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.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT This work was sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in cooperation with the Transit Development Corporation. It was conducted through the Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP), which is administered by the Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Academies. COPYRIGHT PERMISSION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for- profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. DISCLAIMER The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in the report are those of the research agency. They are not necessarily those of the TRB, the National Research Council, the FTA, the Transit Development Corporation, or the U.S. Government. This report has not been edited by TRB.
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, on its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academyâs purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both the Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. William A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is a division of the National Research Council, which serves the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. The Boardâs mission is to promote innovation and progress in transportation through research. In an objective and interdisciplinary setting, the Board facilitates the sharing of information on transportation practice and policy by researchers and practitioners; stimulates research and offers research management services that promote technical excellence; provides expert advice on transportation policy and programs; and disseminates research results broadly and encourages their implementation. The Board's varied activities annually engage more than 5,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org
i TABLE OF CONTENTS HLIST OF FIGURES..................................................................................................................... HII HLIST OF TABLES..................................................................................................................... HIV HACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................................................................................................... HVI HABSTRACT............................................................................................................................... HVII HSUMMARY OF FINDINGS........................................................................................................ H1 HCHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND RESEARCH APPROACH....................................... H3 HOVERVIEW.............................................................................................................................. H3 HUNDERSTANDING REGIONAL ACTIVITY PATTERNS............................................... H4 HFEATURES OF SUBURBAN TRANSIT SERVICES.......................................................... H6 HPRELIMINARY CASE STUDIES ......................................................................................... H9 HRECOMMENDATION OF DETAILED CASE STUDY SITES....................................... H15 HCASE STUDY RESEARCH METHODOLOGY................................................................ H17 HCHAPTER 2: FINDINGS.......................................................................................................... H20 HLAND-USE ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................. H20 HRELATIONSHIPS OF LAND-USE SERVICE AREA CHARACTERISTICS TO TRANSIT SERVICE AND PERFORMANCE.................................................................... H24 HPERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT.................................................................................. H31 HPERFORMANCE FACTOR RELATIONSHIPS TO PRODUCTIVITY........................ H33 HCORRELATION MATRIX .................................................................................................. H37 HSUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS..................................................................................... H39 HCHAPTER 3: INTERPRETATION, APPRAISAL AND APPLICATIONS ....................... H40 HCHAPTER 4: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTED RESEARCH...................................... H42 HOPERATING ENVIRONMENTS........................................................................................ H42 HMEASUREMENTS/EVALUATION PROCESS ................................................................ H43 HINNOVATIONS...................................................................................................................... H43 HFUTURE RESEARCH .......................................................................................................... H43 HBIBLIOGRAPHY....................................................................................................................... H45 HAPPENDIX A: LAND USE .....................................................................................................A- H1 HAPPENDIX B: SUBURBAN TRANSIT SERVICES............................................................B- H1 HAPPENDIX C: INITIAL CASE STUDIES............................................................................C- H1 HAPPENDIX D: CASE STUDY METHODOLOGY..............................................................D- H1 HAPPENDIX E: DATA COLLECTION FORMAT ...............................................................E- H1 HAPPENDIX F: QUANTITATIVE FACTORS DECISION MATRIX................................ F- H1 HAPPENDIX G: QUALITATIVE FACTORS DECISION MATRIX ................................. G- H1 HAPPENDIX H: DETAILED CASE STUDIES ..................................................................... H- H1 H1. DETROIT, MICHIGAN................................................................................................. H- H2 H2. MINNEAPOLIS/SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA......................................................... H- H20 H3. PORTLAND, OREGON............................................................................................... H- H29 H4. WILSONVILLE, OREGON......................................................................................... H- H40 H5. SEATTLE, WASHINGTON ........................................................................................ H- H48 H6. ALBANY, NEW YORK................................................................................................ H- H58 H7. BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA ............................................................................. H- H66 H8. DENVER, COLORADO............................................................................................... H- H76
