First/Last Mile Challenge: Perspectives of Millennials · PDF fileFIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE:...
Transcript of First/Last Mile Challenge: Perspectives of Millennials · PDF fileFIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE:...
FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
Jarrell Smith 20 SW 6th Street, Apt. #204 Gainesville, FL, 32601 765-669-1383 Master of Urban and Regional Planning | University of Florida Course: Transportation Policy and Planning Originally Submitted: December 5, 2016
1 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
ABSTRACT
According to the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), public
transportation use in the United States reduces the nation’s carbon emissions by 37
million metric tons. In addition, for every $1 invested in public transportation,
approximately $4 in economic returns is generated (APTA, 2015). Although public
transportation offers several benefits, one of the major drawbacks is connecting users
from their place of origin to transit nodes, and then to desired destinations, also known
as the ‘first and last mile’ (FLM) problem. Researchers have discovered the connecting
ends of the FLM to be the weakest link of transit systems (Krygsman, Dijst, & Arentze,
2004). However, one of the best approaches to addressing FLM is developing a multi-
modal network. Studies highlight that the millennial generation, those born between
1982 and 2003, the largest generation in American history, is attracted to multimodal
transportation options (APTA, 2013). This research explores the preferences of
millennials on a college campus to connect to transit nodes. The goal is to identify
millennials’ preferred methods to get to and from transit nodes in order to enhance the
FLM. In order to examine millennials’ preference, students attending the University of
Florida were selected as the study group and were surveyed. The findings suggest that
priority should be given to maintaining and enhancing pedestrian facilities to improve
the FLM experience.
Keywords:
First and Last Mile Transit Millennials University of Florida
2 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
I. Public Transportation and the FLM Problem
1.1Background In the Unites States (U.S.), public transportation plays an essential role in
reducing the country’s carbon footprint and congestion costs, and stirring significant
economic growth. According to the American Public Transportation Association (APTA),
public transportation use in the United States reduces the nation’s carbon emissions by
37 million metric tons. If public
transportation was absent in 2011,
congestion costs would have risen by
nearly $21 billion in the U.S. (APTA,
2015). For instance, consider the
person capacity per lane equivalent of
a public bus and a single occupancy
vehicle (SOV). In the bus, 9,000
individuals could be transported over a
3.5 meter wide space in an urban
environment during a one-hour period,
while only 2,000 individuals could be transported via SOVs (see figure 1). Moreover,
public transportation enhances property values, provides critical support during
emergencies and disasters, provides access to all ages, and delivers essential health
and human services (Litman, 2015). Although public transportation offers several
benefits, one of the major drawbacks is connecting users from their place of origin to
transit nodes, and then to desired destinations, also known as the ‘first and last mile’
(FLM) problem (see figure 2). Researchers have discovered the connecting ends of the
Figure 1. Info-graphic explaining the number of people crossing a 3.5 meter wide space in an urban environment during a one-hour period.
3 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
FLM to be the weakest link of transit systems. These connecting ends can significantly
influence an individual’s choice to use transit given the lengthy travel time and travel
discomfort often associated with FLM (Krygsman, et al., 2004) (Rietveld, 2000). In the
U.S., this problem is amplified due to sprawling land-use patterns that move more jobs
and people to lower-density suburbs that are often not within walking distance to
existing public transportation (Lesh, 2013). Consequently, a reliance on cars is
strengthened, which results in more traffic congestion, pollution, and urban sprawl.
However, research highlights that the millennial generation, those born between
1982 and 2003, the largest generation in American history, is attracted to multimodal
transportation options (APTA, 2013). A Google Scholar search suggests that there are
few studies overall, and even fewer peer reviewed studies concerning millennials’
preference in using FLM connectors. By enhancing not only the quality and attributes of
the main mode of transit, but also the influence of connectors, the appeal of using public
transportation will likely increase.
