Smarter Transit Network Design - pt 3 of "A Market Focused Paradigm for Public Transit"

1A Market-Focused Paradigm for Public Transit, pt. 3: Smarter Transit Network Design© 1998-2013 by The Mission Group. All rights reserved.
A Market-Focused Paradigm
for Public Transit
THE MISSION GROUP
Part 3—Smarter Transit Network Design
Alan Hoffman ▪ San Diego, California ▪ (619) 232-1776 ▪ info@missionconsult.com
© 2013 by The Mission Group. All Rights Reserved.
PART
3
1A Market-Focused Paradigm for Public Transit, pt. 1: A Smarter Transit Network© 1998-2013 by The Mission Group. All rights reserved.
A Market-Focused Paradigm
for Public Transit
THE MISSION GROUP
Part 3—Smarter Transit Network Design
Alan Hoffman ▪ San Diego, California ▪ (619) 232-1776 ▪ info@missiongrouponline.com
© 2013 by The Mission Group. All Rights Reserved.
PART
3www.missionconsult.com

In part 2 of this presentation,
we identified the three key strategic
variables that drive modal choice:
Here in part 3, we’ll focus on issues of
network structure—how to configure
more effective transit networks.
Network
Structure
(Connectivity)
System
Performance
(Time)
Customer
Experience

Connectivity:
The Double Challenge
Connect as many places that
matter in as few years as
possible
Shape regional growth and
solve regional problems
GOAL:

Connectivity:
The Double Challenge
Connect as many places that
matter in as few years as
possible
Place access where it needs
to be, not “near” where it
needs to be
Shape regional growth and
solve regional problems
The system really becomes
useful and convenient
GOAL: GOAL:

Some cities pour their resources
into creating a major investment
in a single transit corridor,
be it light rail or busway.

Transit & Land Use:
Weak Strategy
The city above has numerous activity nodes scattered about;
it can’t be served effectively by single lines, however they squiggle
about. For most trips, transit is not relevant or convenient.

Transit & Land Use:
Weak Strategy
Even with the addition of a new line, the transit network
does not provide excellent connectivity between and
among various key nodes in this region.

Transit & Land Use:
Weak Strategy
Most regions build at least one “political line,”
connecting little with little.

Transit & Land Use:
Weak Strategy
If transit systems are unable to provide superior
connectivity among a core set of points, they are
unlikely to shape the future growth of that region.

Transit & Land Use:
Weak Strategy
This region is growing, but around the automobile, even though
developers claim they are doing “smart growth” infill and the
transit agency takes credit for anything built near a line.

Transit & Land Use:
Weak Strategy
More people can use transit now that the region has grown, but it
should be obvious that transit is not the core movement system,
not is it convenient or useful for most people most of the time.

Other cities figure out how to connect
their principal nodes together as
directly and conveniently as possible,
even if they use rickshaws.

Transit & Land Use:
Strong Strategy
This city is focused on linking its
principal nodes together directly.

Transit & Land Use:
Strong Strategy
As this city continues to develop its transit connections,
more and more of its key nodes are now linked together.

Transit & Land Use:
Strong Strategy
This is a useful transit network.
People will want to be located near a node
of this network. Developers smell blood.

Transit & Land Use:
Strong Strategy
Cities that develop strategies to connect their component
parts as quickly as possible create truly useful transit systems—
and markets tend to respond to such usefulness.

Transit & Land Use:
Strong Strategy
Useful transit networks are more likely to generate market
demand for businesses and residents around transit stations. This
is a far cry from the high levels of subsidy of many so-called
“Transit-Oriented Development” (TOD) projects.

Some cities have been very
innovative in their approach to
creating a pervasive transit network.
Curitiba, Brazil, practically invented
modern Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) as
a result of their desire to implement
their ideal transit network in as few
years as possible.

Curitiba, Brazil

Curitiba: Desire vs. Reality
Cover the entire city
with a subway
system
Goal:
Could only afford
single LRT line
Design “surface
subway” system
using buses to get
network up and
running
Goal:
Problem:
Solution:

Curitiba: Transit/Land Use
One-way
road
heading
into
center
One-way road
heading away .
from center .
Transit in center boulevard with high density built alongside.

Curitiba: Transit/Land Use
High-Density
Transit Spine
Low-Density
Family Neighborhoods
Curitiba’s “Structural Axis” corridors were made up of targeted
transit and road investments; the combination of the two is what
made “transit-oriented development” feasible.

Curitiba: Buses and Roads
Make buses
run faster.
Buses always get
stuck in traffic.
Create bus-only
“roads within roads,”
with traffic signal
priority, both
reducing running
time and making the
system more reliable.
Goal:
Problem:
Solution:

Curitiba: Make Buses Like Metro
Goal:
Problem:
Solution:
Make buses run
like subways.
Buses take
so long to load.
Use mass-produced
“tube stations” with
platform-level
loading, multiple
doors along vehicles,
and payment at
station entrance,
reducing “dwell
time” to 10-20
seconds per stop.

