FlexBRT Project Briefing: Using ITS to Serve Suburban Markets
-
Upload
sylvester-elliott -
Category
Documents
-
view
20 -
download
8
description
Transcript of FlexBRT Project Briefing: Using ITS to Serve Suburban Markets
FlexBRT Project Briefing:Using ITS to Serve Suburban Markets
Randall Farwell
FlexBRT Concept Dynamically routed and dispatched
point-to-point operation Responds to user request, real-time
and pre-booked (12 min max wait time)
Fare payment prior to boarding Stations at activity centers Transit ITS support Station access only No fixed schedules No fixed routes
Portland, ME
Traditional
BRT
FlexBRT
Why the FlexBRT Concept?
#
#
#
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
###
##
##
###
#
#
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
SR
436
US
17
&92
S
SR 436 W
SR 434 N
SR
434
S
SR 414
SR 436 E
CR
427 S
W MAITLAND BV
SR
43
4 N
FO
RE
ST
CIT
Y R
D
S O
RL
AN
DO
AV
N O
RLA
NDO
AV
SR 436
I-4
OF
F R
PI-
4 O
FF
RP
W MAITLAND BV
162
181
103
197175
98142
165
157
180
158
116
140
166
168
139
179
102
146
132
171
145
122
170
125100
156
176
127
119
113
198
121178
118
143
194
120
174
169
212
133
193
138
196
126
195
134
144
131211
177
141
167
99
190
128
123135
117
173
137
101
189
136129
172
130
124
634
637
808
809
636
894
639
801
643 791
803807
804
920
641
635
802
895
919
800
795
794
805
806
918
640
916 799
644
792
797
798
793
638921
917
896
796
55
60
53
51
33
27
2622
19
3
5
16
17
46
38
37
36
5756
58
52
1
2
4
687
109
1112131420
21
18
28
24
40
4342
29
35
61
152325
30
65
39
4166
44
64
48
49
0 0.5 1 MilesTotal Trip Flows
Trips
4 - 6
6 - 13
13 - 24
24 - 45
Station#
1/4 mile Buffer
TAZ
Roads
CO ROAD
INTERSTATE
SR TOLL
STATE ROAD
US HW Y
Legend
Service Area and Stations
38 stations
8 remote kiosks
10 future stations
How It Works
1. User requests ride and selects destination station
2. System Selects “best fit” vehicle3. Prompts user to confirm trip4. User boards vehicle and swipes
Boarding Pass5. Trip confirmed
Operational Workflow
1. User requests ride2. Origin location determined3. Prompt for destination4. Prompt for size of party5. Locate existing vehicles6. Evaluate vehicle manifests7. Select “best fit” based on:
• user wait time• user time on board• time on board impact on
other passengers• user total travel time (wait
plus time on board)• available capacity on
vehicle.
8. Calculate fare9. Offer best solution10. Prompt user to accept
trip• declines, trip canceled,• accepts, trip booked, sent to MDT
11. Print Boarding Pass12. User boards vehicle, boarding pass read, trip confirmed
On-vehicle systems Automated reservation,
scheduling, vehicle assignment Vehicle location/computerized
dispatch Payment system and boarding
pass High capacity, high speed, reliable
wireless communications
ITS Driven
Modeling Effort Objectives to validate and complement concept
plan, defining Number of vehicles required Vehicle-miles and vehicle-hours of service Preliminary O&M costs Sensitivities to changes in input variables
Trapeze PASS used to model FlexBRT operations
Weekday demand entered as trip requests 5:00 am to 12:00 am Total of 4,379 requests
PASS parameters set to reflect FlexBRT concept Assigned requests to vehicle runs
Sensitivity Analysis
After base, 35 scenarios were run Variations were made to
Vehicles: 20 (base), 30, 40 Speed [mph]: 21 (base), 23, 25, 28 Max. Wait Time 10 (base), 12, 15
Results for every combination of variations prepared, 36 scenarios
Performed sensitivity analyses on variables
Success Rate Sensitivity to Speed and Max. Waiting Time
50%
55%
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Speed [mph]
Su
cces
s R
ate
10
12
15
Productivity Sensitivity to Speed and Max. Waiting Time
0
3
6
9
12
15
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Speed [mph]
Pro
du
ctiv
ity
[pas
s/h
r]
10
12
15
Average Waiting Time and On-Board Time Variation with Speed and Max. Waiting Time
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Speed [mph]
Tim
e [m
in]
10
12
15
10
12
15
Increasing Max WT from 10 to 12 min has a higher impact than 12 to 15 min. Max WT of 12 min encourages random arrivals, equates to avg wait of 6 minutes. Productivity increases with speed and Max WT.
