Regional Service Concept - Metro · Regional Service Concept. June 2019 – Metro Service Councils....

0

Regional Service Concept

June 2019 – Metro Service CouncilsJuly 2019 – Metro Board of Directors

1

Bus Network Goals and Objectives

Provide high quality mobility options that enable people to spend less time traveling (Metro Vision 2028)

• Target infrastructure and service investments towards those with the greatest mobility needs

• Invest in a world class bus system that is reliable, convenient, and attractive to more users for more trips

• Endorse travel speed, service frequency, and system reliability as the highest priority service design objectives for the NextGen Bus Study (Motion 38.1)

• Optimize system performance to maximize benefit to the public

2

How Can Metro Help Equitably Grow Transit Ridership?

How well do people understand how effectively transit can serve their needs? Is the system easy to understand & find?

FINDHow can we encourage people to try transit? Does transit go where & when they need it to? Is transit competitive with other options? Is the service attractive?

TRYOnce people have tried transit, how can we attract them to use it more often? Is service fast, frequent & reliable enough to retain riders & entice occasional/infrequent riders?

RELY

Current Approach to Equity:> Title VI and Environmental Justice

Moving Beyond Compliance:> Metro Equity Platform: The Four Pillars

I. Define & MeasureII. Listen & LearnIII. Focus & DeliverIV. Train & Grow

How is Metro Addressing Equity?

3

Metro’s Equity Platform in ActionNextGen Goes Beyond Title VI/EJTitle VI/EJ protects against making opportunities worse for minority and/or low income groups.

Metro enhances Title VI/EJ in it’s Equity Platform by:

• Inclusiveness beyond ethnicity and income

• Going above and beyond to improve service for communities with greatest mobility needs

Title VI/EJ

Communities with greatest mobility needs

Folding the Equity Framework into NextGen

LISTEN & LEARN

FOCUS & DELIVER

DEFINE & MEASURE

TRAIN & GROW

• Use Title VI/EJ and Performance Measures to ensure we are achieving our equity objectives

• Use survey results to help define what improvements are wanted/needed

• Verify results through outreach and engagement

• NextGen service design concepts and network redesign based on transit propensity, service performance, service environment and public feedback

• Refresh Board adopted policies based on NextGen service design concepts

Defining Service PrioritiesCommunity Meetings/

EWG Meetings

Transit Propensity Index Maps

Service Design Concepts

Network Redesign

Transit Service Policies

Board Approval

5

• Including nearly 7,000 residents through an online survey. Over 60% were people of color with a balance of genders, age groups, zip codes, & income levels equitably representing the diversity of LA County.

• Bus rider outreach: 300,000

• Digital engagement touchpoints: 9 million +

• Print advertising & collateral: 1.4 million +

• Community events & stakeholder briefings: 200 +

• Input received will help refine services changes

• Meetings & workshops were geographically balanced within Metro’s service area, included a broad & diverse focus, & targeting hard to reach communities

10 million + touchpoints in LA County

Mobile Unit On-board Bus Surveys

Parent Group MeetingADA-Focused Workshop

Community Engagement Highlights

66

20+ public workshops, 1,000+ attendees & 1,800+ comments• Round 1: 10 meetings organized by Service Council Area

• Round 2: 10 additional targeted stakeholder meetings (including 1 ADA-focused meeting)

• 1,800+ quality comments related to the technical aspects of the system & personal needs/experiences

• 1,000+ residents engaged in a dialogue between Metro staff and the system serves

• Utilized interactive & visually appealing workshop stations

• Received requests for additional presentations/workshops

Public Workshop Series

7

How is the public’s feedback incorporated into service design concepts?

> More frequency> Reliability> Accessibility

> Faster service> Better connectivity> Safety

> Hybrid stop spacing> Shorter route lengths> Microtransit/on-demand services> Routing based on transit propensity and public feedback

> Subarea transit hubs> Muni coordination> Standardized frequencies by service tiers> Transit supportive infrastructure

Themes help guide service concepts:

Recurring themes from public outreach (examples):

8

Transit Propensity

Service Performance

Service Environment

Transit Orientation

Service Design Concepts

Design Considerations

Fixed route bus service succeeds when:• There is a high concentration of travel where transit can be

competitive, AND• Current transit service is well aligned with the demand, AND • The built environment & other external factors favor transit

use.

Bus service must be designed to the specifications of individual markets based on:• Time of day/day of week, AND• Trip distance, AND• Demographics served, AND • External factors impacting

transit competiveness

Network Development Process

9

Areas with Greatest Travel DemandTransit Propensity: Willingness to Use Transit

Willingness to Use TransitLow High

What Transit Propensity MeasuresMarket Segments

• Those with greatest mobility needs• Commuters and students• Discretionary riders

Service Environment• Walkability• Street network• Development density• Housing density

Travel Demand• Pop/Emp densities• Travel intensity• Current route performance

10

Service is most successful where we have a strong, integrated bus/rail network and the

right market conditions.

10,000

5,000

1,000

50050

Metro LinesMuni Lines

Metro Weekday Boardings

45,000 – 119,202

35,000 – 45,000

27,000 – 35,000

23,000 – 27,000

18,000 – 23,000

12,000 – 18,000

5,000 – 12,000

2,000 – 5,000

0 – 2,000

Trip Intensity Per Square Mile

Service is most successful where we have a strong, integrated bus/rail network and the

right market conditions.

Service Performance: Where People are Currently Using Metro

11

Travel Intensity Land Use Parking Supply Travel Time

Are there enough people making the same trip?

Is the built environment transit friendly?

Is there too much free parking?

Does transit have priority over cars?