1.2 Scope of Study and Organization Students attending the University of Florida (UF) rely heavily on the Regional
Transit System (RTS) to travel to and from school. However, accessing the transit
nodes can be quite challenging. This research will explore the preferences of millennials
on a college campus to connect to transit nodes. UF is striving to reduce the need for
Accessing Egressing
Figure 2. Graphic showing the first and last mile of transit
4 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
additional parking spaces and limit vehicular emissions on campus to promote a more
sustainable campus (University of Florida, 2016). In fact, a recent survey of
undergraduate students in the U.S. concerning the most prevalent issues on college
campuses identified that the lack of adequate parking is the seventh major concern
among students (Student Monitor, 2014). Transit represents a viable option for reducing
reliance on private vehicles for college students. However, the effectiveness of public
transport as a mode depends largely on the connecting ends. Researchers studying the
multimodal public transportation chain have generally found the connecting ends to be
influential enough to encourage or discourage a person to ride transit. (Krygsman, et al.,
2004) (Rietveld, 2000).
This study will focus on trip making during the morning and evening peak hours
on a weekday. Students will be targeted to participate in a survey throughout UF’s
campus. The primary reason for choosing the morning and evening hours is because
these hours are typically associated with the highest travel volumes. Below is an outline
of the logic model summarizing the study:
5 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
In the subsequent chapter, a literature review on the following will be provided:
the FLM of public transportation and its importance in the public transport trip chain;
services used to connect to transit; solutions to the FLM challenge; and a review of FLM
initiatives throughout the United States. Research data and methodology will be
covered in Chapter 3 and Chapter 4 highlights the results from the survey. Following
Inputs
•Literature Review
•Students Attending UF
•Questionnaire: Preference for FLM Connectors
Activities •Review Past Literature
•Survey Students
Outputs•Data on FLM Strategies and Initiatives Throughout the USA
•Descriptive Statistics: Preference of Students at UF
Outcome
•Improved Understanding of the Needs of Student Transit Riders
•Data that will Influence Local Policies
•Prioritized Strategy for Addressing FLM Connections
Impact
•Enhanced Network for Transit Use
•More Individuals Attracted to Using Transit
•Decreased Reliance on Private Vehicles
•Less Traffic Congestion and Carbon Emissions
•Increased Use of Active Transportation
•Knowledge Added to Planning Theory
Figure 3. Logic model outlining the overall study
Logic Model
6 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
chapter 4, chapter 5 will discuss the implications and limitations of the results for future
planning initiatives. Lastly, Chapter 6 will conclude the research with a critique and
provide suggestions for future directions in the area of FLM research.
1.3 Objective This paper examines millennials’ preferred methods to get to and from transit
stations and bus stops in order to enhance the FLM. To do so, the following questions
are asked:
● What are the established solutions to address the FLM issue?
● Which mode do millennials prefer using to connect to transit?
● Which features of bicycle, pedestrian, and station facilities are most
important to millennial riders?
II. Literature Review
2.1 FLM and Its Importance in Transit FLM in public transportation revolves around two main phases: access mode and
egress mode. The access mode refers to connectivity between the origin (home-end) of
a user's journey and the transit node. The egress mode refers to connectivity between
the transit node and the destination (trip-end) of a user's journey (Tay, 2012) (see figure
2).
Research continues to emphasize that the convenience of a FLM trip depends on
three key factors:
Distance- length of travel between transit services and the origin and/or
destination
7 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
Modal Integration- the ease of pairing a transit trip with bicycling, driving, or a
ridesharing service
Network Quality- the physical conditions of biking and pedestrian
infrastructure between the origin/destination and the transit facility
The distance variable is often quite clear cut; a transit agency should strive to have
transit nodes as close to desired destinations and starting points as much as possible.
However, addressing the modal integration and network quality can be a bit more
complicated since transit users express varying preferences on ways to enhance modal
integration and network quality.
