips. This data reflects a key focus of the BaltimoreLink redesign, which was to focus on important job centers that have grown over time and which have replaced other legacy job centers that have declined as the region changes.

The data in Figure 15 is a companion to Figure 14, and shows a comparison of on-time performance for the pre-BaltimoreLink and BaltimoreLink service to the BWI Business District. The data shows a significant improvement in overall on-time performance on the LocalLink 75 route when compared to the pre-BaltimoreLink 17 route. Again, this reflects the redesign’s focus on improving transit access to important job centers in the region through more direct and reliable service.

On-Time Performance Comparison Pre-BaltimoreLink Service and BaltimoreLink Service to Regional Job Centers

Figure 14: On-Time Performance Comparison Pre-BaltimoreLink 7 to BaltimoreLink LocalLink Route 65



Comparison of On-Time PerformancePre-BaltimoreLink Service and

BaltimoreLink Service to Amazon

Perc

ent O

n Ti

me

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Current Route 65Old Route 7

Early On-Time Late

9.7%

59.6%

30.7%

62.1%

13.6%

24.3%


Comparison of On-Time PerformancePre-BaltimoreLink Service and

BaltimoreLink Service to BWI Business District

Perc

ent O

n Ti

me

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%


Early On-Time Late

15.2%

59.5%

25.2%

68.5%

15.4%16.2%

BaltimoreLink related redesign of services to major job centers such as the Amazon Fulfillment Center and the BWI Business District resulted in improved on-time performance for riders to these locations.



The next set of comparisons show the impacts of improvements such as dedicated bus lanes, decreasing the number of stops on a route, and updating scheduled travel times to reflect current operating conditions. The first comparison, shown in Figure 16, is between the pre-BaltimoreLink route 20 and the current LocalLink route 78. The pre-BaltimoreLink 20 ran on the west side of Baltimore and through downtown. The new LocalLink 78 route follows the same alignment on the westside as the pre-BaltimoreLink 20 route but terminates at the West Baltimore MARC station, thus avoiding downtown congestion. Additional redesign elements included fewer stops and adjusted scheduled run times.

The data in Figure 17 is a companion to Figure 16, and shows a comparison of the pre-BaltimoreLink 11 route to the BaltimoreLink 51 route. The pre-BaltimoreLink 11 route ran between Towson and downtown Baltimore and the LocalLink 51 route follows the same alignment. The improvement in on-time performance shows the positive benefits of dedicated bus lanes on Charles Street, a winnowing of the number of bus stops on the route, and adjustment of run times to reflect current operating conditions.

On-Time Performance Comparison Pre-BaltimoreLink Service to BaltimoreLink LocalLink Service




Comparison of On-Time Performance:Pre-BaltimoreLink and

BaltimoreLink Service in Common Corridor

Perc

ent O

n Ti

me

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%


Early On-Time Late

6.2%

62.1%

31.7%

73.6%

11.1%15.3%


Comparison of On-Time Performance:Pre-BaltimoreLink and

BaltimoreLink Service in Common Corridor

Perc

ent O

n Ti

me

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%


Early On-Time Late

9.2%

59.1%

31.7%

65.1%

20.2%

14.7%

Improvements such as dedicated bus lanes, removing low ridership stops, and updating schedules, has resulted in improved on-time performance on multiple BaltimoreLink routes compared to the pre-BaltimoreLink system.


Customer Satisfaction 19

The final evaluation requested by the State Legislature is an assessment of customer satisfaction after BaltimoreLink implementation. The foundation of this customer satisfaction analysis is complaints received from customers at two different levels. The first involves a comparison of total complaints by month for the first full six months of BaltimoreLink operations (July 2017 to December 2017) to the same months in 2016. The second analysis evaluates just complaints related to bus operations, specifically complaints about late buses, no-shows, and early buses.

C. Customer Satisfaction


20 Cusstomer Satisfaction

Total Bus-Related Complaints July Through December: Comparison of 2016 to 2017

The first Customer Satisfaction analysis, shown in Figure 18, evaluates the change in the number of

total passenger complaints between 2016 and 2017 for the July through December evaluation period.

The data shows two positive trends. The first is the decline in complaints from a high in September, with

total complaints falling to a low of 552 in December 2017 (a fall of 525 complaints, or approximately 49% from the

September high). The second is that 2017 complaints were below 2016 complaints in four of the six months evaluated.

Both of these trends reflect the positive benefits of all elements of the BaltimoreLink redesign.

Figure 18: 2016 to 2017 Comparison - All Bus-Related Complaints Between July and December

Total Bus-Related Complaints BetweenJuly and December - 2016 vs. 2017

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

DECNOVOCTSEPAUGJUL

2016 2017

960

801

1,077

869983

1,392

739817

742

573639

552Com

pla

ints


Customer complaints were lower in 2017 in four of the six months evaluated. Compaints also consistently declined

between September and December 2017, falling by 49% over the four month period.


