Exploring Factors Affecting Metrorail Ridership in Washington D.C.

Similar documents
Geo-coding of the 2012 WMATA Rail Survey. Travel Forecasting Subcommittee January 25, 2012 Clara Reschovsky

A New Approach in the GIS Bikeshed Analysis Considering of Topography, Street Connectivity, and Energy Consumption

RIDERSHIP PREDICTION

the 54th Annual Conference of the Association of Collegiate School of Planning (ACSP) in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania November 2 nd, 2014

Bike-Sharing & the Built Environment

2010 Pedestrian and Bicyclist Special Districts Study Update

RESTAURANT OR RETAIL opportunity located in the central business district

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

Fixed Guideway Transit Outcomes on Rents, Jobs, and People and Housing

APPENDIX E BIKEWAY PRIORITIZATION METHODOLOGY

Motorized Transportation Trips, Employer Sponsored Transit Program and Physical Activity

Market Factors and Demand Analysis. World Bank

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Webinar: The Association Between Light Rail Transit, Streetcars and Bus Rapid Transit on Jobs, People and Rents

ABOUT THE PROJECT. DOWNTOWN WEST Transportation Planning Study. Pennsylvania Ave. NW: H Street NW: Farragut. K St. NW. North. I St.

Short-Term Transit Ridership and Revenue Forecasting

Customer Service and Operations Committee. Board Information Item III-A. March 12, 2015

Measuring and Communicating Mobility:

Philadelphia Bus Network Choices Report

Active Travel and Exposure to Air Pollution: Implications for Transportation and Land Use Planning

VI. Market Factors and Deamnd Analysis

The Impact of Placemaking Attributes on Home Prices in the Midwest United States

Midtown Corridor Alternatives Analysis

The Brookings Institution Metropolitan Policy Program

Neighborhood Influences on Use of Urban Trails

O-D Study Transit Staff Workshop January 23, 2014

Understanding Rail and Bus Ridership

2014 Mobility Assessment Report Functional Planning & Policy Montgomery County Planning Department

TRANSIT RIDERSHIP AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

CHAPTER 3: Service and System Evaluation

Downtown, Washington, D.C. one-of-a-kind retail experience th Street, NW epitome of what The East End has to offer

Transportation Research Part D

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

Capital and Strategic Planning Committee. Item III - B. April 12, WMATA s Transit-Oriented Development Objectives

Appendix G: Bicycle Parking Space Recommendations at Transit Stations

Webinar: Development of a Pedestrian Demand Estimation Tool

What Are The Benefits? How RIDERSHIP + Can Help You. Select RIDERSHIP + Projects

Source: Transit App. D.C. Dockless Bikeshare: A First Look

Roadway Bicycle Compatibility, Livability, and Environmental Justice Performance Measures

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

To Shape or Serve: Transit & Land Use Forum Tina M. Votaw, Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS)

Pedestrian access to transit: Identifying redundancies and gaps using a variable service area analysis

El Paso to Las Cruces Proposed Rail Service Estimated Ridership and Proposed Schedule

Calgary Transit Route 302 Southeast BRT Year One Review June

Rail Station Fact Sheet Downtown Carrollton Station

Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations APPENDIX C TRANSIT STATION ACCESS PLANNING TOOL INSTRUCTIONS

Comparing Generalized Variance Functions to Direct Variance Estimation for the National Crime Victimization Survey

Fitting Light Rail through Well-established Communities

Identifying Latent Transit Ridership. Sean Davis. Building Better Cities Building Better Lives

Characteristics from these programs were used to compare to and evaluate existing conditions in Howard County.

Factors Associated with the Bicycle Commute Use of Newcomers: An analysis of the 70 largest U.S. Cities

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 / /

Bike Planner Overview

SoundCast Design Intro

100 Most Congested Roadways in Texas

Development of Decision Support Tools to Assess Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety: Development of Safety Performance Function

Integrating Community Development and Transportation Strategies. November 13, 2014

BUILDING THE CASE FOR TRAVEL OPTIONS IN WASHING TON COUNTY. Image: Steve Morgan. Image: Steve Morgan

Estimating Ridership of Rural Demand-Response Transit Services for the General Public

Maurer 1. Feasibility Study for a Bicycle Sharing Program in Sacramento, California