2.2 Types of FLM Connections Public transit agencies continue to recognize the challenge of addressing the
FLM problem in order to maintain and increase ridership. Historically, transit riders
focused mainly on using walking, bicycling, public and private shuttles, or private
vehicles as means to connect to transit. In recent years, publicly operated Flex Bus
services― on demand door to door bus service―, private rideshare companies such as
Uber and Lyft, and private car rental companies such as Zip Car and Car2Go have
expanded the options to address the FLM problem.
In general, walking is the most popular way people access transit. According to
APTA’s 2007 Profile of Public Transportation Passengers, nearly 60% of transit users
walk to and from transit. Notably, several studies assert that most transit riders have
little to no problem walking approximately 0.25 miles to access transit or to get home
(Advocacy Advance, 2014). However, if the infrastructure such as sidewalks, traffic
mediums, and refuge islands are absent, the desire to walk declines. For potential riders
8 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
who do not live or work within close walking distance to transit services, the prospect of
a long walk before or after their transit ride may be enough to deter transit use entirely
(Lesh, 2013).
Along with walking, biking is another form of active transportation commonly
used to reach transit. Commuters using cycling as a feeder mode to transit can be
classified in one of two categories: bike and ride (B&R); or bike, park, and ride (B, P&
R). B&R involves bringing the bike on the main mode of transit while B, P, & R entails
parking bikes at a transit stops. Similar to walking, cycling is often used to connect to
transit nodes that are in close proximity, about 1.24 - 3.10 miles (see table 1) (Martens,
2004).
Apart from the above-mentioned active transportation forms, commuters use
personal vehicles to connect to transit nodes. This connection is often associated with
park and ride facilities or the commuter being dropped off at a transit node, also known
as ‘kiss and ride.’ Markedly, the ‘kiss and ride’ method of station access requires no
parking spaces and since this is a motorized mode, the catchment area is much larger
than the catchment area for non-motorized modes. The catchment area for ‘kiss and
ride’ services range between 0.62 - 4.35 miles (see table 1) (Gil and Read, 2012).
In addition to using personal vehicles, shuttles and feeder buses serve as options
to address the first and last mile issue. A great example of the success of a shuttle
service is present in Oakland, California. Oakland’s Broadway shuttle, owned by the
City of Oakland’s Community and Economic Development Agency, connects the Bay
Area Rapid Transit (BART) with the Jack London Square, a popular entertainment and
business destination. After the Broadway shuttle was introduced, authorities noted that
9 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
ridership was higher than expected and requested that the program be expanded
(Gomez, 2010).
Table 1.Catchment area for transit based on mode choice
On the other hand, private ridesharing companies such as Uber and Lyft,
represent a novel option to addressing FLM issues. For instance, in Dallas, riders on the
Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) system can now access Uber via the agency’s
mobile ticketing application (app), a program intended to simplify connections at transit
stations (Dallas Area Rapid Transit, 2015). The main idea is that Uber will act as a
feeder option to and from transit stops. Apart from the Uber app being integrated within
a transit agency’s app, transit agencies in Minneapolis and Los Angeles have signed
deals with Uber to cover trip costs on Uber as part of their respective guaranteed ride
home programs (Simes, 2016).
2.3 FLM Strategy Toolbox As aforementioned, several forms of connectors exist that commuters rely on to
connect to transit nodes. Each connector relies on various elements that improve the
travel experience of end users. Generally, the elements used to improve FLM fall under
Mode Range (miles) Source
Walk 0.01 - .5 mile (Guerra, Cervero, & Tischler, 2011)
Cycle 1.24 - 3.10 miles (Martens, 2004)
Public Transport (Feeder Buses) 1.24 -3.73 miles (Gil & Read, 2012)
Car (kiss and ride) 0.62 - 4.35 miles (Gil & Read, 2012)
10 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
one of the following categories: pedestrian tools; bicycle tools; transportation demand
management tools; transit access information tools; and auto access tools (Utah Transit
Authority, 2015). Given that such a wide variety of tools are available, the question
arises, which ones should receive priority? Julian Lauzan, a transit planner at the RTS
asserts that the funding and the bureaucratic process required for implementing the
improvement generally dictates which enhancement will be made. In fact, in many
instances, the grants transit agencies apply for usually outline the scope of
improvements that can be made. Other than costs and the required bureaucratic
process, the typology of the area can be used to guide the prioritization improvements
for transit connections as well (Utah Transit Authority, 2015). For instance, some transit
nodes may be concentrated in downtown areas characterized by high densities and
more pedestrian traffic.
