Characteristics of Premium Transit Services that Affect Choice of Mode (2014)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

5 C H A P T E R 1 Motivation for the Project The purpose of this research was to describe the most important factors that differentiate premium transit services from standard transit services and to quantify, for practical use, the magnitude of these distinguishing features. The research team’s goals were twofold: • To improve the transit industry’s understanding of mode choice determinants; and • To offer practical insights to the forecasting community so that mode choice models and transit path-builders can better represent and distinguish important mode characteristics. The premise of this research is that understanding and modeling more of the factors deter- mining travel behavior will significantly improve the explanatory power of the models and the potential transferability of travel forecasting models. The inclusion of non-traditional transit service attributes to distinguish premium transit services, instead of mode-specific constants or other fixed parameters, allowed the research team to remove modal labels from the models. This, in turn, reduced the mode-specific constants and other fixed parameters in the mode choice models. Literature and Practice Reviews The review of the literature and current practice was conducted to inform the analysis of how characteristics of premium transit services might affect choice of mode. This review focused on three aspects of transit planning: 1. Awareness of Transit Services. The lack of awareness and familiarity with transit seems to be significant, and there is not yet abundant research on this topic. 2. Transit Service Attributes. The majority of the literature and practice review focused on evaluating non-traditional transit service attributes that could inform mode choice models and transit networks for planning analysis. The long list of attributes was organized into nine categories: monetary cost, journey time, convenience, comfort, accessibility, productivity, information services, fare payment, and safety. 3. How Mode Choice Models Incorporate Premium Transit Services. Practitioners have struggled to quantify these additional service attributes and to measure travelers’ reactions to them. This review highlighted the need for an in-depth study to quantify these additional service attributes and to incorporate them in travel forecasting models. To support better behavioral models, it is necessary to extend the conventional set of explanatory variables to include new variables and methods that relate specifically to the decision-making process. Current practice in mode choice modeling typically results in models that are sensitive to the effects of travel times, wait times, frequencies, travel costs, and transfers, and include large, mode-specific constants. In theory, the mode constants capture the differences in the Introduction

6 Characteristics of Premium Transit Services that Affect Choice of Mode unobserved attributes of modes, but the constants are also adjusted to match observed ridership volumes and therefore help “correct” other errors in the travel model system. Appendix A presents the findings from a review of the literature and the practical experience in these areas, focusing primarily on identification of distinguishing transit service features and their relative importance in mode choice and transit customer satisfaction. A few successful transit industry anecdotes related to upgrading non-traditional transit service amenities are discussed to provide context for the research. The discussion is based on detailed responses obtained from staff at a few transit agencies and MPOs, which also are reported in Appendix A. Appendix A also outlines current attempts in research and practice to understand mode choice and improve the reasonableness and interpretability of mode choice models, reducing the extent to which mode-specific constants dominate the utility equations. The review considers the extent to which the public is aware of transit services and whether the presumption of complete knowledge in travel models is reasonable. Finally, the appendix includes a discussion of the ways that non-traditional transit attributes have been included in mode choice models. These reviews together informed and helped focus the data collection effort for TCRP Project H-37 and begin to suggest opportunities for advancement of the practice. Appendix A presents detailed identification and quantification research of non-traditional transit service attributes as well as case studies pertaining to attribute evaluation and incorporation of these attributes in model applications. Research Process The project was completed in two phases. The Salt Lake City survey was completed first, then revised before deployment in Chicago and Charlotte; this was done to address limita- tions discovered in the analysis. The initial phase of the work was exploratory and focused on identifying the non-traditional transit service measures, traveler attitudes and awareness, and consideration of transit modes that affect traveler behavior. This was done by collecting and analyzing data in three different urban contexts: 1. Salt Lake City has light rail, commuter rail, and bus, and has good ridership for a small city. The city is young, temperate, and not very ethnically diverse. 2. Chicago has commuter rail, heavy rail, and bus, and has good ridership for a large city. The transit system is older and more established, and the city is ethnically diverse. 3. Charlotte has a smaller light rail and bus system, and the light rail was recently introduced. Ridership is lower, but it is growing. The city is smaller, older, and ethnically diverse. Appendix B contains the survey instruments used in each city and Appendix C contains sur- vey methods and detailed survey results. The second phase of the work focused on estimating models for Chicago and Charlotte to quantify premium service characteristics, awareness and consideration, and traveler attitudes. These model estimations focused on testing the full range of possible variables, rather than identifying the best possible statistical fit. The model implementation phase focused on incorporating premium service characteristics into the transit networks and restructuring the mode choice model to replace transit modes with transit paths as defined by traveler preferences. These premium service characteristics were integrated with traveler preferences for other transit attributes and prioritized by comparing transit paths from on-board survey data. The highest priority preferences represented travelers who prefer a short walk or drive to access transit, travelers who prefer direct service (no transfers), and travelers who prefer premium transit services. The team recalibrated the models to assess the ability of the revised models to reduce the influence of mode-specific constants and other fixed parameters while retaining the ability to replicate observed modal trip tables and boardings.

Introduction 7 Structure of this Report The report is structured to follow the two primary themes of mode choice model improvements: incorporating premium service characteristics and traveler determinants of mode choice. Special terms used in the report are both defined in a glossary and called out in each chapter where the terms are used. The report has four chapters and ten appendices: • Chapter 1 introduces the motivation for the project and provides an overview of the literature review, the research process and the structure of the report. • Chapter 2 reports the key findings for the important non-traditional transit service attributes and the research methods and results in three areas: the effects on the attractiveness of transit, the effects on awareness and consideration of transit options, and the role of traveler attitudes. This includes market research and models estimated for three cities (Chicago, Charlotte, and Salt Lake City). • Chapter 3 reports the results of the implementation testing in travel forecasting models, the implementation methods, and the outcomes for the Salt Lake City demonstration. • Chapter 4 describes next steps for research and implementation testing to further the knowledge of how characteristics of premium transit services affect choice of mode. • The Glossary provides a list of terms used throughout the report that may not be familiar to all readers. • References are provided for all citations in the report and appendices. • Appendix A includes the detailed literature and practice reviews for premium service char- acteristics as a supplement to Chapter 1. • Appendix B reports the survey instruments and supports the market research discussions in Chapter 3. • Appendix C details the survey methods and results of the surveys for Salt Lake City, Chicago, and Charlotte, supporting the analysis in Chapter 3. • Appendix D provides technical details and results for the transit service attribute models (maximum difference scaling, called MaxDiff) in Chapter 3. • Appendix E includes technical details for the detailed multinomial logit choice models for mode choice in Chapter 3. • Appendix F provides technical details for the joint bivariate binary probit models of awareness and consideration in Chapter 3. • Appendix G reports the factor analysis for traveler attitudes to supplement information in Chapter 3. • Appendix H includes technical details for the integrated choice and latent variable models for mode choice in Chapter 3. • Appendix I includes a transit travel time analysis that was a pre-cursor to the path-building analysis for the model implementation in Chapter 4. • Appendix J presents technical details of the model implementation and calibration of the Salt Lake City model used in the transit path choice model tests in Chapter 4. The report documents the extensive research conducted to address the broad question of how to evaluate the characteristics of premium transit services that affect choice of mode. The research report is intended to be a reference for evaluating premium services and a guide to improving mode choice models.