FAST Plan pt 1: The Need for a New Transit Plan

F.A.S.T. Plan

December 2013

Financially Achievable — Saves Time

An affordable approach to creating a more
effective and user-friendly transit system

Part I
Why We Need a New
Approach to Public Transit
Produced under the auspices of Move San Diego, Inc., and the
Scripps Ranch/Miramar Ranch North Traffic Reduction Project.
© 2008 by The Mission Group


FAST Plan Pt 1: Why We Need a New Approach to Public Transit

1

The FAST Plan
1

2

3

Why We Need a
Background

New Approach to
Public Transit

How to Create
a World Class
Transit System

The Plan:
Central

4

5

6

The Plan:
South County

7

The Plan:
I-15 Corridor


The Plan
The Plan:

Mid-City
& East County

8

The Plan:
Greater
Golden Triangle

9

The Plan:
North County

Results:
The Results

Costs & Benefits
of the FAST Plan


2

Why do we need transit?



3

You Are Here.



4

An effective transit system—
one that attracts a large share
of current drivers—can add
immeasurably to regional
quality of life and allow families
to reduce what they must
spend on transportation.



5

But will San Diegans
ever use transit?
Didn’t I hear that only
2% of people use transit?



6

How Many People Use Transit?
Transit Trips,
2%

All Other Trips,
98%

2% of Daily Trips

Not 2% of People!!


7

Transit Trips,
2%

All Other Trips,
98%

2% of Daily Trips

In Any Given Week

1 in 8 People Ride


8

Transit Trips,
2%

All Other Trips,
98%
In Any Given Week

In Any Given Month

1 in 8 People Ride

2% of Daily Trips

1 in 4 People Ride



9

Transit Trips,
2%

All Other Trips,
98%

2% of Daily Trips

In Any Given Week

In Any Given Month

In Any Given Year

1 in 8 People Ride

1 in 4 People Ride

3 in 5 People Ride

Source: SANDAG surveys


10

San Diegans ride transit
when it’s convenient and
useful for them to do so.
The challenge, therefore,
is to make transit more
useful and convenient
to more people.



11

Don’t we already
have an extensive
regional transit plan?
Why would we
need a better plan?



12

SANDAG’s Regional
Transportation Plan
2050 (RTP)

A 40-year, $214 billion plan.

$20.4 billion (2010 $)
in new transit capital
projects.

$19.4 billion (2010 $)
for transit operations.

Major projects include new
trolley (light rail) lines,
arterial “rapid bus,”
freeway-based “Bus Rapid
Transit,” and Streetcar lines.


13



14

The Plan looks extensive.
So what’s the problem?



15

At the level of a small diagram,
the new regional transit plan
looks extensive enough. But a
deeper look reveals that the
transit system will still be slow,
poorly located, and cumbersome
for too many trips for too many
people too much of the time.



16

Smartphones are a good
analogy for the problem.



17

Our Regional Transit Plan is like the old Windows Mobile operating system. It
appears to do much that later iPhone and Android phones do—but in a clunky and
non-intuitive manner. The iPhone attracted huge numbers of new users. Why?
Because it was easier to use and better met people’s needs.


18

If Your Goal Is to:



19

If Your Goal Is to:
A. Significantly increase transit use.

 Especially among the crucial
“middle market.”



20

If Your Goal Is to:
B. Get more people to their jobs.



21

If Your Goal Is to:

Then You Need to:



22

If Your Goal Is to:

Then You Need to:
1. Better serve existing urban form.
 Get closer to where people ARE
and get them much closer to
where they are GOING.


23

If Your Goal Is to:

Then You Need to:
2. Make transit faster.


24

If Your Goal Is to:

Then You Need to:
2. Make transit faster.
3. Improve the customer experience.


25

The Regional Transportation Plan
contains $14 billion in light rail
(Trolley) projects.
Will this investment help us achieve
our goals for a fast, convenient
system?



26

“The Trolley is
really popular
with San
Diegans…
…they’re just
not riding it.”
— Job Nelson, reporting on
the KPBS/Competitive
Edge Survey of San
Diegans, Full Focus ,
July 2005


27

Problem #1:
The Trolley, as we’ve built it,
just doesn’t attract enough
people out of their cars.
Here are the facts…



28

“Choice Riders” on the Trolley
% of Trolley Riders Who “Had an Auto Available” for Their Trip
100%
80%
60%
City
Bus

40%

(25%)

20%
0%

1995

In 1995, only about 1/3 of Trolley
riders (and ¼ of bus riders) claimed
they could have taken a car.

Source: SANDAG


29

100%
By 2003, with Trolley expansions to
Old Town, Mission Valley, and
Santee… the number was unchanged.

