METRO Light Rail: Changing Transit Markets in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area

METRO Light Rail: Changing Transit Markets in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area Abhishek Dayal, AICP Planner III, METRO Light Rail Phoenix, AZ BACKGROUND Transit in the Phoenix Region Transit services in the Phoenix metropolitan area have evolved significantly during the past decade. According to the 2010 U.S. Census, the region had one of the fastest population growth rates in the nation. To respond to these growth pressures, voters of Maricopa County approved a regional sales tax in 2004 (Proposition 400) that extended a half cent sales tax to transportation improvements including freeways, roadways and transit. The voter approved sales tax extension allocated a higher percentage of the tax revenues to fund public transportation improvements. The regional tax funds most transit routes that provide regional service across multiple jurisdictions. Individual cities also approved similar sales tax initiatives for enhanced transit services within their community. In 1996, City of Tempe voters approved a half-cent sales tax for public transportation followed by Mesa residents approving a Quality of Life tax in 1998 to fund light rail operations. In 2000, Phoenix residents followed suit and approved a four tenths of a cent sales tax for public transportation including light rail. Voters in other communities have since passed local initiatives to support increased investment in local and regional public transportation services. Transit Services Transit services in the Phoenix metropolitan region are provided and funded by multiple entities. Local fixed route bus service today operates primarily in a grid system, following the street layout of the cities in the valley. Most services operate on major arterials, which are aligned in a one-mile grid pattern, although selective routes are operated on the half-mile minor arterial grid network. A typical route provides 30-minute peak and 30-minute midday service, although some routes operate as frequently as every 10 minutes during the peak and 20 minutes during the midday while others operate on a 60- minute all-day headway. These routes are operated by different agencies depending on the source of funding. The Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA) or Valley Metro provides most of the Express services. Most express routes have a local portion of service in the outlying areas and a nonstop portion en route to downtown Phoenix. Most serve several park-and-ride locations that are sometimes shared with adjacent commercial/community properties, such as shopping centers and churches. In addition, RAPID services are peak period only express routes operated by City of Phoenix Public Transit Department that take commuters to and from downtown Phoenix. RAPID services provide point-to-point services from a few major park-and-rides in the outlying areas to select locations in Downtown Phoenix and State Capitol area. The Central Phoenix/East Valley (CP/EV) light rail, operated by Valley Metro Rail, Inc. (METRO), spans three cities and was built to replace the most utilized local fixed route in the Phoenix area. Light rail operates on headways of 12 minutes in peak periods and mid-day, and 20 minutes for all other weekday service, with 15-minute headways from 6am 7pm on Saturdays and 20 minutes all other weekend times (including Sundays and holidays). Late night service on Fridays and Saturdays was also added in June 2009 that extended the service hours to 2 am on Saturday and Sunday respectively. Route type Transit Services in the Phoenix Region No. of routes Service type Service provided by Local 60 All-day RPTA, Phoenix, Tempe Circulators 17 All-day RPTA, Phoenix, Tempe, Scottsdale, Glendale Express 20 Peak only RPTA, Phoenix, Tempe RAPID 4 Peak only Phoenix Light Rail 1 All-day METRO Table 1 1

Table 1 shows the total transit services offered in the region and the service providers. Transit Ridership Transit ridership in the Phoenix metropolitan area is fairly seasonal with spikes in ridership during the Fall and Spring seasons and a dip during the hot summer months. Since 1997, system-wide transit ridership has been steadily growing along with growth in service supply. Table 2 below shows growth in system-wide transit ridership since 1997. Fiscal Year Transit Ridership Growth: 1997-2011 No. of routes System Ridership Milestone 1997 76 34,141,668 City of Tempe ½ cent sales tax passes in 1996 1999 86 37,367,584 City of Mesa Quality of Life tax passes in 1998 2002 84 45,103,085 City of Phoenix Transit 2000 sales tax passes in 2000 2005 90 56,358,335 Proposition 400, ½ cent sales tax passes in 2004 2008 96 61,866,819 Year before light rail opens 2011 110 67,607,530 Year after light rail opens Table 2 Transit ridership has almost doubled since 1997 with increased funding over the years. Central Phoenix-East Valley Light Rail Corridor The 20-mile