1 / 18

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

sylvester-elliott
Télécharger la présentation

FlexBRT Project Briefing: Using ITS to Serve Suburban Markets

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. FlexBRT Project Briefing:Using ITS to Serve Suburban Markets Randall Farwell

  2. 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 FlexBRT Portland, ME Traditional BRT

  3. Why the FlexBRT Concept?

  4. Service Area and Stations 38 stations 8 remote kiosks 10 future stations

  5. How It Works • User requests ride and selects destination station • System Selects “best fit” vehicle • Prompts user to confirm trip • User boards vehicle and swipes Boarding Pass • Trip confirmed

  6. 1. User requests ride 2. Origin location determined 3. Prompt for destination 4. Prompt for size of party 5. Locate existing vehicles 6. Evaluate vehicle manifests 7. 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 fare 9. Offer best solution 10. Prompt user to accept trip declines, trip canceled, accepts, trip booked, sent to MDT 11. Print Boarding Pass 12. User boards vehicle, boarding pass read, trip confirmed Operational Workflow

  7. ·ITS Driven • On-vehicle systems • Automated reservation, scheduling, vehicle assignment • Vehicle location/computerized dispatch • Payment system and boarding pass • High capacity, high speed, reliable wireless communications

  8. 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

  9. 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 • 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.

  10. Operations Analysis • Objective to Optimize: • Number of Vehicles • O&M Costs • Ridership • Productivity • Wait/Travel Times • Cost-effectiveness • Ran 36 Scenarios • Select best scenario

  11. Connection to Fixed Route

  12. Total Project Costs

  13. Westmonte Drive and SR 436

  14. FlexBRT vs. Traditional Transit

  15. Bang for the Buck FlexBRT makes economic sense… • 92%higher ridership, generated on… • 51%fewer revenue miles, producing… • 291%greater productivity, that costs… • 28%less per rider, which is a… • 79%reduction in the subsidy from local governments PER rider!!

  16. Federal State Local Altamonte Springs Maitland Private Property Owners (thru DOs) Funding

  17. 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 Schedule

  18. Questions?

More Related