Customer Satisfaction 21

The second set of Customer Satisfaction data, as shown in Figure 19, provides a comparison of

passenger complaints related to early, late, and no-show buses between 2016 and 2017. The positive

trend of declining total complaints as displayed in Figure 18 is also seen here for the subset of complaints related to

bus on-time performance. Specifically, the data in Figure 19 shows a decline in complaints regarding early bus

arrivals of 45% while complaints related to no-shows declined by 32%. The decline in these complaint types points to

progress on one of the key goals of the BaltimoreLink redesign, which was improved service reliability.

Operating-Related Complaints Comparison Early and Late Bus Arrivals, and Bus No-Shows - 2016 vs. 2017

Figure 19: 2016 to 2017 Comparison - Complaints Related to Early and Late Bus Arrivals and Bus No-Shows

Operating-Related ComplaintsJuly Through December

2016 vs. 2017

Op

era

ting

-Rel

ate

d C

omp

lain

ts

0

500

1000

1,500

2,000

2,500

LateEarlyNo Show

2016 2017

168

784

1,368

303

812

2,026


Passenger complaints related to early, late, and no-show buses declined in each category in 2017 compared to 2016.

Complaints related to early buses fell by 45%, complaints related to late buses fell by 3%, and complaints related to no-

show buses fell by 32%.


22 Customer Satisfaction


BaltimoreLink Capital Improvement Status 23

Much of the focus of this Legislative Report has been on the service redesign elements of BaltimoreLink, but the redesign effort also included capital improvement initiatives to support the BaltimoreLink service elements. The purpose of this report section is to outline the implementation status of these capital improvements. Each of the initiatives is summarized below.

West Baltimore Enhanced Service

This capital initiative involved the evaluation of bus stops along the pre-BaltimoreLink QuickBus 40 (which has generally been replaced by the CityLink Blue route) in order to identify improvements that would enhance the passenger wait experience. Improvements, which were completed in May 2017 prior to BaltimoreLink implementation, included shelter improvements, new trash cans, sidewalk improvements, and some accessibility improvements.

New Vehicles

MDOT MTA procured 172 new buses in the FY 16/FY 17 procurement as replacements for older vehicles reaching the end of their useful life. All of these buses were in revenue service by the BaltimoreLink launch in June 2017.

Bus Shelters

Funding has been provided for the installation of 200 new bus shelters to help improve the passenger experience at high ridership stops throughout the MDOT MTA bus system. 30 shelters have been installed to date. The selection of installation sites is based on a rating system that considers

average daily boardings, transfer volumes, identified Title VI issues, service frequency at stops, operator relief points, and adjacent human service facilities such as doctor’s offices or elder care facilities. Phase 2 of this program will include the installation of 50 additional shelters. The remaining shelters will then be installed following the same procedures in batches of 50 shelters.

Color Destination Signs

91 buses procured in 2013 and 2014 have been retrofitted with new destination signs that display the bus’s destination in color. In addition, all 2016 and 2017 buses were delivered with factory installed Color Destination Signs, and this feature will now automatically be part of all new bus purchases. The retrofit project was completed prior to the BaltimoreLink launch.

Bus Wraps

This initiative involved the installation of bus wraps designating a bus as serving either a LocalLink or CityLink route. 250 buses were wrapped as CityLink buses and 500 were wrapped as LocalLink buses. This initiative was completed prior to the BaltimoreLink launch.

D. BaltimoreLink Capital Improvement Status


24 BaltimoreLink Capital Improvement Status

Signage and Maps

BaltimoreLink involved the wholesale rebranding of the Baltimore region’s bus system. To that end, new bus stop signs were installed at each of the 4,000 stops in the BaltimoreLink network (these were all installed prior to the BaltimoreLink launch).

The new signs include route destinations and service frequencies. To complement the new bus stop signs, several hundred bus shelters were equipped with new system maps reflecting the new BaltimoreLink system. System maps were also updated at all Metro SubwayLink and Light RailLink stations as were the station name pylons at each of these stations. Finally, downtown transfer stations and busy transfer stops outside downtown were equipped with “you are here” neighborhood maps that also show connections between modes. All of this work was completed prior to the BaltimoreLink launch.

Dedicated Transitways

In order to improve vehicle travel times and reliability, the MDOT MTA implemented 5.5 miles of dedicated transitways in the following corridors. Each of these dedicated transitways is now in place.

1. Fayette Street through downtown Baltimore–0.87 miles of dedicated all-day curb-running transitway.

2. Baltimore Street through downtown Baltimore–.087 miles of dedicated all-day curb-running transitway.

3. Charles Street through downtown Baltimore–0.55 miles of dedicated PM peak curb-running transitway.

4. St. Paul Street through downtown Baltimore–0.42 miles of dedicated peak period transitway, consisting predominantly of curbside running.