light rail starter line serving the cities of Phoenix, Tempe and Mesa began operations in December 2008. The alignment serves the Central Avenue corridor, Phoenix Central Business District (CBD), Sky Harbor International Airport, Tempe CBD and two Arizona State University (ASU) campuses before terminating at the western edge of the City of Mesa. The alignment runs mainly on a north-south orientation and then turns east at downtown Phoenix and continues towards its end-of-line at Mesa following a predominantly east-west pattern. The project was planned, designed, constructed and operated by METRO an agency formed to plan, design, construct and operate High Capacity Transit/Light Rail Transit (HCT/LRT) in the Phoenix Metropolitan region. Travel Markets in the Light Rail Corridor The CP/EV light rail corridor is comprised of a diverse mix of land uses and activity centers. The LRT stations serve several of the largest employment centers in the region, as well as the area of highest residential density in the state (See Figure below). 2

The most important markets that the light rail currently serves are: North Central Avenue From Central Avenue/Camelback station to Central Avenue/McDowell station, the Central Avenue corridor is home to one of the highest employment densities in the region. The corridor includes offices, retail shops, residential buildings, cultural amenities as well as schools and parks that are high generators of transit ridership. Downtown Phoenix Downtown Phoenix is home to major office and commercial buildings, cultural and sports attractions, government agencies, hotels and ASU s Downtown Campus. The transit center at Van Buren and Central Avenue provides connections to the region s local, express and RAPID services. Sky Harbor International Airport The 9 th busiest airport in the United States serving more than 40 million passengers annually has a light rail connection at the 44 th Street and Washington Street station. The airport provides free shuttle service from the station to air passenger terminals seven days a week. An automated people mover will soon replace the existing airport shuttle. Downtown Tempe Downtown Tempe is a pedestrian focused high density commercial district and is also home to one of nation s largest universities in the United States ASU with over 55,000 students and 14,000 faculty and employees. Light Rail Ridership Average daily boardings on the 20-mile light rail have consistently exceeded the opening day forecasts made during the planning process. Since opening for revenue service, the starter line has been showing a 5-7% growth annually from the previous year (See Table 3). Fiscal Year Annual Ridership - FY2009 FY2012 Light Rail Ridership System Ridership % of System Ridership 2009 1 5,580,860 37,456,012 14.9% 2010 12,112,738 67,693,003 17.9% 2011 12,793,529 67,607,530 18.9% 2012 2 8,951,297 47,906,845 18.7% Table 3 1 Ridership from Dec 2008 to June 2009 2 Ridership from July 2011 to February 2012 The CP/EV starter line opened for revenue service on December 28 th, 2008. Monthly average weekday boardings on the line averaged 34,800 during the first full year of operations (through December 2009) against the opening year projections of 26,000 and have been steadily increasing since. In 2011, average weekday boardings had reached 40,700. Interestingly though, during this interval, the economy weakened leading to the elimination of a dedicated funding source by the Arizona State legislature resulting in significant service cuts in transit services including light rail. RIDERSHIP CHARACTERISTICS To understand the changing transit travel patterns, METRO and RPTA partnered with local communities to administer a region-wide on-board survey in 2007 and 2010. The intent of the surveys was to understand the changing trends in transit usage as well as to document the before and after effects of light rail service in the region. Since transit routes in the region typically operate following the grid street system, transit patrons have had to transfer multiple times to get to their destination. In order to remove the effects of this high transfer activity, linked transit trips was used as the more appropriate measure (as opposed to transit boardings) to document change in trip characteristics. Ridership by Trip Purpose Table 4 shows the share of linked trips by trip purpose by service type from the results of the 2010 Onboard 2010 Linked Transit Trips by Purpose Mode HBW ASU HBU HBO NHB Local Bus 30% 8% 8% 44% 10% Express Bus 94% 1% 0% 3% 2% RAPID Bus 97% 0% 0% 2% 1% Light Rail 22% 30% 4% 34% 10% Table 4 HBW Home Based Work, ASU Arizona State University, HBU Home Based University, HBO Home Based Other, NHB Non Home Based As observed in the table above, local bus services cater to almost half of the home based other trips that include social, recreational, school and shopping trips originating or ending at home. Express and RAPID bus services primarily serve the home-based work (HBW) market as expected. Light rail is more diverse in terms of 3

