Transit planning 101

edmonton daily photo · 02-08-2012, 08:41 PM

Check it out.. It has some great theory.

http://www.translink.ca/~/media/docu...rk_primer.ashx

Medwards · 03-08-2012, 06:53 AM

• Serves areas of strong demand
• Has strong anchors at both ends
• Is as direct, simple, consistent and legible as possible
• Maintains speed and reliability along the entire route
• Avoids duplication or competition between transit services
• Matches service levels to demand
• Has balanced loads in each direction
• Experiences an even distribution of stop activity
• Has an even distribution of ridership by time of day

edmonton daily photo · 03-08-2012, 08:19 AM

In the transit world, for example, we know that ridership arises from a relationship between urban form (including density and walkability) and the quantity of service provided. For example, if we focus on local-stop transit, the triangle looks like this:

http://urbanist.typepad.com/.a/6a00d...20f3970b-800wi

You can think of development and service as inputs, and ridership as the output, but you can rotate the triangle any way you like. For example, if you want to justify an increase in service, you want both some existing ridership success and also evidence, from the development density, that there's more potential

edmonton daily photo · 03-08-2012, 04:43 PM

basics: the case for frequency mapping
http://www.humantransit.org/2010/08/...y-mapping.html

Turning this... where everything is equal

into this... where key high frequency routes are highlighted. so people can make more informed choices and find the best service options.

Frequent Network mapping is also important for its secondary audiences. If everyone who wanted good transit had access to this map, they could make decisions about where to locate that would gradually re-organise the city so that people who valued transit were close to good transit, thus making better use of the transit system's finite resources. The Frequent Network is potentially useful to anyone deciding where to live, where to shop, or where to start a business, and also the land use planners and developers who make the same location decisions. If you just show such people the map of all services, with no differentiation, they won't be able to identify which services would really be useful to them, and will thus be less likely to make good location choices.

East McCauley · 03-08-2012, 05:31 PM

I agree the Translink document linked to in post 1 is an excellent primer for how to design an effective transit network.

Note the three key objectives of effective network design summarized on page 3:
Objective 1: Maximize Ridership
Objective 2: Encourage Long-term Ridership Growth
Objective 3: Provide Access to Transit Service across the Region

Outside of NYC and maybe Montreal, Translink has designed the best transit network of any transit authority in North America. As a result, metro Vancouver is seeing solid and continuing ridership growth in all public transit modes (Skytrain, bus and commuter rail), unlike metro Portland where the growth (such as it is) in light rail ridership has not led to increased ridership in other transit modes like buses. Source: http://www.apta.com/resources/statis...pArchives.aspx

02-08-2012, 08:41 PM	#1
edmonton daily photo Addicted to C2E Join Date: May 2008	Transit planning 101 Check it out.. It has some great theory. http://www.translink.ca/~/media/docu...rk_primer.ashx __________________ "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

03-08-2012, 08:19 AM	#3
edmonton daily photo Addicted to C2E Join Date: May 2008	In the transit world, for example, we know that ridership arises from a relationship between urban form (including density and walkability) and the quantity of service provided. For example, if we focus on local-stop transit, the triangle looks like this: http://urbanist.typepad.com/.a/6a00d...20f3970b-800wi You can think of development and service as inputs, and ridership as the output, but you can rotate the triangle any way you like. For example, if you want to justify an increase in service, you want both some existing ridership success and also evidence, from the development density, that there's more potential __________________ "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

03-08-2012, 04:43 PM	#4
edmonton daily photo Addicted to C2E Join Date: May 2008	basics: the case for frequency mapping http://www.humantransit.org/2010/08/...y-mapping.html Turning this... where everything is equal into this... where key high frequency routes are highlighted. so people can make more informed choices and find the best service options. Frequent Network mapping is also important for its secondary audiences. If everyone who wanted good transit had access to this map, they could make decisions about where to locate that would gradually re-organise the city so that people who valued transit were close to good transit, thus making better use of the transit system's finite resources. The Frequent Network is potentially useful to anyone deciding where to live, where to shop, or where to start a business, and also the land use planners and developers who make the same location decisions. If you just show such people the map of all services, with no differentiation, they won't be able to identify which services would really be useful to them, and will thus be less likely to make good location choices. __________________ "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 03-08-2012 at 04:45 PM..

03-08-2012, 05:31 PM	#5
East McCauley Addicted to C2E Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Edmonton	I agree the Translink document linked to in post 1 is an excellent primer for how to design an effective transit network. Note the three key objectives of effective network design summarized on page 3: Objective 1: Maximize Ridership Objective 2: Encourage Long-term Ridership Growth Objective 3: Provide Access to Transit Service across the Region Outside of NYC and maybe Montreal, Translink has designed the best transit network of any transit authority in North America. As a result, metro Vancouver is seeing solid and continuing ridership growth in all public transit modes (Skytrain, bus and commuter rail), unlike metro Portland where the growth (such as it is) in light rail ridership has not led to increased ridership in other transit modes like buses. Source: http://www.apta.com/resources/statis...pArchives.aspx __________________ rapidtransitforedmonton.org

03-08-2012, 06:53 AM	#2
Medwards Addicted to C2E Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Edmonton	• Serves areas of strong demand • Has strong anchors at both ends • Is as direct, simple, consistent and legible as possible • Maintains speed and reliability along the entire route • Avoids duplication or competition between transit services • Matches service levels to demand • Has balanced loads in each direction • Experiences an even distribution of stop activity • Has an even distribution of ridership by time of day