5. Hillen Street/Guilford Avenue/South Street through downtown Baltimore–0.52 miles of dedicated all-day curb-running transitway.

6. Gay Street/Ensor Street through downtown Baltimore–0.53 miles of dedicated all-day curb-running transitway.

7. Lombard and Pratt Streets through downtown Baltimore – upgrades of dedicated all-day curb-running bus lanes originally installed in 2009. Upgrades included painting the dedicated bus lanes on each street red to more strongly communicate that these are dedicated transitway facilities. This initiative also extended the dedicated bus lanes to the blocks between Howard and Greene Streets.

Transit Signal Priority

Transit Signal Priority has been installed at 36 intersections along Loch Raven Boulevard (CityLink Green) and York Road (CityLink Red). In addition, the required TSP equipment on buses has been installed on 251 vehicles to date. The MDOT MTA is currently working on equipping the remaining vehicles in the MDOT MTA fleet. Additional corridors have been identified and MDOT MTA is coordinating with Baltimore City DOT on installation.

Transit Transfer Facilities

The redesign of the Baltimore bus system into BaltimoreLink relied heavily on transfer facilities throughout the system. Improvements at key transfer locations include the following:

1. Development of an off-street transfer facility at the West Baltimore MARC station, which also included the installation of real-time bus arrival displays, sheltered waiting areas, bicycle parking, additional CCTV cameras, ticket vending machines, emergency phones, and a ZipCar parking spot.

2. Installation of real-time bus arrival information displays, new shelters, bicycle parking, additional CCTV cameras, emergency telephones and ticket vending machines at key transfer locations throughout the system including at Penn-North Metro, Penn Station, Charles Center, Bayview Hospital, State Center, and Lexington Market.


BaltimoreLink Capital Improvement Status 25

Car Sharing/Pop-Up Transit Services

MDOT MTA has partnered with the Parking Authority of Baltimore City (PABC) to expand its existing car sharing program to transit facilities. PABC has a contract with ZipCar; if PABC puts out a new RFP for car sharing, MDOT MTA will work with PABC on the RFP to piggyback on the new contract. A one-year License Agreement between MDOT MTA and ZipCar has been executed. ZipCar leases the parking spaces from MDOT MTA for a fee (a tenant-landlord relationship). A total of 18 stations and 32 spaces are planned, with deployment in phases between June 2017 and June 2018. This partnership provides increased regional mobility and alternatives to car ownership.

Fort Meade Connections

MDOT MTA, through BaltimoreLink, has developed a transportation shuttle service to connect the Penn and Camden Line MARC lines with Fort Meade, National Business Park, and the National Security Agency. The Regional Transportation Agency of Central Maryland (RTA) is providing service on this new route, designated route 504. This initiative is funded for a two-year period at $460,000 per year, which includes the cost of four shuttle buses, operators, and maintenance expenses. The new service began operating on October 1, 2017. Ridership is off to a steady start with limited but positive feedback from passengers. The 504 provides an additional layer of service to the Fort Meade internal shuttle and bolsters service to the Savage and Odenton MARC stations, and to the 202 Commuter Bus.

Howard Street Audio-Visual Safety Project

This project involved the installation of audio-visual warning technology at all 17 intersections along the Central Light Rail Line between the Camden Yards Light Rail Station and the Mount Royal Light Rail Station. Signs – along with corresponding audible warnings – are activated as a light rail vehicle approaches the intersection. This project adds an additional level of pedestrian safety in downtown Baltimore.

Last Mile Investments

MDOT MTA has undertaken efforts to improve connections between bicycling and transit to improve the reach of transit and make it easier for people to access transit service by bike. The first MARC Bike Car service was offered on weekend Penn Line trains starting in December 2014. While folding bicycles have always been allowed on MARC trains, the conversion of single-level MARC passenger cars to Bike Cars has allowed users to bring full-size bicycles on the train. With the start of the BaltimoreLink process in the fall of 2015, additional bike cars were added so that all weekend Penn Line trains can carry full-sized bicycles. Bike Car service has also been run on Bike to Work Day, World Car Free Day, and on other occasional weekdays to improve bicycling access for MARC weekday passengers and those on the Brunswick Line. To allow for the use of full-size bicycles regularly on weekday MARC service, an effort is now underway to install two bike racks in select MARC passenger cars.

MDOT MTA has also been working to improve bicycle parking at rail stations throughout the system. Bicycle parking was added to eleven stations around the state. Bike parking and/or lockers were added at these locations that either had no bike parking or bike parking that did not meet the needs at the site. Bicycle parking is also being added at 16 Light Rail and nine Metro Subway stations.

