Upload
ngotuong
View
221
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Ridesharing as a Complement to TransitTCRP Synthesis 98
Gail Murray, Principal Investigator, Co-AuthorMark Chase, Co-AuthorEunice Kim, Tufts Student Research AssistantMarkie McBrayer, Tufts Student Research Assistant
Photo: Metropolitan Transportation Commission website Photo: Avego Corporation Website
Ridesharing as a Complement to Transit
Methodology
• Review of relevant literature
• Web-based survey
• Interviews for agency profiles
Ridesharing as a Complement to Transit
Literature Review Findings
• Ridesharing is 10.7% of mode share, down from 20.4% in 1970
• 7 times as many US passenger miles for commute trips by carpools and vanpools than by public transit
• 384 ride-matching programs in US as of July 2010
• Only 32 were operated by public transit agencies
• Limited research focusing on integration
• Half of the 26 articles discussed vanpooling
Ridesharing as a Complement to Transit
Survey Respondents
• 28 transit agencies
• 14 non-transit agencies
Ridesharing as a Complement to Transit
Locations of the 28 Transit Agencies that Responded to the Survey
Ridesharing as a Complement to Transit
Does the Ridesharing Program Include any of the Following Components?
Response Count Percent
Provide carpool and vanpool matching 24 86%
Provide guaranteed ride home 24 86%
Market ridesharing to businesses 20 71%
Help establish vanpools with vehicles our agency owns or leases
18 64%
Market ridesharing to transit riders 14 50%
Subsidize vanpool fares 13 46%
Form vanpool through a third-party provider 12 43%
Provide parking for vanpools and carpools 12 43%
Provide incentives (e.g., loyalty programs, commuter checks, prizes, recognition)
11 39%
Other 4 14%
Total Responses 28 100%
*Answers exceed 100% because respondents could choose multiple answers.
Ridesharing as a Complement to Transit
Top two Reasons for Ridesharing and Public Transit Work Together
1. Bridge service gaps not filled by existing transit
2. Address market demand from customers• 10 created ridesharing program because
of customer requests
Ridesharing as a Complement to Transit
Extending Service to Low-Density Areas
• Pace, in suburban Chicago, operates Metra Feeder vans
• Vanpool Incentive Program flat rate of $58/month to go “the last mile” from train to workplace
Responses Count Percent
We use ridesharing to serve people who live in an area not dense to justify transit service
12 92%
We use ridesharing to pilot a route as a test for potential ridership on transit
4 31%
We substitute ridesharing for a transit route as a cost-saving measure
3 23%
Other 5 38%
Total Responses 13 100%
If you indicated above the ridesharing fills a service gap or avoids adding another bus or train, please tell us how.
* Answers exceed 100% because respondents could choose multiple answers
Ridesharing as a Complement to Transit
Substituting Ridesharing for Transit
• KCAPTA in CA operates 110 vanpools to take agricultural workers to work
• Fixed route buses aren’t flexible enough for varying work weeks and nontraditional hours
• Cost is $2.19 per trip compared to $4.10/trip for the bus
Photo: Kings County Area Public Transit Agency
Ridesharing as a Complement to Transit
Non-Transit Ridesharing Program
• MTC is the transportation planning, coordinating, and financing agency for 9 counties in San Francisco Bay Area.
• MTC operates the 511 Regional Ridesharing and Bicycling Program.
SF Bay Area 511 Program offers rewards to ridesharingPhoto: Metropolitan Transportation Commission website
Ridesharing as a Complement to Transit
What specific performance measures, if any, do you use to evaluate the ridesharing program?
Response Count Percent
Number of carpools and/or vanpools measuredagainst a goal
11 44%
Number of participants measured against a goal 9 36%
We do not set specific performance measures for the ridesharing program
6 24%
Environmental goals reached, such as decreased carbon emissions
5 20%
Increased miles or percent of service area covered because of ridesharing program
4 16%
Number of residents and businesses included 2 8%
Avoided cost of transit service not required because of ridesharing program
1 4%
Other 8 32%
Total Responses 25 100%
Transit Agencies’ Performance Measures
* Answers exceed 100% because respondents could choose multiple answers
Ridesharing as a Complement to Transit
Examples of Cost-Effectiveness Measurements
• Des Moines Area Regional Transit (DART)• Generates nearly $3M in annual
FTA Sec. 5307 formula funds
• Reports mileage of its 103 vanpools
• RTD in Denver• Subsidizes regional vanpool program based
on annual peak/off-peak marginal cost analysis
• Per boarding subsidy for express routes ($4.73 average) is much more than vanpool subsidy ($2.58)
Ridesharing as a Complement to Transit
Dynamic Ridesharing
• Most interested, but waiting to see demonstrated results.
• WSDOT funded first phase of Seattle’s “go520,” implemented by Avego Corporation
• MTC is funding a pilot program in 3 Bay Area counties.
Seattle’s dynamic ridesharing pilot projectPhoto: Avego Corporation Website
Ridesharing as a Complement to Transit
Challenges
• Ridesharing considered competition for transit (46%)
• Ridesharing not important to agency’s mission (40%)
• Customers do not easily accept ridesharing as a substitute for transit (29%)
Ridesharing as a Complement to Transit
Opportunities for Positive Messages
• Economic: ridesharing as an alternative to simply cutting service
• Contingency Planning: ridesharing for backup in worst-case scenarios
• Solving “Last Mile:” feeder vanpools from the end of line
• Create capacity: supplement crowded transit with slugging, carpools, vanpools
• Legislation: state incentives such as tax credits, exclusion from liability
For more information:www.TRB.orgwww.nelsonnygaard.com | 415-285-1544
Photo: Metropolitan Transportation Commission website Photo: Avego Corporation Website
Gail Murray, Principal Investigator, Co-AuthorMark Chase, Co-AuthorEunice Kim, Tufts Student Research AssistantMarkie McBrayer, Tufts Student Research Assistant