TRANSIT PERFORMANCE IN THE I-66 INSIDE THE BELTWAY CORRIDOR

SUITABILITY STUDY FOR A BICYCLE SHARING PROGRAM IN SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA LINDSAY KATHRYN MAURER

a) List and define all assumptions for multiple OLS regression. These are all listed in section 6.5

Aurora Corridor to E Line

BEAR CREEK PARK AND RIDE

M Street SW-Southeast Federal Center

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

Temporal and Spatial Variation in Non-motorized Traffic in Minneapolis: Some Preliminary Analyses

Development of Arlington County s Marked Crosswalk Guidelines. Jon Lawler, P.E. Design Engineer Arlington County, VA

Rationale. Previous research. Social Network Theory. Main gap 4/13/2011. Main approaches (in offline studies)

Traffic Safety Barriers to Walking and Bicycling Analysis of CA Add-On Responses to the 2009 NHTS

DON MILLS-EGLINTON Mobility Hub Profile

METRO RTA TRANSIT MASTER PLAN. May 25-26, 2011

ESP 178 Applied Research Methods. 2/26/16 Class Exercise: Quantitative Analysis

Travel and Rider Characteristics for Metrobus

City of Davenport CitiBus Public Transportation Study. April 2015

Flyaway Bus: GIS Analysis on Current and Potential Ridership, Revenue, and Prospective Stations

Location Matters: Where America Is Moving

Cutting Canada s Slowest Rush Hour with Public Transportation

North Augusta 1215 Knox Avenue, North Augusta, SC 29841

Investigating Commute Mode and Route Choice Variability in Jakarta using multi-day GPS Data

Methodology for Determining Pedestrian Activity Factors

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

Impact of Bike Facilities on Residential Property Prices

Name May 3, 2007 Math Probability and Statistics

Estimating Ridership of Rural Public Demand- Response Transit

Arlington County 10-Year Transit Development Plan & Premium Transit Network Briefing. May 2016

Transit-Driven Complete Streets

LESSONS FROM THE GREEN LANES: EVALUATING PROTECTED BIKE LANES IN THE U.S.

Pedestrian Activity Criteria. PSAC March 8, 2011

The Nexus between Transportation Demand Your sub title Management (TDM), Transit Station Access, and Internal Station Circulation

Thresholds and Impacts of Walkable Distance for Active School Transportation in Different Contexts

SMARTTRACK RIDERSHIP ANALYSIS

Combined impacts of configurational and compositional properties of street network on vehicular flow

Presentation Summary Why Use GIS for Ped Planning? What Tools are Most Useful? How Can They be Applied? Pedestrian GIS Tools What are they good for?

A Framework For Integrating Pedestrians into Travel Demand Models

Methodology for Linking Greenways and Trails with Public Transportation in Florida

THESE DAYS IT S HARD TO MISS the story that Americans spend

Prince George s County Council Retreat January 5, 2017

CAPITOL CROSSING / 200 & 250 MASSACHUSETTS AVE NW / WASHINGTON, DC

Transcription:

Exploring Factors Affecting Metrorail Ridership in Washington D.C. Chao Liu, Ph.D., Hiro Iseki, Ph.D. National Center for Smart Growth University of Maryland, College Park September 2015, GIS in Transit Conference 1

Motivation for this research Overview of Direct Ridership Model Visualization of the key variables Methodology Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) Geographically Weighted Regression (GWR) Results

5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 Ridership per Half Hour Bethesda Our Rail Stations Show Dramatically Different Ridership Patterns Daily Ridership: 11,500 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Daily Ridership: 6,300 Suitland Bethesda Suitland 3

Direct Ridership Model (DRM) DRM quantifies the relationship between station-level transit ridership and factors of land use, transit service, and socio-demographics. DRM provides an estimate of ridership increase, given certain land use changes (e.g., changing the number of households or jobs). 10-min. walk Land Use Ridership 4

Direct Ridership Model Households Jobs, by type Demographics Transit service & Accessibility Built Environment Multivariate regressions Walk/Bike Ridership By Time Period By Station Walk Area (10-minute walking) Demographics: Transit characteristics: Built environment: household income, education level, etc. level of service, level of accessibility, network connectivity, parking Density (households & jobs), diversity (land use & industry), design (intersection density), job-accessibility, walk-score etc. 5