Curitiba—Speedy Network
Reduce transit
trip times.
Longer trips involve
many stops.
Create an overlay
network of “speedy”
buses directly linking
major transfer centers
and demand generators,
thereby cutting 30
minutes off average trip.
Goal:
Problem:
Solution:

Curitiba—”Integration Terminals”
Facilitate transfer among
transit services.
Transfers are rarely
desirable.
Create a series of
“integration terminals”
that bring all services
together, as well as the
kind of retail shops that
appeal to commuters.
Goal:
Problem:
Solution:

Curitiba—”Citizenship Streets”
Athletic
Facilities
Transit
Center
City
Services

Curitiba—Implementation
Problem:
Solution:
89 94 97
74 79 84
Extend “rapid” transit
services as quick as
possible
Goal:
Need to keep
capital costs low
Bus-based system
“colonizing” existing
rights-of-way has led to
extraordinarily rapid
system expansion
Problem:
Solution:
Goal:

Curitiba—Ridership
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0% 1970s
% of Commute (Work) Trips Made By Transit

Curitiba—Ridership
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0% 1970s Today
% of Commute (Work) Trips Made By Transit

It’s not enough to connect places
at the scale of a regional or city map.
The station’s immediate pedestrian
environment can make a huge
difference in market response.

Location
You Are HereYou Are Here
You Want to
Go Here
You Want to
Go Here
When land uses aren’t matched to transit, the result is often
inconvenient for pedestrians—and transit is about pedestrians.

This streetcar stop in Portland is
located just a few steps from
offices, classes…
and coffee!

Let’s look at Los Angeles,
which can be considered
a theme park of transit modes.

From Panorama City
to LAX:
1. Local bus
(stopping at every stop)
1

From Panorama City
to LAX:
1. Local bus
2. Metro Orange Line
1
2

From Panorama City
to LAX:
1. Local bus
3. Metro Red Line
1
2
3

From Panorama City
to LAX:
1. Local bus
3. Metro Red Line
4. Metro Blue Line
1
2
4
3

From Panorama City
to LAX:
1. Local bus
3. Metro Red Line
4. Metro Blue Line
5. Metro Green Line
1
2
4
3
5

From Panorama City
to LAX:
1. Local bus
3. Metro Red Line
4. Metro Blue Line
5. Metro Green Line
6. Shuttle bus to
terminals
1
2
4
3
5
6

From Panorama City
to LAX:
1. Local bus
3. Metro Red Line
4. Metro Blue Line
5. Metro Green Line
6. Shuttle bus to
terminals
TOO LONG & TOO
MANY TRANSFERS!
1
2
4
3
5
6

Dispersed metropolitan areas
can’t be effectively served just
by traditional transit networks,
regardless of mode.
People need to leapfrog
about their region.

LA has created a lot of TOD
(“Transit-Oriented Development”)
around its transit stations.
How well has the transit system
served all these new residences?
Has this strategy worked?

Los Angeles: A Cautionary Tale
A dozen of the county's most powerful civic leaders— including the
mayor of Los Angeles, L.A. City Council members and county
supervisors—touted the latest and glitziest new development in
Hollywood: the planned W Hotel and apartments at the storied
corner of Hollywood and Vine.
This project, they pledged at the groundbreaking earlier this
year, would restore a sagging neighborhood while also minimizing
traffic—an important promise in increasingly gridlocked
Hollywood.
“People could live here and never use their cars,” declared MTA
Chief Executive Roger Snoble at the February event.
It’s a vision expressed frequently by local government officials,
who see building large mixed-use developments next to mass transit
lines as a key solution for not just the region's traffic congestion but
also its spread-out geography and reputation for being unfriendly to
pedestrians.
In Los Angeles alone, billions of public and private dollars have
been lavished on transit-oriented projects such as Hollywood &
Vine, with more than 20,000 residential units approved within a
Near the rails but still on the road
Research casts doubt on the region's strategy of pushing transit-oriented residential projects to get
people out of cars.
quarter mile of transit stations between 2001 and 2005.
But there is little research to back up the rosy predictions.
Among the few academic studies of the subject, one that looked at
buildings in the Los Angeles area showed that transit-based
development successfully weaned relatively few residents from
their cars. It also found that, over time, no more people in the
buildings studied were taking transit 10 years after a project opened
than when it was first built.
June 30, 2007

There’s more to network
structure than the location of routes.
The location of stops and stations
matters, too. How far will people walk?

Transit and Walking
Effective
Destination
Zone
3 min. walk
≈ 1/6 mi./250m
radius
≈ 56 acres/
23 hectares
Intensive
Residential
Zone
5 min. walk
≈ ¼ mi./400m
radius
≈ 125 acres/
50 hectares
Limit of
Attraction
10 min. walk
≈ ½ mi./800m
radius
≈ 500 acres/
200 hectares

Walking environment matters, too.
It can make a short walk seem long,
and a long walk seem desirable.
The following are what The Mission
Group has identified as the five
levels of pedestrian orientation.

1. Kill the Pedestrian
Levels of Pedestrian Orientation…

2. Punish the Pedestrian

3. Pedestrian Accessible
(but hardly desirable)

4. Pedestrian Friendly

5. Pedestrian Seductive
Distance
Scale
Activity
Variation

In part 4 of this presentation,
we’ll look at System Performance—
how smart transit network design
can save people time. We’ll also
see some innovations in network
structure that go beyond
traditional network forms.

THE MISSION GROUP
3725 Talbot Street, Suite E • San Diego, California 92106 USA
+1 (619) 232-1776 • info@missionconsult.com
Transit
Network
Reviews
Transit
Planning
Support
Transit Market
& Ridership
Studies
Customer
Experience
Audits
Innovative
Alternatives
Generation
Long-Term
Vision Plans
& Strategies
“Quickway”
Network
Proposals
Presentations
and
White Papers
Workshops
and Seminars
We’re the transit market experts.

Smarter Transit Network Design - pt 3 of "A Market Focused Paradigm for Public Transit"

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to Smarter Transit Network Design - pt 3 of "A Market Focused Paradigm for Public Transit"

More from Alan Hoffman

Recently uploaded

Smarter Transit Network Design - pt 3 of "A Market Focused Paradigm for Public Transit"