ROUTE 52 ALLENTOWN. Port Authority of Allegheny County

Similar documents
ROUTE 18B AVALON-SHADELAND EXPRESS

ROUTE 68A MONROEVILLE EXPRESS

ROUTE 67A MONROEVILLE

ROUTE 75D PENN HILLS-MONROEVILLE

DAILY TRIPS (OUTBOUND/INBOUND) Weekdays 6:05 AM to 11:23 PM 30/30/ /28 Saturday 6:15 AM to 8:23 PM 60/60 24/23 Sunday / /

DAILY TRIPS (OUTBOUND) Monday-Friday 6:45 AM to 7:40 PM 30/30/30 26 Saturday 6:45 AM to 6:40 PM 30/30 24 Sunday - - -

ROUTE 124. Mountain Condos ROUTE OVERVIEW

Interim Transit Ridership Forecast Results Technical Memorandum

Philadelphia Bus Network Choices Report

ROUTE 11 Downtown to KU to 31 st and Iowa SERVICE DESIGN

Everett Transit Action Plan. Community Open House November 16, 2015

South King County High-Capacity Transit Corridor Study

ECTS Purpose & Needs. Exhibit Home-Based Work Trips Attracted to the Penn/Jeannette Area

1999 On-Board Sacramento Regional Transit District Survey

Gratiot Avenue Transit Study Tech Memo #4: Ridership

Travel and Rider Characteristics for Metrobus

Calgary Transit Route 302 Southeast BRT Year One Review June

From Disarray to Complete Street:

Service Analysis INTRODUCTION

Aurora Corridor to E Line

BOSTON REGION METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION

SMARTTRACK RIDERSHIP ANALYSIS

Market Factors and Demand Analysis. World Bank

Midtown Corridor Alternatives Analysis

Community Transit Solutions for the Suburbs APTA Annual Meeting Steve Fittante, New Jersey Transit Corporation September 30, 2013

. ' motion. APPLtlDK.L - L"iLC_t1GLR 201b APPENDIX 7 TECHNICAL MEMOS

ROUTE 30 Bob Billings & Kasold to KU SERVICE DESIGN

Title VI Fare Change Equity Analysis

VI. Market Factors and Deamnd Analysis

CHAPTER 3. Transportation and Circulation

Pocatello Regional Transit Master Transit Plan Draft Recommendations

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

Harrah s Station Square Casino

BUS RAPID TRANSIT. A Canadian Perspective. McCormick Rankin International. John Bonsall P.Eng

Providence Downtown Transit Connector STAKEHOLDER MEETING #2. Stakeholder Meeting #1 October 24, 2016

the Story of the 30s & 70s Bus Lines James Hamre - WMATA

SUBJECT: Board Approval: 4/29/04

Cheryl Thole CUTR/NBRTI, Senior Research Associate Tampa, Florida

Transit Signal Priority (TSP) Application to Miami-Dade Transit

Tunnel Reconstruction Brooklyn CB 1 August 14, 2018

Executive Summary. TUCSON TRANSIT ON BOARD ORIGIN AND DESTINATION SURVEY Conducted October City of Tucson Department of Transportation

TRANSIT RIDERSHIP IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CAPITAL PROJECTS OPERATING PLANS - NEXT NETWORK TRANSIT INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

Transit Operations in the I-95 Express Lanes

Ujari Mohite. Vijay Mahal and Vincent Sanders. Revised Ridership Forecasts for the Uptown DBL project. Date: August 17, 2015 INTRODUCTION/SUMMARY:

Cotton Belt Corridor Regional Rail Project

Webinar- Importance of Multi- Modal Transit Connections and Fare Policy for Regional Transit Mobility & Equity

TORONTO TRANSIT COMMISSION REPORT NO.

