Service Analysis Initial Findings & Initial Improvement Concepts - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

service analysis initial findings
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Service Analysis Initial Findings & Initial Improvement Concepts - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Late Night Transit Service Planning Service Analysis Initial Findings & Initial Improvement Concepts Late Night Transportation Working Group SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY Au August st 24, 2016 Service Analysis Overview


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Late Night Transit Service Planning Service Analysis Initial Findings & Initial Improvement Concepts

Late Night Transportation Working Group

SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY Au August st 24, 2016

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Service Analysis Overview

Objective ctive: : Evaluate luate performance mance of existin ting all-nigh nighter ter netwo work k against nst th the serv rvic ice e guidelines elines and nd demand and ana nalysis ysis

 Serv rvice ice Plannin nning g Goals

 Avail ilabi bili lity ty – Service vice cove vera rage ge, , span, n, frequency ency  Producti ductivit vity – Rid idership rship and cost st per rid ider  Reli liability bility – On On-ti time e performance,

  • rmance, transfe

nsfers rs  Legibili ibility ty – Route ali lignme nment nt

 Ana nalysis ysis inc nclud luded: ed:

 Muni, i, AC AC Trans nsit, it, SamT mTran rans Al All-Ni Night hter er service rvice  BART, Caltrain ltrain, , SamTrans rans, Gold lden n Gate early ly and la late e runs

2

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Key Findings: Muni

 Most st produ duct ctive e routes tes: 14–Mi Miss ssion, n, 38–Geary ry

 14 alr lread eady y has 15-minu nute te frequ quenc ency

 Least t productive uctive routes tes: 24–Divis isadero ero, 25–Trea reasu sure re Isla land nd  Some segmen ents ts of oth ther r routes tes (e.g. 91) have lo low rid idersh rship ip  On On-time time perfo formance rmance not

  • t meeting

ng 85% % goal (on routes where data was available)

3

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Key Findings: AC Transit

 Most st produ duct ctive e routes tes: 800 0 weekdays, ys, 802 2 weekday days  Least t productive uctive routes tes: 800 0 weekends, nds, 805 5 weeken ends ds

 800 has muc uch h more

  • re servi

vice ce on weeke ekends than n weekd ekdays ays

 BART stations

  • ns attract

ract hig igh h rid idership ship  Most st on-time time perfo formance rmance not

  • t meeting

ng AC Transi sit t 72% goal

4

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Key Findings: Other operators

 SamTrans ns

 Fir irst/ t/last last ECR R and 292 runs ns have e hig igh product ctivi vity ty  397 has relat lative vely lo low pr producti tivi vity ty  397 relia liabili lity ty not meeti eting ng 85% goal

 Gold lden en Gate Transi sit

 Low rid ider ershi hip on fir irst/l t/last ast runs ns of 70, 101 101

 BART, Calt ltrain

 SF stati tions

  • ns among
  • ng busies

iest t for r fir irst t & la last-ru runs ns

5

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Draft Initial Service Concepts

6 St Status: us: Ini nitial tial conc ncep epts ts pres esent ented ed to trans nsit it agen encies, cies, now now in n vetti vetting/ref g/refin ineme ement nt phase se Ini nitial tial conc ncep epts ts for furth ther er evaluatio luation inc nclud lude: e:

 Muni

 L-Owl: Extend along Embarcadero to Fisherman’s Wharf  38 38-Ow Owl: : In Incre reas ase frequ quenc ncy  91 91-Owl: : Split lit rout ute, e, extend tend to Daly y Cit ity, y, rerou route te some e segments ents

 AC Transit sit

 800: Freque equenc ncy y chang nges es to rebala alanc nce e days ys/s /segm egments ents, , extend end to 24th

th St.

(weekday ays) ) and/or d/or Ric ichm hmond

  • nd Hill

illtop top Mall ll  800/802: 802: Potenti ntial al to realloc locat ate e route ute segments ents betwee ween n two rout

  • utes

es  801: Reallo allocate cate servi vice ce hours urs betwee ween n segments ents

 SamTrans:

 ECR: : Pilo ilot t all ll-nig night ht servi vice ce to Mill illbrae rae  120: Extend tend span n or in introd roduce ce all ll-night ht servi vice ce

 All ll: Regularly larly evalu luate te reli liability bility and adju just t sched edule ules s as needed ed

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Next Steps

 Furth ther er evalu luate te in init itial service ce conc ncep epts ts  Co Consi nside der servic ice e trad ade-offs

  • ffs (e.g. rid

idersh ship ip of an any y reroute

  • uted

d segments) ments)  Inco corp rpora

  • rate

te feedbac back k from

  • m operator

rators, s, Work rking ng Group  Estimat imate e con

  • nce

cept pt opera rati ting ng costs sts  Develo lop p prio ioriti ritized ed tie iers s and fin inal servic ice e recom

  • mmendat

mendations

  • ns

 Tie iers to in includ lude e reso source rce-ne neutra tral l and added-cost cost scen enari rios

  • s

7