DRAFT Planning Use Case Corridor StudyJuly 18, 2009

Introduction

This TSIP Planning Use Case discusses the Corridor Study topic area. The purpose of the Use Case is to elicit comments from users who will use the TSIP and who need the data stored in the TSIP repository for their downstream applications. Corridor Study is one of four topics related to uses for Transit Service Data by regional transit planners.

Please feel free to comment and amend the current use case to reflect the types of data that you need to perform your marketing studies. First set of comments are due on July 31.

For more information contact:

Polly Okunieff (ConSysTec) at

UC #1: Corridor Study including Transit and Roadway

Description:

This Use Case covers the situation where an agency is conducting a corridor study for determining long-term improvements, including both transit and roadway aspects, that should be made on a corridor.The study could be at most any stage in corridor-level planning, ranging from a first review of the corridor, to a more detailed Alternatives Analysis to an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Potential improvements that could be looked at as part of this study include: additional roadway capacity;intersection improvements; roadway operational improvements, i.e. signal coordination; additional fixed-route bus service;and high capacity transit service, i.e. BRTor rail.

Stakeholder Types:

The stakeholders involved in the development a corridor study include NYSDOT, counties and/or municipalities, transit agencies and the appropriate MPO. In this operational scenario, the stakeholders include the agencies that operate the roadway facilities, the transit agency(s) that operates service in that corridor (e.g., MNR and Westchester Bee-Line).

Needs/Preconditions:

Before these operational scenarios can be realistically followed, it is necessary that:

  • The information in the TSIP information portal is available to public sector uses in a database format that can be queried at a variety of levels.
  • A master database catalog is available to find out which data repository has which dataset.

Operational Scenario #1:

Neil from Rockland County is working on a corridor study for the Route 59 corridor. Currently, MNR operates along this corridor between the Nanuet and Spring Valley Stations on the Pascack Valley Line. In addition, bus service is provided along the corridor by Transport of Rockland (TOR), Rockland County’s local bus service, and the TAPPAN ZEExpress inter-county bus service, also provided by Rockland County.

Neil will be conducting his analysis by reviewing existing transit service and roadway conditions as well as by using a modified version of the NYMTC model that is more accurate at the corridor level. He also may want to conduct traffic simulations to determine what transit improvements would save transit time, i.e., traffic signal priority or queue jumps. He needs to find the data listed below to help him conduct his analysis of the corridor, both for his overall analysis and for being able to modify the model so that it can provide more accurate results specifically for Route 59.

Neil is looking for the following types of information:

Demographics/Origin Destination

  • Definition of analysis zones to be used.
  • TAZ
  • Census Tract
  • Self-Defined Polygon
  • Origin-Destination trip patterns for all modes, i.e., total trips starting and ending at particular zones.
  • Largest origins and destinations
  • Frequently followed O-D pairs
  • Current and future (for target year of study, i.e. 2030) population by Census Tract or Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ).
  • Current and future (for target year of study, i.e. 2030) employment by Census Tract or TAZ.
  • Current and future (for target year of study, i.e. 2030) indicators of transit dependencyby Census Tract or TAZ. For example, income or number of households with zero or one automobile.