2.4 FLM Initiatives Throughout the United States Throughout the U.S., transit agencies are expanding efforts to increase the
convenience for individuals to use transit. In fact, considering the volatility of gasoline,
combined with the millennials’ desire to use multi-modal travel options and the Baby
Boomers’ return to urban areas, the environment is quite conducive for growth in transit
(APTA, 2016). In order to increase the attractiveness of transit, localities are focusing
significantly on enacting FLM initiatives. The table and graphic (see table 2 and figure 4)
below outline the latest initiatives taken by transit agencies in the U.S. to address FLM
issues.
11 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
Table 2. The latest trends for addressing FLM issues
Latest Trends for Addressing First/Last Mile Issues
Pinellas Suncoast Authority (PSA)
In February of 2016, PSA became the first public transit agency in Florida to partner directly with a ridesharing company. As part of the partnership, riders pay $3 to take trips to or from select transit stations — with the agency picking up the rest of the fare — making the first and last mile trips affordable to riders. Uber’s technology allows the agency to target specific geographic areas making it possible for the agency to choose where they would like to provide service (Natural Resources Defense Council, 2016).
The Regional Transportation District (RTD) in Colorado
Colorado’s RTD is exploring a pilot project to provide residents and workers with free (grant-subsidized) Lyft rides to and from a suburban light rail station. RTD estimates that the passenger subsidies will cost less than the agency’s current costs for its own Call-n-Ride bus operations, while greatly improving response times for customers (RTD, 2016).
TriMet in Portland Lyft recently launched a partnership with TriMet to integrate real-time Lyft availability and pricing information directly into the TriMet Tickets app, enabled by Moovel’s RideTap. By surfacing Lyft information in the same app where riders buy transit tickets, this partnership reduces friction for multimodal travelers, encouraging commuters to leave their cars at home (Natural Resources Defense Council, 2016).
Maryland Transit Administration (MTA)
MTA has partnered with Baltimore City to install bike share stations at targeted MARC Train, Light Rail Link, and Metro Subway Link stations. MTA is also encouraging a platform for car sharing to more than 20 MARC Train, Light Rail Link, and Metro Subway Link parking facilities. Moreover, MTA is testing the viability of Micro-transit― an emerging, scaled down version of mass transit that provides a shared, on-demand, and tech-enabled ride (Natural Resources Defense Council, 2016).
MARTA in Atlanta, Georgia
MARTA has focused significantly on pedestrian accessibility improvements, bike parking improvements, improving curb channels to move bikes up stairwells, and instituting wind shelters. MARTA also focused on improving its real-time transit information system. Furthermore, MARTA has partnered with the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) to create the Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) ― a unique competitive planning grant program to provide communities with access to various modes of travel (including public transit, roadways, walking, and biking) and to cultivate outreach processes that involve all stakeholders (Natural Resources Defense Council, 2016).