ii LIST OF FIGURES HFigure 1-1: Conceptual Activity Surfaces by Urban Form............................................................. H5 HFigure 2-1: Research Objective .................................................................................................... H24 HFigure 2-2: Typology of Services................................................................................................. H25 HFigure 2-3: Case Study List of Services ....................................................................................... H25 HFigure 2-4: Spatial Adaptation ..................................................................................................... H26 HFigure 2-5: Temporal Adaptation ................................................................................................. H26 HFigure 2-6: Demand Level............................................................................................................ H27 HFigure 2-7: Moderate Density....................................................................................................... H27 HFigure 2-8: Fixedness and Productivity........................................................................................ H28 HFigure 2-9: Productivity and Density ........................................................................................... H28 HFigure 2-10: Productivity and Land-Use Mix .............................................................................. H29 HFigure 2-11: Service Level and Productivity................................................................................ H29 HFigure 2-12: Population Density versus Productivity................................................................... H34 HFigure 2-13: Zero-Car Households versus Productivity............................................................... H34 HFigure 2-14: TLOS Indictor versus Productivity.......................................................................... H35 HFigure 2-15: Service Area versus Productivity............................................................................. H35 HFigure C-1: Wilsonville Annual Ridership 1989-2003 ..............................................................C- H8 HFigure C-2: Urbandale On Call Service Area...........................................................................C- H35 HFigure C-3: Urbandale On-Call Ridership................................................................................C- H37 HFigure H-1: Detroit Metropolitan Area Activity Surface ...........................................................H- H4 HFigure H-2: SMART Community Transit Vehicle.....................................................................H- H5 HFigure H-3: Troy Service Area...................................................................................................H- H7 HFigure H-4: Big Beaver Corridor................................................................................................H- H9 HFigure H-5: Lakeside Job Express Map ...................................................................................H- H11 HFigure H-6: Lakeside Center Area............................................................................................H- H13 HFigure H-7: Fairlane Job Express Map.....................................................................................H- H15 HFigure H-8: Groesbeck Route Map ..........................................................................................H- H16 HFigure H-9: Fairlane Town Center Area...................................................................................H- H18 HFigure H-10: Twin Cities Activity Surface ..............................................................................H- H22 HFigure H-11: Route 224 Map....................................................................................................H- H23 HFigure H-12: Route 421 Map....................................................................................................H- H26 HFigure H-13: Portland Vicinity Map ........................................................................................H- H30 HFigure H-14: Portland Activity Surface....................................................................................H- H31 HFigure H-15: Clackamas Circulators Map................................................................................H- H33 HFigure H-16: Cedar Mill Shuttle Service Area Map.................................................................H- H35 HFigure H-17: Routes 41 and 50 Map ........................................................................................H- H39 HFigure H-18: Wilsonville Vicinity Map ...................................................................................H- H41 HFigure H-19: Wilsonville Map .................................................................................................H- H42 HFigure H-20: King County Map ...............................................................................................H- H49 HFigure H-21: Route 903 Map (Federal Way) ...........................................................................H- H51 HFigure H-22: Route 914 Map (Kent) ........................................................................................H- H52 HFigure H-23: Route 927 Map (Issaquah)..................................................................................H- H53 HFigure H-24: Route 291 Map (Redmond) ................................................................................H- H54 HFigure H-25: Vanpool Fare Schedule.......................................................................................H- H56 HFigure H-26: Vanpool Driver and Bookkeeper Selection Criteria ...........................................H- H57
iii HFigure H-27: CDTA Service Area Map ...................................................................................H- H58 HFigure H-28: Shuttle Bug .........................................................................................................H- H62 HFigure H-29: Shuttle Fly...........................................................................................................H- H64 HFigure H-30: Denver RTD Map ...............................................................................................H- H77 HFigure H-31: Call and Ride Map ..............................................................................................H- H80