Operations Analysis
Objective to Optimize: Number of Vehicles O&M Costs Ridership Productivity Wait/Travel Times Cost-effectiveness
Ran 36 Scenarios Select best scenario
INPUT Scen. 11 Scen. 23 Scen. 34 Scen. 35Runs / Vehicles 20 30 40 40Speed 28 28 28 28Max Waiting Time 12 12 10 12
RESULTSTotal trips 4,379 4,379 4,379 4,379Scheduled Trips (Success) 3,368 4,163 4,281 4,319Unscheduled Trips (Failure) 1,011 216 98 60Success rate 77% 95% 98% 99%Productivity (Pass/hour) 11.32 10.19 8.21 8.83Total Distance [veh-mi] 10,527 13,332 15,610 14,372Non-Revenue Distance 2,993 3,925 5,318 4,505Revenue Distance 7,533 9,408 10,291 9,866Total Time [veh-hrs] 305 420 537 505Non-Revenue Time 80 133 221 200Revenue Time 225 287 315 304Average Trip Distance [mi] 2.38 2.32 2.32 2.31Average Ride Time [min] 7.9 7.7 7.5 7.6Av. wait [min] 6.1 5.8 4.7 5.5Av. Actual Speed [mph] 18.2 18.2 18.7 18.1Speed Ratio 64.9% 64.8% 66.6% 64.8%Daily O&M Costs [$] 12,295$ 15,662$ 17,204$ 16,608$ Annual O&M Costs [$] 3,209,093$ 4,087,785$ 4,490,364$ 4,334,748$
Average O&M cost / trip 3.65$ 3.76$ 4.02$ 3.85$
Connection to Fixed Route
Total Project CostsProject Cost
Elements
Roadway Improvements $3,054,112
Stations $2,316,000
Vehicles $8,910,000
ITS Components $4,421,758
Total Capital$18,701,87
0
Total Fees $4,848,911
Total Project$23,550,78
1
O&M Costs
Vehicle Operations
$4,089,900
ITS $241,300
Stations $62,400
Total O&M Costs$4,393,60
0
Westmonte Drive and SR 436
FlexBRT vs. Traditional Transit
Evaluation CriteriaAlternative in 2020
Traditional Circulator
FlexBRT
Peak Vehicle Requirement 31 30
Annual Ridership 563,500 1,086,543
Annual Vehicle-Revenue Hours 151,934 74,907
Productivity (Riders/VRH) 3.71 14.51
Annual O&M Cost $8,295,600$4,393,60
0
Annual Cost per Trip $14.72 $4.04
Annual Revenue $704,374$1,358,17
9
Annual O&M Subsidy $7,591,228$3,035,58
9
Annual O&M Subsidy/Rider $13.47 $2.79
FlexBRT makes economic sense… 92%92% higher ridership, generated on… 51%51% fewer revenue miles, producing… 291%291% greater productivity, that
costs… 28%28% less per rider, which is a… 79%79% reduction in the subsidy from
local governments PER rider!!
Bang for the Buck
Funding Federal State Local
Altamonte Springs Maitland Private Property Owners (thru DOs)
Schedule
PER complete Jan 2004 File CATEX Feb 2004 Public Hearing March 23, 2004 Identify Initial Segment of FlexBRT Final PER May 2004 Final Design Fall 2004 Open FlexBRT 2007/2008
Questions?