trip purposes served with a third of trips destined to ASU. Compared to the local bus, a smaller percentage of trips use the light rail to go to work. Ridership by Auto Ownership Table 5 shows the share of linked trips by auto ownership by service type from the results of the 2010 onboard 2010 Linked Transit Trips by Auto Ownership Mode 0-Auto 1-Auto 2+ Auto Local Bus 48% 29% 23% Express Bus 4% 33% 63% RAPID Bus 0% 26% 74% Light Rail 36% 31% 32% Table 5 While almost half the riders on local bus are transit dependent with no cars available in their household, express and RAPID riders tend to be choice riders with one or more cars available in their household. Light rail riders, however; tend to be more diverse with an almost equal mix of transit dependents and choice riders. Ridership by Time of Day Table 6 shows the share of linked trips by auto ownership by service type from the results of the 2010 onboard 2010 Linked Transit Trips by Mode of Access Mode Walk Bike Dropped Off Drove Alone Carpool Local Bus 91% 4% 3% 2% 0% Express Bus 27% 4% 13% 55% 1% RAPID Bus 3% 1% 12% 82% 2% Light Rail 68% 7% 10% 14% 0% Table 7 A majority of riders using local bus walk to a stop while express and RAPID bus riders predominantly drive or are dropped off at a bus stop park-and-ride. Light rail is somewhere in between with approximately a quarter of the riders being dropped off or driving to a station. A majority of light rail riders walk to a station. Light rail also attracts the highest percentage of bike users. Characteristics of Light Rail Travel Patterns In order to better understand transit travel patterns in the region, the region was divided into five transportation analysis districts by aggregating traffic analysis zones (TAZ) based on major light rail markets North Central Avenue Corridor, downtown Phoenix, downtown Tempe, Rest of rail corridor and other areas (Figure 2). Transportation Analysis Districts 2010 Linked Transit Trips by Time of Day Mode 6 AM - 9 AM 9 AM - 3 PM 3 PM - 6 PM 6 PM - 6 AM Local Bus 18% 45% 22% 15% Express Bus 46% 2% 41% 10% RAPID Bus 42% 0% 40% 18% Light Rail 15% 41% 24% 20% Table 6 The share of riders in the local bus during mid-day is approximately half of the total local bus ridership. Light rail ridership is fairly similar to local bus with a slightly higher share during the evening/late night time period. Ridership by Mode of Access Table 7 shows the share of linked trips by mode of access by service type from the results of the 2010 onboard Figure 2 Light Rail Trip Productions and Attractions Table 8 shows the share of rail trips attracted to or produced from the five major transportation districts from the results of the 2010 on-board 4

2010 Light Rail Trip Productions and Attractions Transportation Districts Percentage Attraction Percentage Production North Central Avenue 17% 8.5% Downtown Phoenix 19% 7.5% Downtown Tempe 26% 14% Rest of Rail Corridor 20% 27% Other Areas 18% 43% Table 8 Light rail attractions seem to be spread fairly uniformly along the corridor and beyond. Notably, though, a quarter of the rail trips are destined to Downtown Tempe district possibly due to the presence of ASU s largest campus. Light rail productions, on the other hand, seem to be generated mainly from outside the rail corridor districts (43%). The trips tend to flow from the outlying areas to the three primary geographic nodes (North Central Avenue, downtown Phoenix and downtown Tempe) with limited interaction between the nodes. With the total ridership of 41,000 trips, the rail trip flow patterns enabled a few observations: North Central Avenue attracted 7,200 rail passenger trips, 5,600 of which originated from the rest of the rail corridor or other areas. Downtown Phoenix attracted 7,800 rail passenger trips, 5,300 of which originated from the rest of the rail corridor or other areas. Downtown Tempe attracted 10,700 rail passenger trips, 7,000 of which were produced from the rest of the rail corridor or other areas. Light Rail Trip Attractions by Trip Purpose To understand the distribution of types of trips attracted to the various districts, Table 9 shows the share of rail trips attracted to the five major transportation districts identified earlier in Table 8 by trip purpose. 2010 Light Rail Trip Attractions by Purpose Transportation Districts HBW HBU HBO NHB Total North Central Ave 4% 1% 10% 2% 17% Downtown Phoenix 5% 7% 5% 2% 19% Downtown Tempe 2% 20% 3% 1% 26% Rest of Rail 6% 3% 9% 2% 20% Corridor Other Areas 5% 3% 7% 3% 18% Table 9 Downtown Tempe and downtown Phoenix accounted for the highest share of home-based university trip attractions using light rail due to the presence of two ASU campuses in the rail corridor. Central Avenue corridor accounted for the highest share of attractions for the home-based other trip purpose possibly due to the presence of schools, museums, retail shops and other entertainment venues. Home-based work trip attraction shares on light rail were fairly uniformly spread along the rail corridor and beyond. Light Rail Trip Productions by Purpose To understand the distribution of trips produced from the various districts, Table 10 shows the share of rail passenger trips attracted to the five major transportation districts identified earlier in Table 8 by trip purpose. 