MDOT MTA has also been a partner in the Baltimore Bike Share system, working in partnership with the Baltimore City Department of Transportation to ensure that Bike Share complements the transit system. Of the 25 locations installed to date, seven have been at or adjacent to MARC, Light Rail, or Metro Subway stations and four more are planned at locations at or adjacent to rail stations.


Appendices 27

Appendix 1– Weekday Ridership Detail

Appendix 2 – On-Time Performance Detail

Appendix 3 – Weekend Ridership Detail

Appendices

28 Appendix 1- Weekday Ridership Detail


App.- Fig. 1: July 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by CityLink Route

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by CityLink RouteSeptember 2017

CityLink Routes

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

Purple Pink Yellow Lime Silver NavyBrown Green BlueOrangeGold Red

10,419

8,441

9,687

6,2377,183

6,742

12,661

6,6926,151

10,574

8,061 7,898

Rid

ersh

ip


App.- Fig. 2: August 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by CityLink Route

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by CityLink RouteAugust 2017

CityLink Routes

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

LimePinkYellowSilver BrownPurple NavyGreen Blue OrangeGold Red

8,4357,8128,064

5,6596,013 5,614

11,901

5,8096,686

10,135

6,6497,326

Rid

ersh

ip


App.- Fig. 3: September 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by CityLink Route

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by CityLink RouteJuly 2017

CityLink Routes

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

Lime PinkSilver YellowBrownPurple NavyGreen Blue OrangeGold Red

8,814

7,5617,711

5,7975,949 5,768

12,079

6,0196,939

9,379

6,8227,351

Rid

ersh

ip


App.- Fig. 4: October 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by CityLink Route

Rid

ersh

ip

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by CityLink RouteDecember 2017

CityLink Routes

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

LimePink SilverPurpleYellow Brown Navy Green Blue OrangeGold Red

9,345

7,7898,591

6,0776,108 5,986

11,086

6,588 6,327

9,851

6,6787,332


App.- Fig. 5: November 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by CityLink Route

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by CityLink RouteNovember 2017

CityLink Routes

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

Lime Purple Silver Yellow Pink Brown NavyGreen Gold BlueOrange Red

9,674

Rid

ersh

ip

8,3258,870

6,749 6,631 6,381

11,886

6,714 6,526

8,358

7,0688,112


App.- Fig. 6: December 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by CityLink Route

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by CityLink RouteOctober 2017

CityLink Routes

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

Purple Pink Lime Silver Yellow Brown NavyGreen Gold BlueRedOrange

10,388

8,9239,422

6,3546,885

6,402

10,211

6,8986,154

9,293

7,7637,868

Rid

ersh

ip


The data on this page outlines weekday CityLink ridership by route, for the months between July 2017 and December 2017.


Appendix 1- Weekday Ridership Detail 29

App.- Fig. 3: September 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by CityLink Route App.- Fig. 7: July 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by LocalLink Route

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by LocalLink RouteJuly 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

925752959133673459757193218273946965517989877770816278368337762853312656293085805422

LocalLink Routes

Rid

ersh

ip


App.- Fig. 8: August 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by LocalLink Route

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by LocalLink RouteAugust 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

925752953391673459759321719482797369655177878970817836628376372853312629563085805422

LocalLink Routes

Rid

ersh

ip


App.- Fig. 9: September 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by LocalLink Route

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by LocalLink RouteSeptember 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

529257959167753433599373696571512187899482797781706236787637832831565329308526542280

LocalLink Routes

Rid

ersh

ip


App.- Fig. 10: October 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by LocalLink Route

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by LocalLink RouteOctober 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

38529295579167933334757359947151692181657789827987707862763637538328315629302685548022

LocalLink Routes

Rid

ersh

ip


App.- Fig. 11: November 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by LocalLink Route

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by LocalLink RouteNovember 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

38925257959133347559679373697121518965798294877781706236787637833128535629853026548022

LocalLink Routes

Rid

ersh

ip


App.- Fig. 12: December 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by LocalLink Route

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by LocalLink RouteDecember 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

38925257959133347559679373697121518965798294877781706236787637833128535629853026548022

LocalLink Routes

Rid

ersh

ip


The data on this page outlines weekday LocalLink ridership by route, for the months between July 2017 and December 2017.

LocalLink Route 38 is a seasonal supplemental service school tripper route.