80%
60%

City
Bus

40%

(25%)

20%
0%

1995

2003

Source: SANDAG


30

100%
80%
By 2009, with the Trolley to SDSU…
the number was still unchanged.

60%

City
Bus

40%

(25%)

20%
0%

1995

2003

2009

Source: SANDAG


31


As popular as the Trolley is, it isn’t
attracting a large number of additional
people from their cars, even with major
expansions. Why not?

Travel
Time



32



Travel
Time


Door-to-door journey times
are still way too long for
most people.


33



Travel
Time


Station
Access

Stations still
aren’t close
enough to origins
and destinations.


34



Travel
Time

Station
Access

Trip
Patterns

All those new lines still aren’t
aligned with actual trip patterns.


35

They Trolley, in fact, does
not attract a market different
than that of the city bus.
A true rapid transit system
would attract larger numbers
of middle-income riders.



36

Income Level of Transit Riders
MTS Bus
riders are
overwhelmingly
low income.

50%

MTS
Bus

40%
30%
20%
10%

Source:
SANDAG, “Results of the
2009 Onboard Transit
Passenger Survey for the
San Diego Region,”
(February, 2011).

0%
Househol
d
Income

Below
$15k

$15k <$25k

$25k <$50k

$50k - $75k - $100k
<$75k <$100k and Up


37

The Commuter
Rail attracts
a much higherincome ridership.

50%

MTS
Bus

Commuter
Rail

40%
30%
20%
10%

Source:
(February, 2011).

0%
Househol
d
Income

Below
$15k

$15k <$25k

$25k <$50k

$50k - $75k - $100k
<$75k <$100k and Up


38

Premium Express
(freeway) buses
attract the same
market as the
commuter rail.

50%

MTS
Bus

Commuter
Rail

Freeway
Bus

40%
30%
20%
10%

Source:
(February, 2011).

0%
Househol
d
Income

Below
$15k

$15k <$25k

$25k <$50k

$50k - $75k - $100k
<$75k <$100k and Up


39

The San Diego
Trolley (light rail)
attracts the
identical lowincome market of
the MTS Bus.

50%

MTS
Bus

Light
Rail

Commuter
Rail

Freeway
Bus

40%
30%
20%
10%

Source:
(February, 2011).

0%
Househol
d
Income

Below
$15k

$15k <$25k

$25k <$50k

$50k - $75k - $100k
<$75k <$100k and Up


40

Do we want to create a rapid
transit system that would serve
San Diego’s broader market?
Then we can’t just keep
doing more of the same.



41

Problem #2:
Travel times are often excessive
with a traditional rapid transit
network (be it light rail or “rapid bus”)
for a city laid out like San Diego,
meaning the system will not attract
as many choice riders.



42

Let’s take an example: going
from the heart of the Grantville
Redevelopment Area to a
3:00 pm meeting downtown.
At what time would you need to
leave your origin to arrive on time?



43

6

M

IL
ES

How Much Time Do You Have?

Trolley Station



44

How Much Time Do You Have?

3:00

1:55
1:50

2:04

6

M

IL
ES

To make it on time to your
3:00 pm meeting, you’d need
to catch the 2:04 pm
Trolley—meaning you’d need to
walk out of your office
around 1:50 pm, 70 minutes
before the actual meeting!

Source for times: Best case light rail
trip from www.sdcommute.com


45

Problem #3:
San Diego’s land uses generally
aren’t arranged along straight lines,
making them difficult to serve
effectively with single lines
(such as much light rail or BRT).
Here is a concrete example…


46

Mission Valley illustrates
the problem of creating
effective transit in San Diego.
According to some measures,
it’s our region’s second
largest office market.



47

Mission Valley

Mission Valley, because it’s long
and linear, seemed like it would
be a good fit for the Trolley.



48

Mission Valley

Here, we’ve drawn a ¼ mile
radius around each station—
a theoretical five minute walk.
On the destination end of a
work trip, most people aren’t
even willing to walk that far.


49

Mission Valley

Now we’re showing just the land
within that ¼ mile radius that’s
actually accessible to a trolley
station. Close to half the land
within ¼ mile is NOT accessible.


50

Mission Valley
Location of major
office employment
in Mission Valley

With only a couple of exceptions,
nearly all of the major office
employment in Mission Valley is
inconvenient to a Trolley station.



51

In other words, after spending
$ ¾ billion on building light rail
through Mission Valley, you can’t
conveniently get to your office job.



52

These next set of maps
depict our household density
in 2000, using a ¼ mile grid
(about a 5-minute walk).
If transit isn’t touching a
grid cell, it’s probably too
far to be convenient for
most people in adjacent cells.