2010 Light Rail Trip Productions by Purpose Transportation Districts HBW HBU HBO NHB Total North Central Ave 2% 2% 2.5% 2% 8.5% Downtown Phoenix 1% 2.5% 2% 2% 7.5% Downtown Tempe 2% 8% 3% 1% 14% Rest of Rail Corridor 6% 8% 10% 3% 27% Other Areas 12% 13% 16% 2% 43% Table 10 Trips originating from areas other than the light rail corridor had the biggest share of light rail trip productions. The trip shares were almost evenly split between the various home-based trip purposes. The rest of rail corridor had the second largest share of trip productions that were also mostly home-based. Changing Transit Travel Patterns Transit usage in the Phoenix region has evolved over the years. As the results from 2007 and 2010 on-board survey results will show, the evolution of the role of transit due to reasons such as introduction of new services including rail, change in economic conditions, opening up of new markets etc. have influenced the way people travel. Phoenix has traditionally been an auto-centric city with transit contributing 2% to the mode split. While the share of transit has remained unchanged, there have been some interesting changes in transit usage trends. Compared to 2007, the total number of linked transit trips has increased 24%. However, the total number of 5

boardings (unlinked trips) have increased by only 12%, which indicates that fewer people transferred between routes to get to their destination. This is significant since most transit routes follow the grid pattern of the street network in the region; transfer rates have been traditionally high. Table 11 shows the change in transit trips between the major transportation districts identified previously. The districts are numbered from 1 to 5 as follows: North Central Avenue District 1 Downtown Phoenix District 2 Downtown Tempe District 3 Rest of Rail Corridor District 4 Other Areas District 5 Change in Transit Trips by District (2010-2007) District 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Total 1. 612 462 310 618 350 2,352 2. 624-147 590 17 233 1,317 3. 16 1,067-1,280 1,227 490 1,520 4. 1,387 1,603 3,266 4,273 3,050 13,579 5. 1,164 1,309 4,039 1,398 6,946 14,856 Total 3,803 4,294 6,925 7,533 11,069 33,624 Table 11 Transit trips increased from approximately 141,000 in 2007 to 175,000 in 2010. Most of this increase can be attributed to introduction of light rail service with limited decrease in local bus ridership. Analyzing the district to district flows from Table 11 also confirms this trend. The transit trips in districts served by rail grew by 27,000 or 37% while those in districts not served by rail grew by approximately 7,000 trips or 10%. Transit flows within rest of rail corridor (within district 4) showed a significant increase of 4,273 transit trips. Transit trips from outside the rail corridor (district 5) to downtown Tempe (district 3) also showed a significant increase from 2007. Changing Transit Travel Patterns by Auto Ownership Table 12 shows the distribution of transit trips by auto ownership to analyze how socioeconomic trends have changed between 2007 and 2010. Overall transit trips on the local fixed route bus system decreased by approximately 7,000 possibly due to replacement of a few redundant routes in the rail corridor with light rail service. This reduction in trips could also be because of service reductions in response to the recent economic downturn. Change in Transit Trips by Auto Ownership (2010-2007) Mode 0-Auto 1-Auto 2+Auto Total Local Bus -5,716 2,379 593-6,991 Express Bus -136 169 223 256 Rapid Bus -87-365 -378-831 Light Rail 15,022 12,924 13,420 41,366 Total 9,083 15,107 13,858 33,800 Table 12 The biggest increase in transit trips is in households with at least one automobile available which indicates that choice riders are gradually embracing transit, particularly light rail, for their commute. Changing Transit Travel Patterns by Trip Purpose Transit trips by mode and purpose also showed some key trends. Table 13 shows the change in daily transit passenger trips by trip purpose between 2007 and 2010. Change in Transit Trips by Purpose (2010-2007) Mode HBW ASU HBO NHB Total Local Bus -17,716 364 12,413-2,051-6,991 Express 91 31 86 48 256 Rapid Bus -928 0 51 47-831 Light Rail 9,040 12,396 15,885 4,046 41,366 Total -9,514 12,791 24,435 2,088 33,800 Table 13 While most of the trip purposes showed an increase in transit trips from 2007, HBW trips showed a decrease. There was a nominal increase within the light rail corridor but was down 15% in other areas. This could be due in part to the 2.5% drop in employment between 2007 and 2010 as a result of the economic downturn. The biggest increase in trips occurred for the HBO market that includes trips between home and schools, shopping, medical appointments, restaurants, special events etc. With the light rail corridor serving many of the key educational and entertainment destinations in the region, a greater percentage of this increase in HBO trips were observed on light rail. Special events also play a key role in the increase in ridership. Increase in trips to or from ASU was mainly due to the light rail that serves two of the four ASU campuses in the region. Moreover, ASU enrollment has grown 6