12 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority( LA Metro)
LA Metro recently conducted an in depth FLM study to identify the best ways to improve connections to transit. As a result of the study, LA Metro is increasing its focus on improving the following: crossing and connections (enhance existing crosswalks, mid-block & additional intersection crossings, raised crossings, cut-throughs & shortcuts, curb extensions at intersections, & scramble crossings); signage and wayfinding (metro signage & maps, medallion signage, time-to-station signage, real-time signage adjacent to station, & smart technologies); safety and comfort (street furniture, landscaping & shade, lighting, enhanced bus waiting areas, freeway underpass & overpass enhancements, traffic calming, sidewalk paving & surface enhancements); allocation of street-space (reduced lane width, enhanced bike facilities, bus enhancements, the “Green Zone”, signal modifications, sidewalk widening, rolling lane); and plug-in components (car share, neighborhood electric vehicles (NEVs), bike share & bike station, van pool & feeder bus, high visibility bicycle parking, electronic bicycle & pedestrian counters, kiss & ride, micro park-and-ride) (Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 2013)
Figure 4. A comparison of FLM strategies with peer transit agencies
Source: Utah Transit Authority
13 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
Based on both the table and the graphic above, transportation agencies are evidently
committing significant effort to enhancing pedestrian and bicycle facilities to address
FLM challenges. Some agencies are also exploring partnerships with ridesharing
companies such as Uber and Lyft as a means of attracting more ridership on transit. As
ridesharing companies continue to evolve, transit agencies should seek opportunities to
further enhance transit use.
III. Methodology
3.1 Overview of Research Design In this chapter, the methodology used to conduct this research is described. The
study design is cross-sectional and focused on studying and drawing inferences from
the existing differences among the student population at UF. Moreover, it should be
noted that data was collected at and concerning one point in time. The main tool used to
collect data was a brief survey (see appendix). Both the findings of the literature on FLM
and conversations with transit officials at the RTS in Gainesville, Florida were used to
refine the issues to be explored. The survey is made up of 10 questions with five
implicit sections: the first section focuses on the respondents’ usage of transit; the
second section collects demographic information; the third section collects information
on the respondents’ preference to connect to transit; the fourth section investigates the
students’ opinion concerning the importance of bicycle, pedestrian, and transit station
facilities; and the final section asks participants to identify any additional barriers of
connecting to transit that were not highlighted in the questionnaire.
3.2 Study Population and Sampling The study population consisted of millennial students attending the University of
Florida. In this study, the millennial generation is defined as persons born in 1982 –
14 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
2003. In order to determine if a participant was classified as a millennial, the participant
was asked to select the range that included their respective birth year. If the participant
was not born in 1982 – 2003, the survey was destroyed. Students waiting at bus stops,
exiting classes, and throughout the UF campus were randomly selected to participate in
the survey.
3.3 Data Collection A ten question survey was the only tool used to collect data from participants.
The variables being examined include: the frequency of using public transit; preferred
method to get to and from bus stations/stops; and preference for bicycle, pedestrian,
and station facilities at or near transit nodes. The researcher printed the survey and
issued it to participants to answer. A paper survey was issued instead of an online
survey mainly because the researcher had no access to an email listserv for students.
In addition, the researcher realized that having a paper survey would allow more
participants to be surveyed in one sitting, in comparison to asking students one-by-one
to answer the survey on a smart device such as a tablet. In total, eighty-five individuals
agreed to participate in the survey over a two week period. Out of the eight-five, ten
respondents were outside of the established classification for millennials and as a
result, those ten surveys were destroyed (see figure 5).
15 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
Figure 5. Total students surveyed on UF's campus
3.2 Data Analysis Each answer to a question was given a numerical value which allowed
descriptive statistics to be gathered. The responses to the survey were entered in
Microsoft Excel, and several pivot tables and charts were created to visualize the
descriptive statistics.
IV. Results After entering the data in Microsoft Excel and generating a pivot table, the
researcher was able to gather the desired descriptive statistics. The results show that
77% of millennials attending UF prefer walking as the mode to connect to transit, while
13% prefer bicycling and 8% prefer using a private automobile. No respondent chose
the options: shuttles (both private and public); publicly operated Flex Bus services; or
private rideshare companies such as Uber and Lyft (see figure 6). In addition,
noticeable variation existed in the respondents’ preference for connecting to transit
based on the respondents’ frequency of using transit (see figure 7). Finally, most
16 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
participants valued pedestrian and transit facilities near transit nodes as either very
important or important, while a few expressed neutrality or aversion to pedestrian and
transit facilities (see figure 8 and 9). On the other hand, a striking amount of
respondents disregarded bike facilities (see figure 10).