App.- Fig. 13: July 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by Express BusLink Route

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by Express BusLink RouteJuly 2017

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

164107105102106150160115154103120

478

178191

31

281

543

244

455

280

31

187

Rid

ersh

ip



App.- Fig. 14: August 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by Express BusLink Route App.- Fig. 15: September 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by Express BusLink Route

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by Express BusLink RouteAugust 2017

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

164107105106102150115160154103120

465

150200

27

249

517

227

430

271

27

224

Rid

ersh

ip



Average Weekday Daily Ridership by Express BusLink RouteSeptember 2017

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

104164107105106102160150115154103120

511

16

115

187

32

299

578

250

476

248

26

232Rid

ersh

ip



Average Weekday Daily Ridership by Express BusLink RouteOctober 2017

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

164104107105106102150103160115154120

255

23

176211

29

276

569

239

366

264

15

231Rid

ersh

ip



App.- Fig. 16: October 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by Express BusLink Route

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by Express BusLink RouteNovember 2017

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

104164107105106150102160115103154120

284

24

126

188

34

464513

210

476

288

21

193

Rid

ersh

ip



App.- Fig. 17: November 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by Express BusLink Route App.- Fig. 18: December 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by Express BusLink Route

Average Weekday Daily Ridership by Express BusLink RouteDecember 2017

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

104164107105106102150115160154103120

414

21

169174

29

235

452

215

401

257

22

188

Rid

ersh

ip



The data on this page outlines weekday Express BusLink ridership by route, for the months between July 2017 and December 2017.

Express BusLink Route 104 was discontinued as part of BaltimoreLink, reinstated in September.


Appendix 1- Weekday Ridership Detail 31

App.- Fig. 19: Top 10 Weekday Daily Ridership Routes - July 2017

Top 10 Highest Ridership BaltimoreLink RoutesWeekday - July 2017

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

80Purple54NavyGreenBlue22OrangeGoldRed

9,3798,814

7,897 7,711 7,561 7,351 7,157 6,939 6,864

12,079


Rid

ersh

ip


App.- Fig. 20: Top 10 Weekday Daily Ridership Routes - August 2017 App.- Fig. 21: Top 10 Weekday Daily Ridership Routes - September 2017

Top 10 Highest Ridership BaltimoreLink RoutesWeekday - August 2017

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

Purple8054Navy22GreenBlueOrangeGoldRed

10,135

8,435 8,064 7,812 7,563 7,326 7,110 6,821 6,686

11,901


Rid

ersh

ip


Top 10 Highest Ridership BaltimoreLink RoutesWeekday - September 2017

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

5422NavyBrown80GreenBlueOrangeGoldRed

10,574 10,4199,687

8,441 8,327 8,061 7,898 7,659 7,343

12,661


Rid

ersh

ip


Top 10 Highest Ridership BaltimoreLink RoutesWeekday - October 2017

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

54BrownNavy8022GreenGoldBlueRedOrange

10,2119,422 9,293 8,923 8,470

7,978 7,868 7,7637,149

10,388


Rid

ersh

ip


App.- Fig. 22: Top 10 Weekday Daily Ridership Routes - October 2017

Top 10 Highest Ridership BaltimoreLink RoutesWeekday - November 2017

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

80Purple54NavyGreenBlue22OrangeGoldRed

9,3798,814

7,897 7,711 7,561 7,351 7,157 6,939 6,864

12,079


Rid

ersh

ip


App.- Fig. 23: Top 10 Weekday Daily Ridership Routes - November 2017 App.- Fig. 24: Top 10 Weekday Daily Ridership Routes - December 2017

Top 10 Highest Ridership BaltimoreLink RoutesWeekday - December 2017

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

Brown54Navy80GreenBlue22OrangeGoldRed

9,8519,345

8,873 8,5917,789 7,456 7,332 7,265

6,678

11,086


Rid

ersh

ip


The data on this page outlines the top 10 highest weekday BaltimoreLink routes, for the months between July 2017 and December 2017.



The data on this page shows weekday ridership by route category for the months between July 2017 and December 2017.

App.- Fig. 25: July 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by Route Category App.- Fig. 26: August 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by Route Category App.- Fig. 27: September 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by Route Category

Average Weekday Daily RidershipBreakdown by Route Category

July 2017

46%

90,19053%

104,938

1%

2,897

CityLink LocalLink ExpressLink


August 2017

46%

90,10353%

103,732

1%

2,787



September 2017

45%

100,74754%

119,997

1%

2,969


App.- Fig. 28: October 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by Route Category App.- Fig. 29: November 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by Route Category App.- Fig. 30: December 2017 Daily Weekday Ridership by Route Category


October 2017

46%

96,56053%

110,869

1%

2,655



November 2017

45%

95,29554%

115,132

1%

2,828



December 2017


45%

91,75754%

108,687

1%

2,578


Appendix 2- On Time Performance Detail 33

App.- Fig. 31: LocalLink On-Time Performance – July 2017


LocalLink On-Time PerformanceJuly 2017

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

549270956926657694805651757131892930622252593783933667217353288534778791797882338157

LocalLink Routes

Trip

s A

rriv

ing

as

Sche

dul

ed


LocalLink On-Time PerformanceAugust 2017

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

925470699594265176655662898052303171292259373693755367732134857879288333877781915782