significantly since 2007, particularly at the downtown Phoenix campus that was established in 2006. Weekend Ridership Transit services have traditionally been fairly limited during the weekends and holidays resulting in lower average weekend ridership compared to an average weekday. Since METRO operates late night light rail services on Fridays and Saturdays as well as enhanced services during special events, weekend ridership has been much higher than previously observed. Weekend Ridership Trends (2005-2011) Service 2005 2007 2009 2011 Weekday 223,805 223,072 239,470 253,841 Saturday 106,653 112,639 123,026 134,183 Sunday 58,830 67,419 81,026 85,700 Total Weekend 165,483 180,058 204,052 219,883 % of Weekday 74% 81% 85% 87% Table 14 Table 14 compares the weekend ridership in boardings as a percentage of total weekday ridership from 2005 through 2011. Weekend ridership has been increasing since 2005 although Saturday ridership increased significantly by 9% between 2007 and 2009 while Sunday ridership jumped 20% during the same period. This can be attributed to the introduction of light rail service in December 2008 and added late night weekend service on light rail in June 2009. CONCLUSIONS The 20-mile CP/EV light rail project was the first modern fixed guideway transit project built and operated in the Phoenix metropolitan area. To address the significant growth in population over the last decade and the resulting congestion, the corridor was centered on the central core of the region replacing one of the most productive local routes in the system. Ridership has been continuously increasing over previous years surpassing all previous projections during the project development phase. The introduction of light rail services to the region has brought about a change in the way transit system is used in the region. The following key observations point towards this changing trend: Trip purposes other than work form the biggest proportion of light rail riders. According to the 2010 on-board survey, home-based other and home-based university trip purposes had the highest share of trips on light rail. Light rail attracts an almost equal share of riders with zero, one or more than one vehicle available in their households. While local bus services are skewed towards riders with no vehicles available (48%), express/rapid services are at the other end of the spectrum serving more than 95% of the riders with at least one car available. Light rail share for individuals with zero, one or more than one vehicle in the household was 36%, 31% and 32% respectively. Light rail attracts the highest share of riders accessing the transit system by bikes. According to the 2010 on-board survey, approximately 7% of rail passengers surveyed accessed the system on bikes, which is the highest share among all transit modes available. The greatest share of light rail trips is destined to Downtown Tempe. While downtown Phoenix and North Central Avenue are the largest employment destinations in the region, the presence of ASU s largest campus in Tempe, makes it the most popular destination along the light rail corridor. College Students form the biggest share of light rail users. According to the 2010 on-board survey, college students accounted for 40% of the total light rail riders. This was the highest share among all other transit modes. Light rail appeared to generate a disproportionate growth in transit passenger trips. Transit passenger trips grew 37% between 2007 and 2010 in districts served by light rail while those in areas not served by light rail grew by only 10%. Weekend ridership is growing due to light rail. Sunday ridership jumped 20% between 2007 and 2011 while increasing 15% and 6% during the 2005-2007 and 2009-2011 time periods respectively. Light rail has affected the way people travel in the Phoenix region and have also presented some unique challenges to address. These include accessibility to adjacent land uses, enhancing bus interface as well as provide demand responsive services to name a few. As part of Proposition 400, METRO is responsible for planning and development of 37 additional miles of HCT/LRT in the region. As light rail ridership grows and more extensions and/or corridors are added to the system, there is a need to acknowledge these changing trends and enhance the ridership experience for the transit patron. 7