iv LIST OF TABLES HTable 1-1: Performance Criteria and Standards ........................................................................... H12 HTable 1-2: Case Study Sites by Agency Size (number of buses) ................................................. H16 HTable 1-3: Case Study Sites by Agency Location ........................................................................ H17 HTable 1-4: Case Study Sites by Transit Services Offered ............................................................ H17 HTable 2-1: Rating System for Sidewalk Coverage ....................................................................... H21 HTable 2-2: Rating System for Street Connectivity........................................................................ H23 HTable 2-3: Description of Case Study Routes .............................................................................. H31 HTable 2-4: Broward County Correlation Matrix........................................................................... H38 HTable B-1: Relationships between Activity Surfacesâ Topographical Features and Transit Service Formats ................................................................................................................B- H12 HTable B-2: Characteristics of Various Transit Service Formats...............................................B- H13 HTable B-3: Relationships between Service Area Characteristics and Service Parameters.......B- H14 HTable C-1: Tri Delta Express â Service Characteristics...........................................................C- H12 HTable C-2: Pierce Transit Hybrid Services...............................................................................C- H17 HTable C-3: Urbandale On-Call Operating Statistics.................................................................C- H37 HTable C-4: Johnson On-Call Operating Performance ..............................................................C- H38 HTable E-1: Transit Characteristics .............................................................................................. E- H1 HTable E-2: Transit Performance (FY 2004) ............................................................................... E- H2 HTable E-3: Funding Sources ....................................................................................................... E- H2 HTable E-4: Key Attractions......................................................................................................... E- H3 HTable E-5: Street Network Characteristics ................................................................................. E- H5 HTable E-6: Aerial Photos of Service Area .................................................................................. E- H6 HTable E-7:Transit Priority Features............................................................................................ E- H6 HTable F-1: Quantitative Factors Decision Matrix....................................................................... F- H1 HTable G-1: Qualitative Factors Decision Matrix........................................................................G- H1 HTable H-1: Operating Characteristics of Troy Area Services ....................................................H- H8 HTable H-2: Operating Performance of Troy Area Services........................................................H- H9 HTable H-3: Service Area Characteristics of the Troy Area Services........................................H- H10 HTable H-4: Operating Characteristics of Lakeside Job Express...............................................H- H12 HTable H-5: Operating Performance of Lakeside Job Express ..................................................H- H12 HTable H-6: Service Area Characteristics for Lakeside Job Express.........................................H- H14 HTable H-7: Operating Characteristics of Other Regional Services ..........................................H- H17 HTable H-8: Operating Performance of Other Regional Services..............................................H- H17 HTable H-9: Service Area Characteristics for Fairlane Job Express and Groesbeck Flex Route .................................................................................................................................H- H19 HTable H-10: Operating Characteristics of Route 224...............................................................H- H24 HTable H-11: Operating Performance of Route 224 ..................................................................H- H24 HTable H-12: Service Area Characteristics of Route 224 ..........................................................H- H25 HTable H-13: Operating Characteristics of Route 421...............................................................H- H27 HTable H-14: Operating Performance of Route 421 ..................................................................H- H27 HTable H-15: Service Area Characteristics of Route 421 ..........................................................H- H28 HTable H-16: Operating Characteristics of Clackamas Circulators ...........................................H- H33 HTable H-17: Operating Performance of Clackamas Circulators...............................................H- H34 HTable H-18: Operating Characteristics of Cedar Mill Shuttle..................................................H- H35 HTable H-19: Operating Performance of Cedar Mill Shuttle .....................................................H- H36
v HTable H-20: Service Area Characteristics for Cedar Mill Shuttle............................................H- H37 HTable H-21: Operating Characteristics of Routes 41 and 50....................................................H- H39 HTable H-22: Operating Performance of Routes 41 and 50.......................................................H- H40 HTable H-23: Operating Characteristics of Route 204...............................................................H- H43 HTable H-24: Operating Performance of Route 204 ..................................................................H- H43 HTable H-25: Operating Characteristics of Route 201...............................................................H- H44 HTable H-26: Operating Performance of Route 201 ..................................................................H- H44 HTable H-27: Service Area Characteristics of Route 201 ..........................................................H- H46 HTable H-28: Operating Characteristics of Route 1X ................................................................H- H47 HTable H-29: Operating Performance of Route 1X ...................................................................H- H48 HTable H-30: Operating Characteristics of Selected DART Routes..........................................H- H54 HTable H-31: Annual Operating Performance of Selected DART Routes ................................H- H55 HTable H-32: Transit Service Characteristics â Shuttle Bug and Shuttle Fly ............................H- H60 HTable H-33: Shuttle Bug and Fly Operating Performance .......................................................H- H61 HTable H-34: Service Area characteristics of Shuttle Bug.........................................................H- H63 HTable H-35: Service Area Characteristics of Shuttle Bug........................................................H- H65 HTable H-36: Broward County Correlation Matrix....................................................................H- H72 HTable H-37: Broward County Demographic Characteristics ...................................................H- H74 HTable H-38: Denver RTD Year 2003 Standards ......................................................................H- H78 HTable H-39: Denver RTD Service Performance for Call and Ride Routes..............................H- H81 HTable H-40: RTD Service Performance Data 2003..................................................................H- H82 HTable H-41: Denver RTD Express Route Origins/Destinations ..............................................H- H83