LocalLink Routes

Trip

s A

rriv

ing

as

Sche

dul

ed

App.- Fig. 32: LocalLink On-Time Performance – August 2017 App.- Fig. 33: LocalLink On-Time Performance – September 2017


LocalLink On-Time PerformanceSeptember 2017

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

385492708030266929766595942256283659523162377151217375345367859379788283577791338781

LocalLink Routes

Trip

s A

rriv

ing

as

Sche

dul

ed

App.- Fig. 34: LocalLink On-Time Performance – October 2017


LocalLink On-Time PerformanceOctober 2017

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

38547030802665956956365992347628942953225167313773522162719382898178758791797785833357

LocalLink Routes

Trip

s A

rriv

ing

as

Sche

dul

ed

App.- Fig. 35: LocalLink On-Time Performance – November 2017


LocalLink On-Time PerformanceNovember 2017

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

38547092302629569480693676655922955134287573675271532137938982316291857881877933577783

LocalLink Routes

Trip

s A

rriv

ing

as

Sche

dul

ed

App.- Fig. 36: LocalLink On-Time Performance – December 2017


LocalLink On-Time PerformanceDecember 2017

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

38547030296992229456806721365226317576599565537371285783375134818982628593783377917987

LocalLink Routes

Trip

s A

rriv

ing

as

Sche

dul

ed

The data on this page outlines LocalLink on-time performance by route, for the months between July 2017 and December 2017.


34 Appendix 3- Weekend Ridership Detail

App.- Fig. 37: July 2017 Saturday CityLink Ridership by Route


0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

Silver YellowPinkLime Green Purple NavyBrownBlue Gold OrangeRed

Average Saturday Ridership by CityLink RouteJuly 2017

CityLink Routes

6,051

3,859

5,314

3,116 2,9073,486

7,803

2,957

4,538

5,719

4,795 4,694

Rid

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 38: August 2017 Saturday CityLink Ridership by Route


0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

Lime SilverPinkYellowGold GreenPurple NavyBrown BlueRedOrange

Average Saturday Ridership by CityLink RouteAugust 2017

6,451

4,0264,760

3,239 3,155 3,138

5,945

3,6954,401

3,727

4,7574,456

CityLink Routes

Rid

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 39: September 2017 Saturday CityLink Ridership by Route


0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

Pink Silver Green PurpleYellow OrangeBrown Gold Lime BlueNavyRed

Average Saturday Ridership by CityLink RouteSeptember 2017

3.624

2,830

4,308

2,4352,706

3,781

5,353

3,3602,911

3,740 3,633

5,069

CityLink Routes

Rid

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 40: October 2017 Saturday CityLink Ridership by Route


0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

PinkLime PurpleGold Silver GreenOrangeYellowBrown NavyBlueRed

Average Saturday Ridership by CityLink RouteOctober 2017

3,585 3,493

4,953

2,307

3,3362,622

5,599

3,6203,2573,300

3,9864,710

CityLink Routes

Rid

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 41: November 2017 Saturday CityLink Ridership by Route


0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

SilverPink Purple Yellow LimeGreen Gold BrownNavy Blue Orange Red

Average Saturday Ridership by CityLink RouteNovember 2017

5,143

3,832

5,075

3,021 2,9593,630

6,822

3,4113,090

4,0454,540

4,947

CityLink Routes

Rid

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 42: December 2017 Saturday CityLink Ridership by Route


0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

SilverPink LimePurpleYellow Green Navy Brown Gold Blue OrangeRed

Average Saturday Ridership by CityLink RouteDecember 2017

5,244

4,070

4,982

3,022

2,284

3,326

6,604

3,8483,413

4,839 4,578 4,370

CityLink Routes

Rid

ersh

ip

The data on this page outlines Saturday CityLink ridership by route, for the months between July 2017 and December 2017.