EUCLID AVENUE PARKING STUDY CITY OF SYRACUSE, ONONDAGA COUNTY, NEW YORK

Final Recommendation US 36 Service Plan

Regional Transportation Needs Within Southeastern Wisconsin

Kitsap Transit Fast Ferry Schedule Survey

Transportation Trends, Conditions and Issues. Regional Transportation Plan 2030

Appendix 1 Transit Network Analysis

SETTINGS AND OPPORTUNITIES MOBILITY & ACCESS

ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY. Metrolink Ridership and Revenue Quarterly Report. Staff Report

Scheduling 101 Calculating Running Time Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority Multimodal Operations Workshop Houston, TX

Southwest Bus Rapid Transit (SW BRT) Functional Planning Study - Executive Summary January 19 LPT ATTACHMENT 2.

TRANSPORTATION & MOBILITY

Scottsdale Road/Rural Road Alternatives Analysis (AA) Study. Arizona ITE/IMSA Spring Conference March 7, 2012

RIDERSHIP PREDICTION

ALTERNATIVES TO BE CONSIDERED

Sketch Level Assessment. of Traffic Issues. for the Fluor Daniel I-495 HOT Lane Proposal. Ronald F. Kirby

WHITE PAPER: TRANSIT SERVICE FOR SOUTH SHAGANAPPI

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Introduction. Neighborhood Traffic Analysis. Vehicular Travel Times. Mitch Bonanno. Vornado/Charles E. Smith.

MORE CONNECTIONS. Redesigning routes for the future of transit in Milwaukee County.

Project Narrative. Albuquerque, NM. July 31, 2015

Greenbush Commuter Rail Before-and-After Study

ROUTES 55 / 42 / 676 BUS RAPID TRANSIT LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

A More Efficient Night Owl

Modal Shift in the Boulder Valley 1990 to 2009

Tunnel Reconstruction South 5 th Street Association October 16, 2018

REGIONAL HOUSEHOLD TRAVEL SURVEY:

Congestion Management Report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... vii 1 STUDY OVERVIEW Study Scope Study Area Study Objectives

95 Express Annual Operations Report: Fiscal Year

Intermodal Connections with Light Rail in Phoenix, AZ Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Planning & Development

Previous Transit Studies MTTF MEETING #

Demand Estimation Model for Park-and-Ride Service: Fort Bend County to Central Houston

FY2006 Budget Board Budget Committee request for information. Board Request: Detailed information on bus route 5A DC-Dulless Airport

Executive Summary BEYOND THE B-LINE: RAPID TRANSIT LINE PHASE II - COMMERCIAL DRIVE WEST. Final Draft December 13, Appendix B BROADWAY/LOUGHEED

Title. Metropolitan Council Transportation Committee December 12, Brad Larson Metro District MnDOT

Evan Johnson, Tindale Oliver & Associates. Alan Danaher, P.E., PTOE, AICP, PTP

Congestion Management Report

PURPOSE AND NEED SUMMARY 54% Corridor Need 1. Corridor Need 2. Corridor Need 3. Corridor Need 4. Corridor Need 5

MTA Surveys: Facts and Findings. NYMTC Brown Bag March 12, 2014 Julia Seltzer, MTA Planning

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PLAN FOR THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN

PASSENGER SURVEY RESULTS

City of Edmonton - ETS. ETS Ridership Growth Strategy and Planning Review. Summary Report. May Excellence in Transportation Planning

City of Davenport CitiBus Public Transportation Study. April 2015

Transportation Analysis

Benefits for the Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens and Staten Island

The Broadway SkyTrain Extension

1.221J/11.527J/ESD.201J TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS FALL 2003 FINAL EXAMINATION. 1. Open-book and open-notes, calculators are fine -- no laptops.

Fitting Light Rail through Well-established Communities

DUNDAS WEST-BLOOR Mobility Hub Profile

CENTRAL AND EAST CORRIDORS

DON MILLS-EGLINTON Mobility Hub Profile

Transportation Impact Study for Abington Terrace

TABLE OF CONTENTS FIGURES TABLES. Executive Summary Report: BLUE LINE

TRANSPORTATION & ACCESS

Transcription:

ROUTE 52 ALLENTOWN Route 52 Allentown is a limited service LRT line that operates on weekdays between South Hills Junction and downtown Pittsburgh. The route serves the Allentown neighborhood and skirts Beltzhoover and the South Side using East Warrington Avenue and Arlington Avenue, crosses the Monongahela River and then enters the subway tunnel in downtown Pittsburgh. (see Figure 1). Key destinations along the route Figure 1: Route 52 Allentown include the Warrington Avenue commercial district, South Hills Junction and downtown Pittsburgh. S imilar Routes Route 52 is most similar to Route 46K Knoxville Beltzhoover, which operates on East Warrington Avenue and Arlington Avenue during off-peak periods when Route 52 is not in service (and is also shown in Figure 1). To avoid duplication during peak periods, Route 46K alternatively uses East Warrington Avenue to South Hills Junction and the transit tunnel to access downtown Pittsburgh. In total, Route 52 overlaps parts of five other routes: Route 41E Mt. Washington operates on East Warrington Avenue between Beltzhoover Avenue and South Hills Junction. Route 42S Beechview LRT operates four one-way trips during fringe peak hours via East Warrington Avenue and Arlington Avenue between South Hills Junction and downtown Pittsburgh. Route 46K Knoxville Beltzhoover operates as described above. Route 51A Arlington Heights operates on East Warrington Avenue between Arlington Avenue and South Hills Junction. Route 54C North Side Oakland - South Side operates on East Warrington Avenue between Beltzhoover Avenue and South Hills Junction. Page 1

Alignment/Service Patterns Route 52 operates on a single inbound and outbound alignment with no deviations. S chedule Route 52 operates on weekdays during peak periods only. The daily schedule consists of 14 one-way trips (see Table 1). Headways are approximately 45 minutes during the AM peak and 50 minutes during the PM peak. Weekdays Early AM AM Peak Base PM peak All Day Table 1: Route 52 Schedule Statistics One-Way Trips Headways Span of Service Inbound Outboun d (minutes) 5:35 am 5:59 am 6:00 am 8:28 am 3:23 pm 3:29 pm 3:30 pm 5:59 pm 5:35 am 5:59 pm 0 4 0 3 7 1 3 1 2 7 -- 42-45 -- 50-56 Route 52 s schedule is related to Routes 42S an d Route 46K. Route 42S operates four one- on the Route 52 timetable even though they are an integral part of the way trips per weekday via East Warrington Avenue and Arlington Avenue during fringe peak hours that essentially increase service to nine trips per peak period. These trips are not shown schedule. Route 46K bus service runs on East Warrington Avenue and Arlington Avenue when Route 52 is not in service. Route 46K uses East Carson Street and the Smithfield Street Bridge rather than the subway tunnel to access downtown Pittsburgh, and takes five minutes longer from East Warrington Avenue and Beltzhoover Avenue (18 minutes vs. 13 minutes). The two routes appear on a common timetable. R idership Route 52 currently carries approximately 230 passengers per weekday. This is down slightly from 246 passengers per day in 2006, but up significantly from 160 per day in 2007. Ridership on Route 52 is split into four distinct markets, with travel to and from downtown being the largest destination, followed by stops along East Warrington Avenue (see Figure 2): 1. Riders boarding at the First Avenue, Steel Plaza and Wood Street subway stations comprise 53% of total inbound weekday passengers. These passengers likely board the first train that comes along among Routes 42, 47 and 52. 2. Riders boarding on East Warrington Avenue between Arlington Avenue and the Haberman Avenue ramp to the South Busway comprise 40% of total inbound passengers. These passengers also have access to Route 51A, but it takes much longer to get to downtown Pittsburgh. Page 2

3. 4. Riders boarding at South Hills Junction comprise four percent of total inbound passengers. These riders are unlikely to be heading downtown, since travel through the tunnel via another route would be considerably faster than using Route 52. These passengers more likely alight along East Warrington Avenue near Arlington Avenue. Riders boarding on Arlington Avenue comprise three percent of total inbound passengers. In summary, Route 52 s major ridership market is travel between East Warrington Avenue and downtown Pittsburgh, and short distance travel within the Downtown subway tunnel. Figure 2: Route 52 Ridership by Stop: All Day Inbound Route 52 ridership is moderate on most peak direction trips and relatively light on reverse direction trips, except that the 4:53 pm inbound departure from South Hills Junction carries more than 50 passengers (see Figure 3). AM peak direction trips average about 50% of seated capacity (assuming 62 seats on a single car train). Page 3