Figure 7. Most preferred method to get to and from transit nodes by respondents
Figure 6. Most preferred method to connect to transit nodes based on respondent's frequency of riding transit
13% 1% 8% 77%
MOST PREFFERED METHOD TO GET TO AND FROM TRANSIT NODES
Bicycling No Response Private automobile Walking
Note: 0% of respondents chose the following options: Shuttles (both public and private); Publicly Operated FlexBus Services; and Private Rideshare Companies (Uber & Lyft)
17 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
Figure 8. Importance of pedestrian facilities based on students’ responses
64%
47%
68%
45%
20% 21%16%
23%
3%
15%
3%
16%
0% 1% 0% 1%0% 1% 0% 1%0% 1% 0% 0%
Improved Crosswalks Pedestrian SpecificSignage
Street Lighting forPedestrians
Landscape ImprovementsAlong Sidewalks
Pedestrian Facilities
Very Important Important Neutral Less Important Not Important No Response
59%61%
77%
32%
21%17%
9%15%
5%0% 1% 0%0% 1% 0%0% 0% 0%
Passenger Waiting Areas Wayfinding and Signage Lighting Near Transit Stops
Transit Stop Facilities
Very Important Important Neutral Less Important Not Important No response
Figure 9. Importance of transit stop facilities based on students’ responses
18 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
Figure 9. Importance of bike facilities based on students’ responses
V. Discussion
5.1 Interpretation of Results and Implications The results indicate that the majority of students attending UF prefer walking as
the main mode to access transit. Considering that the FLM trip is substantially impacted
primarily by distance, modal integration, and network quality, the question arises, which
categories are influencing the students’ preference the most? By analyzing the location
of the majority of student housing developments in relation to bus stops, it is evident
that a relatively short distance exists between a student’s origin and a transit node.
Lauzan, the transit planner at RTS explained that most routes offered by RTS are
created to cater to students for increased convenience. Consequently, walking to transit
is likely more attractive for potential transit users. In terms of modal integration, RTS
has instituted park and ride facilities and most buses are able to carry at most, two bikes
on bike racks attached to the front of the bus. The limited capacity to carry bikes
onboard buses may discourage the use of bikes to connect to transit. Also, the network
15%
45%47%
36%35%
25%
21%
32%31%
16%
21%
13%
7%4% 4%
5%
11%
4%7%
5%3%
5%
0%
8%
Bike Sharing Bike Paths (Separatedtrail)
Onboard Bike Racks (onbus)
Bike Racks and Lockers
Bike Facilities
Very Important Important Neutral Less Important Not Important No response
19 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
quality may further deter using bikes to connect with transit due to the lack of bike
facilities such as bike paths, lanes, lockers, and stations.
Notably, none of the respondents of the survey chose the following connector
options: shuttles (both public and private); publicly operated flex-bus Services; and
private rideshare companies (Uber & Lyft). Once again, the present modal network may
have influenced the correspondents’ choice for not choosing shuttles (both public and
private) and publicly operated flex-bus services as connectors to transit. The culture of
using ridesharing along with the close distance between one’s origin and the transit
node are likely factors that influenced the students’ disfavor for using Uber to connect to
transit. According to a student attending UF who wanted to maintain anonymity, “Uber is
for weekend fun; and whenever you are too drunk to drive home.”
Along with selecting a preference for a mode to connect to transit, respondents
were asked to rate the importance of bike, pedestrian, and transit facilities. The
participants’ appreciation for pedestrian facilities supports their preference to walking as
the main mode to connect to public transportation. Street lighting for pedestrians and
improved crosswalks garnered the larger support as most important, while respondents
were notably neutral to pedestrian specific signage and landscape improvements.