Appendix 3- Weekend Ridership Detail 35

App.- Fig. 43: July 2017 Sunday CityLink Ridership by Route


Average Sunday Ridership by CityLink RouteJuly 2017

CityLink Routes

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

Silver PinkPurple Yellow Lime BrownNavyGreenGold BlueRedOrange

5,433

3,3633,787

2,513 2,3782,740

4,750

2,634 2,536

3,763

2,7633,062

Ave

rag

e Ri

der

ship

App.- Fig. 44: August 2017 Sunday CityLink Ridership by Route


Average Sunday Ridership by CityLink RouteAugust 2017

CityLink Routes

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

Silver Purple Yellow PinkLime NavyBrownBlueGreenGold OrangeRed

4,532

3,5503,192

2,5592,279

2,585

4,835

2,540 2,358

3,719

2,738 2,733

Ave

rag

e Ri

der

ship

App.- Fig. 45: September 2017 Sunday CityLink Ridership by Route


Average Sunday Ridership by CityLink RouteSeptember 2017

CityLink Routes

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

Brown PurplePinkYellowNavyLimeGold SilverRedGreen BlueOrange

5,739

3,4863,700

2,463

3,2422,978

3,328

2,7262,399

2,990

1,073

2,821

Ave

rag

e Ri

der

ship

App.- Fig. 46: October 2017 Sunday CityLink Ridership by Route


Average Sunday Ridership by CityLink RouteOctober 2017

CityLink Routes

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

Purple Brown Lime Silver Pink Yellow Navy Green Blue Gold Red Orange

4,994

2,7143,157

2,411 2,234 2,229

3,476

2,418

1,732

3,423

2,1872,566

Ave

rag

e Ri

der

ship

App.- Fig. 47: November 2017 Sunday CityLink Ridership by Route


Average Sunday Ridership by CityLink RouteNovember 2017

CityLink Routes

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

PurpleSilver Yellow Brown PinkLimeNavyGreen BlueGold Red Orange

5,136

3,2463,411

2,6902,364

2,714

4,501

2,5902,312

3,595

2,6382,850

Ave

rag

e Ri

der

ship

App.- Fig. 48: December 2017 Sunday CityLink Ridership by Route


Average Sunday Ridership by CityLink RouteDecember 2017

CityLink Routes

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

Purple SilverBrown NavyPinkLimeYellowGreen BlueGold RedOrange

4,5704,081

2,909 2,7902,482 2,464

3,398

2,347 2,195 2,0181,606

2,364

Ave

rag

e Ri

der

ship

The data on this page outlines Sunday CityLink ridership by route, for the months between July 2017 and December 2017.



App.- Fig. 49: July 2017 Saturday LocalLink Ridership by Route


Average Saturday Daily Ridership by LocalLink RouteJuly 2017

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

57526791333494519365598269752173777071798789763781286236537826833029315685802254

LocalLink Routes

Rid

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 50: August 2017 Saturday LocalLink Ridership by Route


Average Saturday Daily Ridership by LocalLink RouteAugust 2017

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

52573367699134939459898251756521778773627179702876813753367826308331568529228054

LocalLink Routes

Rid

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 51: September 2017 Saturday LocalLink Ridership by Route


Average Saturday Daily Ridership by LocalLink RouteSeptember 2017

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

57526734339491652187518162599389773626698275733770767180793028785383562931225485

LocalLink Routes

Rid

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 52: October 2017 Saturday LocalLink Ridership by Route


Average Saturday Daily Ridership by LocalLink RouteOctober 2017

0

500

1000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

33575267943465912171935951828975697379778762817076263753783628563183302922808554

LocalLink Routes

Rid

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 53: November 2017 Saturday LocalLink Ridership by Route


Average Saturday Daily Ridership by LocalLink RouteNovember 2017

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

57523391346794935165215982876973757771628170798976373628265378835631302985228054

LocalLink Routes

Rid

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 54: December 2017 Saturday LocalLink Ridership by Route


Average Saturday Daily Ridership by LocalLink RouteDecember 2017

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4000

4500

5,000

52573334919493675965517569827787732171798970768162373628785383263129305685802254

LocalLink Routes

Rid

ersh

ip

The data on this page outlines Saturday LocalLink ridership by route, for the months between July 2017 and December 2017.



App.- Fig. 55: July 2017 Sunday LocalLink Ridership by Route


Average Sunday Daily Ridership by LocalLink RouteJuly 2017

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

9257675233349169935994825170212865367977897137877375627681782953832631305685225480

LocalLink Routes

Ave

rag

e Ri

der

ship

App.- Fig. 56: August 2017 Sunday LocalLink Ridership by Route


Average Sunday Daily Ridership by LocalLink RouteAugust 2017

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

9252573367349187815993699470218951288265363779757771732978627626538331305685542280

LocalLink Routes

Ave

rag

e Ri

der

ship

App.- Fig. 57: September 2017 Sunday LocalLink Ridership by Route


Average Sunday Daily Ridership by LocalLink RouteSeptember 2017

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

9257523367913494937087215936896965518228777179767337756281782983533130562654228580

LocalLink Routes

Ave

rag

e Ri

der

ship

App.- Fig. 58: October 2017 Sunday LocalLink Ridership by Route


Average Sunday Daily Ridership by LocalLink RouteOctober 2017

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

9257523367913493599469512182706577792871733676873789627883817531263029535685225480

LocalLink Routes

Ave

rag

e Ri

der

ship

App.- Fig. 59: November 2017 Sunday LocalLink Ridership by Route


Average Sunday Daily Ridership by LocalLink RouteNovember 2017

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

9257523367913494695993518221703665797328877177893762817678752953318330265685542280

LocalLink Routes

Ave

rag

e Ri

der

ship

App.- Fig. 60: December 2017 Sunday LocalLink Ridership by Route


Average Sunday Daily Ridership by LocalLink RouteDecember 2017

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

9257523367349169939451598270737121376528877936896277767881752953312630835654852280

LocalLink Routes

Ave

rag

e Ri

der

ship

The data on this page outlines Sunday LocalLink ridership by route, for the months between July 2017 and December 2017.