Transit

  • Bus route geometry, i.e. the streets the route operates on, where it turns, etc.
  • This data should be available as a GIS layer that is readable by both TransCAD, for modeling purposes, and ArcGIS, for planning purposes.
  • Location of the bus stops on the route.
  • This data should be available as a GIS layer with location references.
  • Attribute layer should provide text description, i.e. Route 59 and Mountainview Avenue.
  • Whether the stop is served by local and express buses or just local.
  • Service headway by time of day and day of week for each bus route and the MNR rail line.
  • This data should be available in tabular format (importable to Excel) but also be provided as attribute data on the bus route geometry GIS layer.
  • Effective service headway by time of day and day of week for each roadway segment.
  • This data should be available in tabular format but also be provided as attribute data on the bus route geometry GIS layer.
  • Running time for local and express buses by roadway segment.
  • By time of day and day of week.
  • This data should be available in tabular format but also be provided as attribute data on the bus route geometry GIS layer.
  • Span of service on each roadway segment.
  • This data should be available in tabular format but also be provided as attribute data on the bus route and rail line geometry GIS layer.
  • The fare on each route and cost to transfer to other transit services, if there is a discount provided.
  • This data should be available in tabular format but also be provided as attribute data on the bus route and rail line geometry GIS layer.
  • Average transit ridership by bus route and rail line for the portion of the service operating along the corridor.
  • This data should be available in tabular format but also be provided as attribute data on the bus route and rail line geometry GIS layers.
  • Local TOR service.
  • TAPPAN ZEExpress service.
  • MNR service
  • Any other transit service that operates on the corridor.
  • Average transit ridership by roadway segment including riders on all services.
  • This data should be available in tabular format but also be provided as attribute data on the bus route and rail line geometry GIS layer.
  • Local TOR service.
  • TAPPAN ZEExpress service.
  • MNR service
  • Any other transit service that operates on the corridor.
  • Boardings and alightings at all rail stations and bus stops along the corridor.
  • This data should be available in tabular format but also be provided as attribute data on the bus stop GIS layer.
  • By service, i.e. TOR, MNR.
  • Total.
  • Note that as APC’s and AVL become available, boarding and alighting information by stop would also be available.
  • Historic information (changes over time to a schedule, service frequency, ridership)
  • Current span of service/operating hours (i.e. peak periods only) along a roadway segment or on a particular route and what it has been in the past.
  • Current service frequency along a roadway segment or on a particular route and what it has been in the past.
  • Current ridership along a roadway segment or on a particular route and what it has been in the past.

Roadway

  • Average Daily Trips (ADT) by roadway segment to ascertain level of use.
  • Current data would be used in the model to develop ADT projections for the forecast year.
  • Roadway configuration by roadway segment.
  • To ascertain level of congestion based on ADT.
  • To determine whether there is sufficient room for improvements for transit, i.e. queue bypasses or jumps, exclusive transit lane.
  • V/C ratios by roadway segment.
  • Current data would be used in the model to develop ADT projections for the forecast year.
  • Archive information on roadway speed, by roadway segment, i.e. how speed has changed over time. This could be used as an alternative way than the model for predicting future roadway speeds.

To start his search, Neil went to a master database catalog which contains allroadway service, asset information, demographic, and origin-destination data that he needs to conduct his analysis. The catalog also includes the categories of data that are available in TSIP, wherehe finds the types of transit service information that he needs.

Neil, already having credentials to log into TSIP, logs on and accesses the TSIP catalog to review which data sets are available. There is a list of the complete set of SDP elements (raw service information) and a set of aggregated data. He goes through the list and checks the data that he wants. It includes:

  • Transit routes by mode, i.e., all routes on bus, subway, railroad;
  • Patterns by path description and stop sequence (tied to the road network, if applicable);
  • Transit stop and facility locations and amenities (particularly parking but also including bus shelters);
  • Trips by trip types; express, local special trip, etc.
  • Fare policy and transfer costs for different ridership classes by day type, time of day (including discounts).

Additional aggregated service information is available. This includes the following:

  • Routes and trip types (i.e., local, express) serving each stop ;
  • Effective headway at each stop;
  • Average running times by route segment and direction for day types and time of day;
  • Some data may be available for average running times by route segment (generalized term that could mean the whole route or partial route.;
  • Service headways on each route by direction, by day type and time of day;
  • Span of service (as start of first trip to end of last trip) for each route/route direction;

Neil also wants to collect some service performance information related to ridership. He would like to acquire ridership information on the corridor for:

  • Each route for all modesby route direction and triptype;
  • Each route by road segment by route direction and service type; and
  • Boardings and alightings at all transit stops by day type and time of day.

A note by the performance data indicate that these data may not be available, although there are formats for acquiring them. He also does not see a method other than using his own GIS to associate ridership with road segment. Since he has the route alignment information, he can generate his own tool to aggregate that data.

Neil would also like to see the historic data related to the service information. In particular, he would like the data to show the changes from the current information on the following information

  • Route alignment
  • Stop locations and amenities (along with ridership statistics by boardings and alightings by stop)
  • Span of service
  • Service frequencies by road segments
  • Ridership (if available) by road segment

Having checked the data he wants, Neil is asked whether he wants to limit the scope of the data. He does this by drawing polygon around the corridor under analysis. The system interprets the corridor and shows only the Data Providers that store information related to his data requests and coverage.

As expected, TOR, TAPPAN ZEExpress, and MNR provide service along this corridor. The screen shows a table of the Data Provider and their available service information. Glancing at the charts, Neill sees that MNR provides information on all the categories for three years, TAPPEN ZEExpress, as a new service, only has a single year of information. TOR does not have ridership information, but has all the other service information.