Figure 3: Route 52 Maximum Loads by Time of Day (All Sampled Trips) Productivity Route 52 s productivity is the lowest of the light rail lines, and below average (see Table 3): Table 3: Route 52 Weekday Productivity Route 52 LRT Average Operating Cost/ Passenger $6.29 $4.41 Passengers/Revenue Vehicle Hour 47.8 101.3 Passengers/Total Vehicle Hour 66.2 83.3 Passengers/ Revenue Vehicle Mile 6.0 6.1 Total Vehicle Hours/Revenue Vehicle Hour 0.72 1.22 Average Speed (mph) 8.0 16.7 Stops/Mile 9.2 16.7 Directness 0.99 0.91 Number of Variations 2 2.4 Operating Cost/Passenger: Route 52 s operating cost per passenger is $6.29, which is 42% above average for light rail lines. The key contributing factors to the higher cost are a limited schedule focusing solely on downtown commuters, low service frequency, and competition from duplicative bus routes. Page 4

Ridership per Unit of Service: Overall, Route 52 carries nearly 48 passengers per revenue hour, which is 42% below combined LRT performance but 44% above the radial bus route category average. The 14 one-way trips in the daily schedule carry an average 17 passengers per trip, equivalent to 26% of seated capacity. Total Vehicle Hours Versus Revenue Vehicle Hours: Based on Winter 2007 schedules, the ratio of total vehicle hours to revenue vehicle hours is 1.38, which is 14% higher than combined LRT performance, and seven percent higher than the radial bus route category average. This high ratio reflects the distance between South Hills Junction and the rail yard. Average Speed: Route 52 scheduled service operates at an average speed of 11 mph, which is slower than most other services. This is attrilbutable to on-street running, steep grades, and sharp curves, and an excessive number of stops along the route. Bus Stops/Mile: Route 52 serves an average of 9.2 stops per mile, or one every 574 feet. This is 1.5 times as many stops per mile than the average for radial bus routes, and 13 times more than the other LRT routes. Number of Variations: Route 52 operates 14 weekday trips on two route patterns, one per direction. Four additional daily trips operated as Route 42S use similar patterns. Service Design Route 52 is unique in the PAAC transit network as an LRT line that characteristically is more similar to a radial bus route than Routes 42C, 42S, 47L or 47S. It currently provides limited peak-only service on the Allentown rail alignment, which is an underutilized resource. Nevertheless, the right-of-way is important to rail operations overall, since it supplies alternative access to downtown Pittsburgh in the event that the South Busway tunnel requires temporary closure. While peak service would be expected to focus primarily on downtown commuters, Route 52 s schedule frequency is too low to be appealing to commuters, and competing bus routes provide duplicative service between Allentown and downtown Pittsburgh. Service Improvement Opportunities Add Route 42 Allentown Trips to Route 52 Timetable: Currently, four trips per weekday designated as Route 42 operate on the Route 52 alignment, but are not shown on the Route 52 timetable. All 18 one-way LRT trips presently operating on East Warrington Avenue and Arlington Avenue should appear on a common timetable. Rationalize Route 41E, 46K, 51A, 52 and 54C Services on Warrington Avenue: These five routes currently overlap on Warrington Avenue in the Allentown neighborhood. Service on Warrington Avenue and to South Hills Junction should modified to achieve three objectives: (1) Make better use of Route 52, which offers shorter, more predicable travel times to downtown Pittsburgh for residents of Allentown and adjoining neighborhoods than the bus routes; (2) Simplify the route network and improve headway spacing in Allentown, Beltzhoover and Knoxville; and (3) Improve system productivity with selected truncation of local bus services at South Hills Junction on weeknights and weekends. Page 5

Improve Service Level: Route 52 currently does not provide an adequate level of service to meet the needs of commuters and others in the Allentown neighborhood. Service span and frequency improvements should be considered in conjunction with a reduction in duplication of service on competing routes. Page 6