App.- Fig. 61: Top 10 Highest Saturday Ridership Routes - July 2017


Top 10 Highest Ridership BaltimoreLink RoutesSaturday - July 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

Green22PurpleNavy54BrownBlueGoldOrangeRed

6,0515,719

5,3144,795 4,748 4,694 4,538

3,8593,871

7,803


Ried

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 62: Top 10 Highest Saturday Ridership Routes - August 2017


Top 10 Highest Ridership BaltimoreLink RoutesSaturday - August 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

GoldGreen80PurpleNavy54BrownBlueRedOrange

5,945

4,760 4,757 4,627 4,456 4,401 4,1213,727

4,026

6,451


Ried

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 63: Top 10 Highest Saturday Ridership Routes - September 2017


Top 10 Highest Ridership BaltimoreLink RoutesSaturday - September 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

Yellow54OrangeBrownGoldLime85BlueNavyRed

5,069

4,3083,826 3,781 3,740 3,633 3,624 3,3603,527

5,353


Ried

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 64: Top 10 Highest Saturday Ridership Routes - October 2017


Top 10 Highest Ridership BaltimoreLink RoutesSaturday - October 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

SilverGreenOrangeYellow85BrownNavy54BlueRed

4,953 4,864 4,7103,986

3,630 3,620 3,585 3,3363,493

5,599


Ried

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 65: Top 10 Highest Saturday Ridership Routes - November 2017


Top 10 Highest Ridership BaltimoreLink RoutesSaturday - November 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

22Green80Gold54BrownNavyBlueOrangeRed

5,143 5,075 4,9474,540

4,171 4,045 3,859 3,6793,832

6,822


Ried

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 66: Top 10 Highest Saturday Ridership Routes - December 2017


Top 10 Highest Ridership BaltimoreLink RoutesSaturday - December 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

PurpleYellow54GreenNavyBrownGoldBlueOrangeRed

5,244 4,982 4,839 4,578 4,3704,070 4,019

3,4133,848

6,604


Ried

ersh

ip

The data on this page outlines the top 10 highest Saturday BaltimoreLink routes, for the months between July 2017 and December 2017.



App.- Fig. 67: Top 10 Highest Sunday Ridership Routes - July 2017


Top 10 Highest Ridership BaltimoreLink RoutesSunday - July 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

Brown2254Navy80GreenGoldBlueRedOrange


4,750

3,787 3,7633,363 3,170 3,062 2,928 2,7632,847

5,433

Ried

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 68: Top 10 Highest Sunday Ridership Routes - August 2017


Top 10 Highest Ridership BaltimoreLink RoutesSunday - August 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

NavyBrown542280BlueGreenGoldOrangeRed


4,532

3,719 3,5503,192

2,928 2,790 2,778 2,7332,738

4,835

Ried

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 69: Top 10 Highest Sunday Ridership Routes -September 2017


Top 10 Highest Ridership BaltimoreLink RoutesSunday - September 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

2285LimeGoldSilver80RedGreenBlueOrange


3,7003,486 3,328 3,286 3,242

2,990 2,978 2,8532,915

5,739

Ried

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 70: Top 10 Highest Sunday Ridership Routes - October 2017


Top 10 Highest Ridership BaltimoreLink RoutesSunday - October 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

852254NavyGreen80BlueGoldRedOrange


3,476 3,4233,157

2,745 2,714 2,566 2,516 2,4782,483

4,994

Ried

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 71: Top 10 Highest Sunday Ridership Routes - November 2017


Top 10 Highest Ridership BaltimoreLink RoutesSunday - November 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

BrownPinkLimeNavy80GreenBlueGoldRedOrange


4,501

3,595 3,411 3,2462,937 2,850 2,714 2,6382,690

5,136

Ried

ersh

ip

App.- Fig. 72: Top 10 Highest Sunday Ridership Routes -December 2017


Top 10 Highest Ridership BaltimoreLink RoutesSunday - December 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

NavyPinkLimeYellow80GreenBlueGoldRedOrange


4,081

3,3982,909 2,790 2,730

2,482 2,464 2,3472,364

4,570

Ried

ersh

ip

The data on this page outlines the top 10 highest Sunday BaltimoreLink routes, for the months between July 2017 and December 2017.

BaltimoreLink Implementation February 2018 Status …...- July Through December - 2016 vs. 2017 2016...

Documents

Transcript of BaltimoreLink Implementation February 2018 Status …...- July Through December - 2016 vs. 2017 2016...