He sees that the service information may come as SDP comma delimited (CSV) file format which can easily be imported into an Excel spreadsheet, GIS, and potentially the NYMTC BPM and/or another travel demand model that he is using. He sees that the TSIP has an interface to read and configure SDP CSV files. A separate schema is available that defines the aggregated data that he wants, and two other SDP family schemas includes information on ridership and fare policies. He selects the default parameters for the aggregated data (e.g., time of day and day type categories). Then, he selects all the standard formats; this way, he will receive the data within minutes.

Neil indicates that he is finished and submits the request. Within five minutes he goes to his MyTSIP page and sees the data sets that he requested. He downloads these documents and gets to work.

Definitions

ADT: Average Daily Traffic, the number of automobiles that traverse a segment of roadway over the course of a day.

APC: Automatic Passenger Counters that count boardings and alightings, tied into the current location of the bus using AVL.

AVL: Automatic Vehicle Location that provides information on the exact location of the bus.

Aggregated Data: A calculated piece of data derived from raw data, such as effective headways, ridership along a corridor (derived from route level ridership),change in ridership over time, etc.

Analysis Zone: The geographic area that is used for collection of data and analysis. This could be in the form of a Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) that are generally made up of more than one census tract, an area defined by the US Census Bureau for data collection and reporting purposes. A third type of analysis zone that can be used is a polygon, or geographic area, defined by the planners, although doing this complicates the data collection process, as data is generally available by TAZ and/or Census Tract.

Bus Ridership: Total ridership by route by time of day, day of week. Also boarding and alighting data by stop by trip and by stop by time of day, day of week. All for “typical” days.

Bus route geometry: street-by-street and turn-by-turn instructions for the bus routings, including terminals and any route variations, i.e. if a route variation short-turns.

Corridor: A travel corridor, usually on one roadway but can consist of multiple roadways. The corridor would have transit service through multiple bus routes and possible rail.

Day of Week: Weekday, Saturday, Sunday

Effective service headway: Number of minutes between buses when all bus headways are combined. For example, if there are two bus routes operating on a segment of roadway each with ten minute headways, the effective headway is five minutes.

Fare: Cost in cash, cost using MetroCard, cost with transfer. All in dollars.

Headway/Frequency:

  • Service Headway: Number of minutes between buses or trains on a particular bus or rail route or line, e.g., B9 NYCT bus, LIRR Port Jefferson Line, or at a particular station. Represented as a number of minutes between transit vehicles on that route or at that station, in one direction, during a specific time of day, for a single transit route.
  • Frequency: Number of buses per hour, i.e., 10 buses per hour northbound in the peak period.
  • Effective Headway: Composite headway of all bus service at a stop based on bus frequency, the number of buses per hour divided by 60 minutes. For example, the stop at E 116Street and 3rd Avenue has service provided by the Routes 98, 101, and 103. Then, if the three routes have service headways of 10, 7 and 5 minutes in one direction during the peak period, then the effective headway would be:

(60 minutes / 10 minute headway) + (60 minutes / 7 minute headway) + (60 minutes /5 minute headway) = 26.6 buses/hour  26.6 buses hour / 60 minutes = 2.25 effective headway

Location of Stops:Where the bus stops and rail stations are, with location references, text description, and express, local, or both.

Rail Ridership: Total ridership by line and total passengers entering each station, for a “typical” weekday, Saturday and Sunday.

Roadway Configuration: Number of through lanes in each direction, existence of turn lanes, shoulders, parking lanes, and wide medians.

Running time: time scheduled for bus in-service time from terminus to terminus.

Span of service: Time that revenue service (first stop to pick up passengers) begins in the morning and when it ends in the evening. This also includes information on whether there is a break in the service during the day, such as on routes that provide only peak period service.

Time of Day: Peak Periods, Midday (including early morning, midday and early evening), and late evening

V/C Ratio: Volume-to-Capacity ratio on a roadway segment, i.e. number of vehicles at a snapshot in time divided by the capacity of the roadway. V/C is generally reported as a decimal, e.g. 0.8 or 1.2 and then categorized into a level of service ranging from A (free-flowing) to F (extremely congested).

Corridor Plan Use Case 071809_v004Page 1