Markedly, the easy access to real time information via smart phones may be meeting
the purpose of printed wayfinding and signage. For instance, by providing the schedules
and bus stop coordinates to Google, RTS gives transit riders the option to use Google
Maps for directions to nearby bus stops and to obtain the expected arrival and
departure time. However, the high level of neutrality and the evident disregard towards
20 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
bike facilities raises several questions. Bike facilities received the highest percentage of
ratings as less important or not important.
This data suggest that in order to enhance the FLM experience for millennials
attending UF, priority should be directed to maintaining and enhancing pedestrian
facilities. However, transit and bicycle facilities should not be overlooked. The data also
indicate that 20% of respondents who never used transit would prefer biking to transit
nodes and another 20% would prefer using a private vehicle to connect to transit; these
respondents represent a segment of potential transit riders (see figure 7).
5.2 Limitations
One possible limitation may have been that respondents were not familiar with
certain terms used on the survey sheet. For instance, students may not have known
what are Flexbus services or bike lockers. In addition, the survey did not allow the
strength of preference for each stated connector type to be measured. Also, three
campus bus routes, route 46, 17, and 16 were not identified as routes taken by any of
the respondents who completed the questionnaire. As a result, the overall perceptions
of student transit riders may have been discounted. Finally, participants who answered
the survey in a group setting may have been influenced by others in close proximity.
VI. Conclusion This paper has analyzed millennials’ preferred means to connect to transit nodes
by surveying students attending UF. Based on the results of the survey, priority should
be given to maintaining and enhancing pedestrian facilities to improve the FLM
experience. Further studies should be pursued to examine why millennials at UF
consider biking facilities as unimportant; moreover, research should be conducted at the
micro-level to examine the strategies best suited for each bus route. Finally, when
21 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
selecting strategies to improve the FLM, it is important to consider context and tailor the
network to the preference of the users.
VII. Appendix
Questionnaire Used to Survey Students
Preferred Methods for Riders to Get to and from Transit Stations
This study focuses on the preferred methods for millennial riders to get to and
from transit stations. The purpose of the study is to enhance the convenience of
using transit specifically for college students. Participating in this survey is
completely voluntary. At any time, you can opt to not answer a question. The
questionnaire will take about 2 – 3 minutes. All of the responses will be
confidential.
1) Select how frequently do you ride public transit?
1. Daily
2. A few times a week
3. A few times a month
4. A few times a year
5. Never
6. Other
2) Did you ride transit today?
1. Yes
2. No
3) If yes, what bus route(s) did you take to get to school?
4) Circle when were you born?
1. Before 1982
2. 1982 – 2003
3. After 2003
5) Select your gender?
1. Male
2. Female
3. Prefer not to specify
6) Circle your most preferred method to get to and from bus stations or bus stops
(Choose one)?
1. Walking
22 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
2. Bicycling
3. Private automobile
4. Shuttles, both public and private
5. Publicly operated Flex Bus services
6. Private rideshare companies, such as Uber and Lyft
7) Please tick how important these features of bicycle facilities at or near transit stops
and onboard buses are to you.
8) Please tick how important these features of pedestrian facilities at or near transit
stops are to you.
Very Important
Important Neutral Less Important
Not Important
Bike paths (separated trail)
Bike sharing (the ability to pick up a bicycle at any self-service bike-station and return it to any other bike station located within the system’s service area)
Bike racks/lockers
Onboard Bike racks (on bus)
Very Important
Important Neutral Less Important
Not Important
Improved Crosswalks (i.e. raised crosswalks, marked crosswalks, etc.)
Pedestrian specific signage (i.e. fixed maps, schedules, and instructions or brochures)
Street lighting for pedestrians
Landscape improvements along sidewalks (i.e. provide street trees, shrubs, etc.)
23 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
9) Please tick how important these features of station facilities at transit stops are to
you.
10) What other barriers (getting to and from bus stops and transfer stations) are not
identified?
