1
Using Transit Market Analysis Tools to Evaluate Transit Service
Improvements for a Regional Transportation Plan
TRB Transportation Applications May 20, 2009
By: Mark Charnews, PhD & Jennifer Ryan, PEPuget Sound Regional Council
Liam HonCambridge Systematics, Inc.
Puget Sound Regional Council
2
PSRC Integrated Urban Models
Integrated Models Simulating Persons and Vehicles at a Parcel Level
Regional Economic Forecasts
Land Use Forecasts
Travel Forecasts
Benefit-Cost Analysis
Transport System
Geodatabase
Hybrid ActivityUrbanSim
PSEF
BCA
Air Quality Analysis
EPA MOVES
Alternatives Development
ProjectsTOM
IDAS TCI/SPT
3
T2040 Alternatives Development Tools
Regional Customization of Various Modeling Tools: Market Segmentation
Attitudinal preference analysis from 2006 Household Survey.
Transit Competitive IndexDemand based automated process to combine Census and Employment block data with results of market segmentation to identify most transit competitive O-D pairs within a corridor.
Sketch Planning Tool – Market AnalysisSupply based automated process to evaluate changes in ridership within a corridor’s O-D pairings based on travel time changes for all
routes.
4
Need for Travel Flexibility
Attitudinal Factorsfrom 2006 PSRC Household Survey
Time Sensitivity
Transit Receptiveness
Comfort and Time Use
Environmental Consciousness
Travel Stress
5
Market Segmentation
Transit Receptive
All Travelers in the Puget Sound Region
High Transit Receptiveness Low Transit ReceptivenessMedium Transit Receptiveness
Need forTravelFlexibility
MarketSegment
Low Need forFlexibility
High Need forFlexibility
Low Need For Flexibility
Medium NeedFor Flexibility
HighComfort
Time Use
Medium Comfort
Time Use
High Comfort
Time Use
Low Comfort
Time Use
ProductiveRiders
RoutineRiders
ComfortableMovers
MobileRiders
Comfort and Time Use
Low Comfort
Time Use
Medium Comfort
Time Use
Easy Goers
No Frills 9To 5’ers
Low Comfort
Time Use
Medium Comfort
Time Use
ComfortableDrivers
High Need for Flexibility
Multi-tripDrivers
6
Market Segment Size
8%
8.9%
12%
15.1%
10%
6.2%
0%
22.7%
0%
19.7%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
ProductiveRiders
MobileRiders
RoutineRiders
ComfortableMovers
Easy Goers
No Frills 9 To 5ers
Multi-tripDrivers
ComfortableDrivers
Perc
en
t In
cid
en
ce
30%
5.2%
20%
22%
30%
4%
34%
12%10%
0% 0%
Transit Percentage
6%
14.1%
6%
7
Interpreting the Transit Competitiveness Index (TCI)
• TCI shows how competitive transit is relative to auto
• TCI utilizes road network not transit availability
• TCI > 100 is transit competitive
• TCI is proportional to the TAZ’s ability to generate transit trips
Transit competitive
0
1-50
50-100
100-200
200-500
500-2,000
>2,000
TCI
TCI
Production Trip Density
Attraction Trip Density
Market Segment Concentration
Household Income
Trip Purposes
Congestion
Parking Cost
8
Work Trips to Bellevue
TCI Results:
• Bellevue/Redmond corridor very strong work attractor on Eastside
• Surprisingly strong attraction from North and West Seattle (limited thru bus connections currently)
Bellevue
Redmond/Microsoft
273
571
400 396
958
658711
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Seat
tle C
BD
N. S
eattle
QA/M
agno
lia
Belle
vue
CBD
Kirk
land
S. B
ellevu
e
Redm
ond
TCI
9
origin
destination
Transit Sketch Planning Tool
• Applies results of market research– Stores existing mode shares– Matches markets with transit service– Segments markets geographically– Inputs service scenarios– Outputs ridership
Existing service
New direct service
bus ridership: +100 dailydrive alone: -100 daily
10
SPT Example Ballard to Bellevue CBD
11
Level of Service Menu
12
Use of Level of Service Parameters
• Bus Rapid Transit – decrease in-vehicle time, increase walk distance both peak and offpeak
• Transit Signal Priority – decrease in-vehicle time
• Stop Consolidation – increase walk time, decrease in-vehicle time
• Fare Change – change travel cost by transit
• Auto Congestion – increase in-vehicle time auto
• Direct Transit Service – decrease transfers, decrease in-vehicle time
Examples of Transit Service impacts on Level of Service Parameters:
13
Transit Level of Service Peak
14
Results Summary
Trip Changes
Local Bus (WA) Decrease Transit In-vehicle Time: 5 minutesDecrease Transit Wait Time: 15 minutesDecrease Transfers: 1
Other HBWOff Peak Before After Change Before After Change
Local Bus (WA) 10 30 197% 5 26 428%Local Bus (DA) 0 0 0% 0 0 0%Premium Bus (WA) 1 1 N/A 1 1 N/APremium Bus (DA) 0 0 0% 0 0 0%Auto 162 142 -12% 72 52 -29%
Other HBWPeak Before After Change Before After Change
Local Bus (WA) 2 7 205% 26 86 228%Local Bus (DA) 0 0 0% 2 1 -58%Premium Bus (WA) 0 0 0% 0 0 0%Premium Bus (DA) 0 0 0% 0 0 0%Auto 51 46 -10% 170 111 -35%
15
Identified Transit Corridors for Bellevue Example
16
Transit Facilities Example
17
TCI and SPT Applications
• Used for Transportation 2040 Long Range Plan Update
• Used to develop ridership estimates for BNSF Commuter Rail Feasibility Study
• Will be used to develop transit service for Bellevue Multimodal Concurrency Study
18
Questions
For more information, contact:
Mark Charnews, PhD Senior Modeler
Puget Sound Regional Council
206-971-3285
Jennifer Ryan, PE Principal Planner
206-405-0542
Liam HonAssociate
Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
206-327-9962
Top Related