1 / 23

IMPROVING CONSISTENCY BETWEEN TRANSIT PATH-BUILDING AND MODE CHOICE IN LAS VEGAS

IMPROVING CONSISTENCY BETWEEN TRANSIT PATH-BUILDING AND MODE CHOICE IN LAS VEGAS. David Kurth, Suzanne Childress, & Sathya Thyagaraj Parsons. Motivation for Project. Regional Fixed Guideway Alternatives Analysis / New Starts Existing, unused mode choice model 2002 on-board survey data

patrice
Télécharger la présentation

IMPROVING CONSISTENCY BETWEEN TRANSIT PATH-BUILDING AND MODE CHOICE IN LAS VEGAS

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. IMPROVING CONSISTENCY BETWEEN TRANSIT PATH-BUILDING AND MODE CHOICE IN LAS VEGAS David Kurth, Suzanne Childress, & Sathya Thyagaraj Parsons 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  2. Motivation for Project • Regional Fixed Guideway Alternatives Analysis / New Starts • Existing, unused mode choice model • 2002 on-board survey data • FTA transit forecasting guidelines • Consistency between path-building & mode choice • “Tell a coherent story” 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  3. 2002 Transit Network • 49 routes (2002-04) • Basic grid system • ½ to 1 mile spacing • Routes by service type: • Local 42 • Limited stop 6 • Express 1 • 24 hr/day routes: 16/49 • Emphasize coverage over frequency; routes with: • 0-20 minute hdwy: 9 • 30-45 minute hdwy: 23 • 60 minute headway: 17 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  4. 2002 Transit Access Mode 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  5. 2002 Resident Transit Shares |–- Home-Based Work –-| 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  6. 2002 Visitor Transit Shares 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  7. Surveyed Boardings 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  8. Who Rides Where? • Fares • Non-Strip – $1.25 • Strip – $2.00 • Speeds (MPH) • Non-Strip – 12-18 • Strip – 5-8 • Strip Boardings • 44% of all visitor • 15% of all resident 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  9. Conclusions from On-Board Survey Data • Walk access reigns (at least in 2002) • Resident mode shares as expected • HBW low income captivity • Discernible visitor mode shares • Exceed 10% of total boardings • Low transfer rates 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  10. Resident Mode Choice Models 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  11. Visitor Mode Choice Models 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  12. Mode Choice Coefficient Relationships 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  13. The Issues • Mode choice model • Different travel market segments • Different model forms • Path-builder consistency • Different travel market segments 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  14. Transit Path-Building • TRANSCAD “Path-Builder” Method • Based on weighted time paths • Weights ≈ mode choice parameters • Vary by peak & off-peak, trip purpose, income group • Path Sets 1 – HBW low incomes 2 – HBW upper incomes 3 – HBO 4 – NHB & Visitor Low Value-of-Time 5 – Visitor High Value-of-Time 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  15. Transit Path-Building 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  16. Transit Path-Building 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  17. Path Set 3 Home-Based Non-Work Low Value-of-Time Off-Peak Network Local Only Network- includes only Local Routes No Express, BRT, Premium Routes, or Monorail Path Set 5 Hotel-Based Convention/ Business, Gaming, & Non-Hotel-Based High Value-of-Time Off-Peak Network Local Only Network- includes only Local Routes No Express, BRT, Premium Routes, or Monorail Impact of Path Sets on Path-Building Example 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  18. Path-building Weights (Reminder) 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  19. In-Vehicle Travel Time Comparison 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  20. PS 3 – PS 5 IVTT Zero Difference Excluded IVTT Difference in Minutes 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  21. Example Paths O T Set 5 Path 2 Local Buses Set 3 Path 3 Local Buses T D T 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  22. Choice of Path 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

  23. So What? • Improved path-building / mode choice consistency is possible • Increases path-building complexity • Can produce different paths / impedances • Importance increases for • Premium alternatives • Fare differences 11th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference – Session 18

More Related