Very Important
Important Neutral Less Important
Not Important
Lighting
Improved passenger waiting areas (i.e. covered shelters, real-time bus/train information, trash cans etc.)
Wayfinding and signage (i.e., information about transit routes, availability of services, etc.)
24 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
References
American Public Transportation Association (2015). “Millennials & Mobility:
Understanding the Millennial Mindset.” Retrieved from
http://www.apta.com/resources/reportsandpublications/Documents/APTA-
Millennials-and-Mobility.pdf
Dallas Area Rapid Transit (2015). “The Last Mile: Increasing Transit Accessibility.”
Retrieved from https://www.dart.org/about/inmotion/july15/1.asp
Gil, J., and Read, Stephen (2012). “Measuring Sustainable Accessibility Potential Using
the Mobility Infrastructure’s Network Configuration.” Retrieved from
http://www.sss8.cl/media/upload/paginas/seccion/8104_1.pdf
Gomez, M. (2010). “Oakland looks to expand popular ‘Free B’ shuttle.” Retrieved from
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Oakland-looks-to-expand-popular-Free-B-
shuttle-2452785.php
Guerra, E., Cervero, R., & Tischler, D. (2011). “The Half-Mile Circle: Does It Best
Represent Transit Station Catchments?” Retrieved from
http://www.its.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/publications/UCB/2011/VWP/UCB-
ITS-VWP-2011-5.pdf
Krygsman, S., Dijst, M., & Arentze, T. (2004). “Multimodal public transport: an analysis
of travel time elements and the interconnectivity ratio.” Transport Policy, 11(3),
265-275.
Lesh, M. C. (2013). Innovative Concepts in First-Last Mile Connections to Public
Transportation. In S.L. Jones Jr. (Ed.), Urban Public Transportation Systems
2013 (pp. 63-74). Washington, D.C.: American Society of Civil Engineers
(ASCE).
Litman, T. (2015). Evaluating public transit benefits and costs. Victoria Transport Policy
Institute.
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro (2013). “Draft- First
Last Mile Strategic Plan: PATH PLANNING GUIDELINES.” Retrieved from
25 FIRST/LAST MILE CHALLENGE: PERSPECTIVES OF MILLENNIALS
http://libraryarchives.metro.net/DB_Attachments/131108_DRAFT_First_Last_Mil
e_Strategic_Plan.pdf
Natural Resources Defense Council (2016). “First and Last Mile Connections: The Salt
Lake Region, Utah.” Retrieved from http://milehighconnects.org/wp-
content/uploads/2016/02/2016.01-FLMC-Salt-Lake-City-UT-NRDC-Case-
Study.pdf
Natural Resources Defense Council (2016). “First and Last Mile Connections: Atlanta,
GA.” Retrieved from http://milehighconnects.org/wp-
content/uploads/2016/02/2016.01-FLMC-Altanta-GA-NRDC-Case-Study.pdf
Natural Resources Defense Council (2016). “First and Last Mile Connections: New
Mobility.” Retrieved from https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/shared-mobility-
cs.pdf
Rietveld, P. (2000). “The accessibility of railway stations: the role of the bicycle in The
Netherlands.” Transportation Research Part D-Transport and Environment, 5(1),
71-75.
Simes, R. (2016). “Metro, Uber Ink Deal Aimed at Addressing First and Last Mile
Connections for Transit Riders.” Retrieved from
http://www.urbancincy.com/2016/03/metro-uber-ink-deal-aimed-at-addressing-
first-and-last-mile-connections-for-transit-riders/
Tay, H. (2012). “Cycling infrastructure as a first mile solution for mass transit access in
Singapore: a study of MRT ridership in Singapore towns.” Retrieved from
https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/73799#files-area
Utah Transit Authority (2015). “First/Last Mile Strategies Study.” Retrieved from
https://www.rideuta.com/-/media/Files/Studies-
Reports/UTAFirst_LastMileFINALCOMP1.ashx?la=en