Service Environments

12

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

B. Good market share,Poor competitiveness

A. Good market share, Good competitiveness

C. Poor market share, Good competitiveness

D. Poor market share, Poor competitiveness

Transit to Drive Time Ratio

Tran

sit M

arke

t Sha

reMarket Types

20,000 trips 50,000 trips

13

Where should routes be adjusted to better connect people to where they want to go?

1What frequency

levels and service spans are needed

for a successful network?

2How do we balance

walk-wait-ride on key network corridors to

optimize the customer experience?

3How does this all fit

in with Metro’s available bus

resources?

4

Network DesignApproach to

14

Sylmar/San Fernando

Sunland/La Crescenta60%

60% of trips occur within the area27% of trips are to the Valley 1% of trips are to Downtown LA3% of trips are to Sunland/La Crescenta

27%

1%

3%

Design ConsiderationsSFV Example

Trips: 380,000 tripsMarket Share: 1.4% market shareMileage: 76% of trips under 2.5 milesTravel time competitiveness: 3.25-3.50

Sylmar/San Fernando Key Facts

Percentages do not equal 100%. Additional trips dispersed throughout the County.

15

Sylmar/San Fernando

Sunland/La Crescenta

60% of trips occur within the area2% of trips are to Sylmar/San Fernando11% of trips are to the Valley 1% of trips are to Downtown LA8% of trips are to Glendale6% of trips are to Pasadena

11%

1%

2%


8%

6%


Sunland/La Crescenta Key Facts

60%


16


Line90/91Line 92Line 94/794Line 222Line 224Line 901 (Orange Line)Red LineNorth Hollywood Station

Only 2-3% of trips travel

between Sylmar and Sunland

No connection to North Hollywood

Station

Only 1% of trips go all the way to

Downtown

Only one route connects to North Hollywood, every

12-21 min

Existing Transit

17


New circulators to address short-distance travel

Fewer routes go Downtown, feed Red

Line, frees up resources

Increase frequency to

every 10 minutes all day

Direct connection to North Hollywood

Line90/91Line 92Line 222Line 224Sylmar Shuttle 1Sylmar Shuttle 2Sylmar Shuttle 3Line 901 (Orange Line)Red LineNorth Hollywood Station

Transit Concept

18

East Los Angeles

Monterey Park

Alhambra

Rosemead

Commerce

El Monte

Downtown LA32% of trips occur within the area20% of trips are north between I-10 & Mission Rd

(8% to Pasadena) 17% of trips are east to I-60511% of trips are south to Whittier Blvd (4% to 91)3% of trips are to City Terrace/Boyle Heights2% of trips are to Downtown LA3% of trips are to the Westside

Design ConsiderationsSan Gabriel Valley Example

Trips: 200,000 weekday tripsMarket Share: 2.4%Mileage: 48% of trips under 2.5 miles

71% of trips under 5 milesTravel time competitiveness: 3.25-3.50

San Gabriel Valley

17%

Downtown LA

20%

11%

2% 3%3%

8%

32%

4%

Montebello


19

East Los Angeles

Monterey Park

Alhambra

Rosemead

Montebello

Commerce

El Monte

Downtown LA

Design ConsiderationsSGV Example: Existing

Line 68Line 70Line 71Line 770

Existing

Significant service

overlap with diluted

frequencies

Frequent Silver Line

service from El Monte Station to

Downtown LA

No direct connections to Gold Line

Less than 2% of all trips

end in Downtown

20

Rosemead

East Los Angeles

Monterey Park

Alhambra

Montebello

Commerce

El Monte

Downtown LA

Design ConsiderationsSGV Example: Proposed

Line 68Line 71Line 268Line 487Line 770

Proposed

Focus on sub-regional

hubs that more

directly reflect travel

needs

Service to Shops at Montebello

provided by Monterey Park or

Montebello Transit

Increase frequency of north-south connections

Fewer routes go Downtown, freeing up

resources for more frequency Frequent service

to Gold Line to make connections

to Downtown (& Westside in the

future)

21

26 PPH 73 PPH 86 PPH 68 PPH 28 PPH15 PPH

Design ConsiderationsGateway Cities/South Bay Example

< 1515 – 30 30 – 45

45 – 60 60 – 75> 75

Passengers Per Hour (PPH)

Marina Del Rey

22


Key Facts

40% of trips occur within the area20% of trips are to Santa Monica/Mar Vista15% of trips are to Westside10% of trips are to Culver City2% of trips are along Slauson corridor

2%

20%

40%

Percentages do not equal 100%. Additional trips dispersed throughout the County. Marina Del Rey


23

Extend Big Blue Bus Route

1 via Pacific into Marina

del Rey

Enhance North/South

corridors:Centinela, Sepulveda

(consolidate frequency)

Explore Mobility on

Demand opportunities

End Slauson Ave service at

Culver City Transit Center Extend and

reorient Culver City Bus routes

Marina Del Rey

For Discussion Purposes Only These scenarios are for illustrative purposes. Discussions still need to take place with local Municipal Bus Operators


24

73% of trips are under 7.5 miles.

Design ConsiderationsVenice Blvd. Example

Local

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

<.5mi .5-1mi 1-2.5mi 1-2.5mi 5-7.5mi 7.5-10mi 10-15mi 15+mi

Tota

l Trip

s

Length of Trip

Venice Blvd

Rapid

25

Corridor Optimization Example: Venice Blvd.

Time (in minutes)

w/ Transit Priority(Hybrid)

56 28

Optimized (Hybrid) 56 35

Local (Existing) 4 min

10 36

Rapid (Existing) 10 10 33

Walk RideWait

Represents a 7.5 mile trip

26

Study Milestone Schedule

27

Implementation Schedule

Regional Service Concept - Metro · Regional Service Concept. June 2019 – Metro Service Councils....

Documents

Transcript of Regional Service Concept - Metro · Regional Service Concept. June 2019 – Metro Service Councils....