Half-Mile Walk Sheds: Examples Ballston Cheverly 6

Walk/bike AM peak entries vs. PM Peak entries Walk/Bike AM entries: include many commuters from suburban stations Walk/Bike PM entries: include many commuters to downtown DC 7

Households vs. jobs Households: distribute across the region with high concentration at several stations, such as Dupont Circle and Columbia Heights. Jobs: include jobs in downtown DC, as well as a few suburban stations, such as Bethesda and Ballston. 8

Jobs Accessible in 30 Minutes Job accessibility: the number of jobs can be accessed from each station within 30-minute transit time and 10-minute walking 9

AM peak entries model Objective Estimate ridership increase by adding X number of households (HHs) Regression Related a change in household to a change in ridership Added a term to indicate CBD in the model to improve accuracy 10

AM peak entries model-results Independent Variable Coefficient P-value Households000050miles 0.14 0.010 HHsXJobsAccessRailvHighway 0.25 0.000 MedianHHIncome 0.005 0.002 HHsXGoodService 0.16 0.000 IntersectionH -3.73 0.180 DowntownCore* -279.73 0.066 Constant 136.86 0.252 r-squared: 0.84 Note: After testing different samples, downtowncore includes: Dupont Circle S, Farragut North S, Metro Center, Farragut West, Foggy Bottom, McPherson Square, Federal Triangle, Smithsonian S

Predicted AM Entries per HH Important variables: Households (Household) x (Job accessibility) (Household) x (Good service) Median house hold income Downtown core Note: Interactive effects 12

PM peak entries model Objective Estimate ridership increase by adding X number of jobs Regression A statistical issue persisted due to large variance in both ridership and jobs. Station grouping helped to solve this issue. Group 1 (orange): Downtown Stations : in the downtown core Group 2 (green): Low Job Stations : with jobs < 2,500 Group 3 (red): Mixed Job Suburban Stations : other stations 13

Grouping of Stations Station grouping Group 1 (orange) Downtown Stations : in the downtown core Group 2 (green) Low Job Stations jobs < 2500 Group 3 (red) Mixed Job Suburban Stations others 14

PM peak entries model (3 groups) Independent Variable Group 1 Downtown Stations Group 2 Low Job Stations Group 3 Mixed Job Suburban Stations jobs in half-mile walk sheds 0.22 0.34 0.14 Trains per hour NS NS 52.38 (Jobs) x (Miles from downtown) NS -0.02-0.008 N 21 35 24 R 2 0.77 0.53 0.89 Notes: significant level is 0.05; NS means statistically not significant; for Group2 and Group3, the total effect of adding jobs is determined by both jobs and miles from downtown. 15

PM Entries per Job PM Entries per Job Predicted PM Peak Entries per New Job in the Walk Shed 16

Example Results and Trade-offs Imagine 274 new HHs near Metro: at Rhode Island Avenue: 144 new entries/day at New Carrollton: 52 new entries/day Imagine 10,000 new 9-5 jobs near Metro: At NoMa: 3,550 new entries/day At Friendship Hts: 1,341 new entries/day At Greenbelt: 881 new entries/day 18

19

Motivations In a typically linear regression model, coefficients of independent variables are considered constant across observations ---- global estimates GWR allows the estimated coefficient vary among observations and can provide local estimates of the transit ridership. Not all TODs are alike. Certain predictors play more important roles than others at different Metro stations. Specific results can be used as evidence to support local policies and decision-making. 20

AM peak entries model-results Independent Variable Coefficient P-value Households000050miles 0.14 0.010 HHsXJobsAccessRailvHighway 0.25 0.000 MedianHHIncome 0.005 0.002 HHsXGoodService 0.16 0.000 IntersectionH -3.73 0.180 DowntownCore* -279.73 0.066 Constant 136.86 0.252 r-squared: 0.84 Note: After testing different samples, downtowncore includes: Dupont Circle S, Farragut North S, Metro Center, Farragut West, Foggy Bottom, McPherson Square, Federal Triangle, Smithsonian S

Coefficients of the number of households 22

Coefficients of median income 23

PM peak entries model (3 groups) Independent Variable Group 1 Downtown Stations Group 2 Low Job Stations Group 3 Mixed Job Suburban Stations jobs in half-mile walk sheds 0.22 0.34 0.14 Trains per hour NS NS 52.38 (Jobs) x (Miles from downtown) NS -0.02-0.008 N 21 35 24 R 2 0.77 0.53 0.89 Notes: significant level is 0.05; NS means statistically not significant; for Group2 and Group3, the total effect of adding jobs is determined by both jobs and miles from downtown. 24

