metropolitan transit planning: towards a hierarchical and conceptual framework

8/9/2019 Metropolitan Transit Planning: Towards a Hierarchical and Conceptual Framework

1/31

METROPOLITAN MASS TRANSIT PLANNING:

TOWARDS A HIERARCHICAL & CONCEPTUAL

FRAMEWORK

PRESENTATION @ UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE

THURSDAY, MARCH 18TH, 2010

Richard Layman


2/31


3/31

Transit network framework:Five scales

International (connections between countries)

National (Interstate Highways, Freight railroads, Amtrak)

Regional/multi-state covers two or more metropolitan areas(freeways, certain passenger railroad service, inter-city bus)

Metropolitan (transit services in a particular metropolitan area suchas Philadelphia, Baltimore, NYC, or Washington)

Sub-metropolitan (transit subnetworks within a metro, differentiatingbetween foundational cross-jurisdictional services and those withinjurisdictions)


4/31

Population density shapes transit frequency

Source: Belmont, Cities in Full


5/31

DC-Baltimore region

Two commuter focused regional services:Maryland MARC (train + bus) and Virginia VRE(train) + Amtrak, inter-city bus

DC Metro: WMATA subway and regional bus;commuter bus, separate bus services provided byeach of the jurisdictions, light rail/streetcarplanning underway

Baltimore Metro: state-managed MTA subway,bus, light rail, commuter bus; separate bus

services provided by Annapolis and HowardCounty + new Baltimore City Circulator


6/31

Regional transit services


7/31

Washington metropolitan transit network:

Core service

Metropolitan Transit Network

Polycentric

Trunk line service classified by mode,frequency, system vs. route, price

crosses jurisdictions, focused on serviceto major job centers

WMATA subway system

Ferry system if added

Bus Rapid Transit/Commuter Expressbus service


8/31


Suburban service

Suburban Primary Transit Network

high frequency* bus and streetcar service within the suburbs

WMATA or local service

classify by speed and destination

Suburban Secondary Transit Network

primarily intra-jurisdictional (more monocentric)

* Definition of high-frequency is relative and dependent on population density. Center

cities typically have higher density and therefore higher transit use. (Partly due totransit dependence and automobility, partly due to efficiency.)


9/31

Suburban transit services


10/31


DC (Center City) Service

Primary Transit Network: Core of the WMATAsystem in DC (29 stations); streetcar system;branded city services (Circulator); high frequency

WMATA bus service Secondary Transit Network: the other 11 subway

stations in the city; other WMATA bus servicewithin the city; water taxi service if added,depending on the routes

Tertiary Transit Network*: intra-neighborhoodbus services; private shuttle services (employer,

university, etc.), shared taxi, jitney* conceptual

In Washingtons core, the WMATA heavy rail system functions monocentrically.


11/31

Center city transit services


12/31

Center city transit services


13/31

Transit planning:

Metropolitan transportation planning vs. operator-driven transitplanning

Planning the network at the metropolitan level is rare(comprehensive planning vs. grab bag of projects)

By default, transit planning is done by the provider and issatisficed based on budget

Need to set metropolitan metrics for network breadth,depth, frequency and quality independent of transit servicescheduling

LOS/LOQ planning for the network vs. LOS delivered by thetransit operator


14/31

Transportation planning:choice vs. optimality

Rockville Pike, Montgomery CountyCapacity in persons/hour of one 12 foot

wide road lane by mode

Left: Washington Post. Right: Planning and Design for Pedestrians and Cyclists: A Technical Guide, VeloQuebec


15/31

Transit shed:Catchment area for a transit route/network

Construct the total catchment area (shed) through

the sum of

the stops/stations on each route/transitline

Terminus stations draw from larger areas


16/31


17/31

Transit shed example Baltimore County, MarylandOne mile radius from transit stops and stations


18/31

Mobility shed:Catchment area for station/stop

Area map inside the Columbia Heights Metro Station.

Each circle is mile/5 minute walking distance


19/31

Mobility shed:Catchment area for station/stop

Rings represent the shed of different modes

Typology based on optimality and

sustainability Trip distance shapes mode choice

(e.g., bike share vs. owned-bicycleboth human-powered, vs. electric bicycle)

Sustainable transportation hierarchy: Transportation

Alternatives, New York City.


20/31

Mobility shed:

Modes

Active transportation

-- Walking

-- Bicycling

Shared transportation

-- Bicycle Sharing

-- Car Sharing

-- Taxi/Jitney-- Rental

Transit

-- mode specific to stop

-- intra-neighborhood connectingservices

Owned vehicles

-- Electric bicycle, Scooter,Motorcycle

-- Automobiles

-- Multiple vehicles per household)


21/31

Mode shift through focusedtransportation demand management

Many examples

-- TravelSmart,

Victoria, Australia

-- Arlington County, VA

-- Smart Trips,

Portland, OR


22/31

How these concepts came together


23/31

Seeds

Belmont polycentric vs. monocentric transit systemsand MUNI/BART vs. WMATA comparison

Cervero commutershed (gross grain concept) Transportation demand management planning, Victoria,

Australia (TravelSmart)

Arlington County Master Transportation Plan

definition o

fthe primary and secondary transit network


24/31

Similar/related concepts

Hierarchy of the urban rail network in Metropolitan Tokyo

Professor Shigeru Morichi, President, Institute for Transport

Policy Studies, Japan Mobility hubs University of Michigan Center for Advancing

Research & Solutions for Society

High-frequency transit services HiTrans project, Europe,

http://www.hitrans.org, + many examples of differentiated

service in the U.S. (Minneapolis-St. Paul, Los Angeles, Reno,Portland, etc.)


25/31

What doesnt fit?

Public transit vs. mass transit

-- Dial-a-ride/paratransit services Tourist transit

-- all-day & multi-day tourist services

-- approximately $20+/adult/day


26/31

Next steps/Q&A

Refine, test, strengthen, extend

?


27/31


28/31

National blogs

Transport Connection http://thetransportconnection.wordpress.com

Urbanophile http://www.urbanophile.com The Overhead Wire

http://theoverheadwire.blogspot.com/

Streetsblog (NYC) http://www.streetsblog.org

Rebuilding Place in the Urban Space http://urbanplacesandspaces.blogspot.com


29/31

Local-regional blogs

Greater Greater Washington http://greatergreaterwashington.org

Washcycle (bicycling) http://washcycle.typepad.com Transit Miami http://www.transitmiami.com

but there are hundreds, i.e., Streetsblog network

Plus tens of thousands of neighborhood blogs


30/31

Lessons Most blogs are side projects by interested parties

Some are sponsored with paid staff(Streetsblog)

Group blogs enable coverage of a wider area and more issues (GGW)

Challenge finding like-minded, able writers

Comment thread quality trends downward, dependent on participants (10/90 rule)

Need to set high bar for quality and not every author, post, or blog meets it

Perfect as the enemy of the good vs. being a player

Blogs have supplanted e-lists/listservs


31/31

Thank you!

Contact information:

[email protected]

metropolitan transit planning: towards a hierarchical and conceptual framework

Documents