Coefficients of the number of jobs 25

Predicted PM entries 26

PM Entries per Job PM Entries per Job Predicted PM Peak Entries per New Job in the Walk Shed 27

AM peak entries model OLS vs. GWR OLS GWR R 2 0.837 0.907 Adjusted R 2 0.824 0.845 AIC 1241.16 1262.951 Number of parameters 7 42 Sigma (σ) 340.1 344.924 28

Category Variables Description Data source Dependent Variable Walk_Bike_Entries Walk_Bike_Exits Average weekday ridership for September 2013, by AM peak periods entries. WMATA, 2013 Transit Service Parking 2013 These are the number of daily parking transactions at WMATAowned parking facilities at the station, from our fare system. WMATA 2013 AM Peak headway Number of trains of both directions in AM peak WMATA 2013 Built Environment transit connectivity index* Households- in half - mile walk sheds Jobs-in half - mile walk sheds Intersection in half - mile walk sheds Miles from the downtown core Composite index based on graph theory including transit routes, coverage, speed, capacity, urban form, etc Number of households within a half-mile catchment area of stations NCSG 2010 WMATA 2012 Number of Jobs within a half-mile catchment area of stations WMATA 2012 Number of intersections within a half-mile catchment area around stations WMATA 2012 Distance of each station to downtown WMATA 2012 job accessibility by auto * Job accessibility by transit* industry diversity * location dummies* Number of jobs that can be accessed within 30 minutes by auto using the Maryland State Transportation model (MSTM) Number of jobs that can be accessed within 45 minutes by transit using the MSTM Entropy index of industry diversity within a half-mile catchment area of stations Downtown, municipalities, redline NCSG 2012 NCSG 2012 NCSG 2012 NCSG 2012 WMATA 2012 Walk Score https://www.walkscore.com/ Walk Score 2013 Sociodemographics Median household income Median household income within a half-mile catchment area of stations WMATA 2012 32

Appendix 33

Where did you come from just before entering the Metro station? Walk only 34

Land Use and Ridership: Other Lessons We Learned Peak is all about jobs and households, and accessibility Off-peak is all about certain kinds of jobs Accessibility is significant in nearly all models If you can reach more stuff via transit from a station, ridership generation is stronger. Median income usually helps as control variables Positive on peak, negative at midday, no effect in evening WalkScore, most built environment variables phasing out in face of land use data Parking phasing out, overlap with job access No value in differentiating private vs. federal jobs Nearby jobs and neighborhoods are a small but robust source for off-peak ridership 35

Using Jobs by Type as Proxy for Activity Schedule Job NAICS Types INCLUDED NAICS Excluding Govt 92 922120 922140 922160 922190 9-to-5ers Office 51-56 5616 Nonprofits 813 Manufacturing 33 (near Metrorail, NAICS2 33 is mostly HQs for Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Xerox, etc - not manuf. plants) Shift Workers and Midday Appointments Nights and Weekends All Medical 62 Jails 922140 Hotels 7211 7213 Police/Fire 922120 922160 922190 Security Services 5616 Restaurants, Bars 72 7211 7213 (hotels) Retail 44 45 Concert Halls, Arenas 71 7121 7131 Schools Schools 61 Midday + Weekend Attractors Museums, Zoos, Parks 7121 7131 36

Did You Look At? Rule of Regression: no collinearity. If two explanatory variables are similar across stations, you can only use one E.g., housing density and 4-way intersections So, choose the set of variables that best predict ridership, as proxies for other effects 37

Work Relationship NCSG provided: An additional set of variables for analysis, Technical reports and consultation, STATA program files and GIS maps, and Base-excel files to predict ridership by station. NCSG closely communicated with Justin regarding: Specific requirements: regression specification Discussion of problems in regression analysis Discussion of intermediate results and further steps to explore Translation of regression analysis results in ridership prediction 38

39

AM peak exits model 1 2 3 Group 1 (orange): Downtown Core : in the downtown core Group 2 (green): Low Job Stations : jobshalf < 2500 Group 3 (red): Mixed Job Suburbs : others 40

Group 2 Jobs < 2500 42