53

San Diego:
Household
Density
Households per Acre



54

San Diego:
Household
Density

Planned

Households per Acre

Existing
Light Rail
(Trolley)



55

A transit solution in
the Mid-Coast
would need to get
people into and out
of the beach
communities,
as well as to/
from and
around the
greater Golden
Triangle. Even if you
build a Mid-Coast
light rail, you would
still need to go back
and make
significant new
investments just to
solve this challenge.



56

Bottom Line:
As much as we like the Trolley,
and however successful
or popular it may appear to be
it cannot possibly hope
to reach into enough places
and transport people quickly enough
to transform the role
of transit in this region.


57

“Traditional” Rapid Transit
“Rapid Bus”
(BRT Lite)

Trolley
(Light Rail)

With light rail and many forms of Bus Rapid Transit, transit networks generally resemble
pearls on a string, with vehicles stopping at every station. If you’re traveling a longer
distance—and most San Diegans are—your trip becomes too long, with too many
transfers and too many stops.


58

If you
board here



59


To arrive
here



60


Board and
ride five
stops.


1


61


Transfer
between
modes.

2


62


Board and
ride five
stops.

3


63


Transfer
between
trains.

4


64


5

Board and
ride two
stops.


65


6

Transfer
between
modes.


66


7

Board and
ride four
stops.


67

Faster: Express Routes

An express network is faster, especially when it is designed to reach into
neighborhoods and major job sites. Express routes can behave as Rapid Bus,
then travel non-stop between major stations, then distribute at a major
destination zone. To be feasible, they need to attract enough riders,
and that depends on connectivity with other express routes.


68




69


Board and
ride six stops.

Doesn’t stop at intervening
stations


1


70


Same
Platform
Transfer.

2


71


3

Ride
five
stops.


72

SuperStations

In an effective express network, “SuperStations” become the hubs
of the system, where both all-stops and express routes converge.


73

What about the freeway-based Bus
Rapid Transit (BRT) in our Regional
Transportation Plan?
Is that the kind of express network
you’re talking about?



74

San Diego Freeway-Based BRT

Bus in mixed traffic;
any incident and bus
is held up, too.
A lot of time is lost
accessing off-line
stations. Slower service
attracts fewer riders AND
costs more to operate.

Too many delays;
poorly located stations

Brisbane “Quickway”

Straight-line in and out;
faster and better.
Grade-separated
busway (Quickway)
used only by transit
and emergency
services—more
reliable and
quicker.

Stations are in-line.


75


Passenger unfriendly stations.


76

Coffeeshop
linked to station
Shelter from sun &
occasional rain

No
obstructions

Shelter from wind

Brisbane: Passenger-friendly stations


77


Lack of infrastructure once off
freeway leads to delays and poor
customer experience: you’re still
just waiting by the side of the
road, and transit is still in traffic.


78

What about
“Arterial Rapid Bus?”



79

Arterial Rapid Bus

Many trips
will require
multiple
transfers

Service will
still be slow in
congested
areas

Arterial rapid bus, as being planned, is a step above
local bus service—but is a far cry from rapid transit,
despite it being named “rapid.”



80

Arterial Rapid Bus: High Speed?
From the official Rapid Bus website:

Mid-City Rapid will be a high-speed,
limited-stop bus service between San Diego
State University and Downtown San Diego…
a fast and reliable way to get around…


81


SDSU to
Santa Fe Depot
Distance:
Travel Time:
Average Speed:
Travel Time
on Trolley:

9.5 miles
38 mins
15 mph
32 mins



82


SDSU to
Santa Fe Depot
Distance:
Travel Time:
Average Speed:
Travel Time
on Trolley:


9.5 miles
38 mins
15 mph
32 mins

Our approach to “Rapid Bus” is
still… slow.
What would the market
consider “high speed”?

83

Why not just emulate a
successful European city?



84

Some local advocates for
improved transit argue
that we should emulate a
city such as Bordeaux,
France, which has
developed a model
tramway system as
depicted here.



85

San Diego, to identical
scale as Bordeaux map,
showing Bordeaux’s
tram lines (flipped to fit
San Diego’s orientation)
superimposed. They
reach just from Old
Town to National City.



86

Bordeaux, at same scale as
San Diego map, showing
tram lines superimposed on
San Diego (with our Trolley
lines in red).


87

Weighted brown
lines show
number of trips
between
Downtown and
origin zone.

San Diego’s light rail
system extends over a
much larger area, with
excessive trip times as a
result—and it doesn’t
always effectively serve
many of the
communities it passes
through, let alone areas
far from lines.
Bottom line:
San Diego does not
resemble a compact
European city. What
may work well in our
core doesn’t solve our
regional problem!

Bordeaux, at same scale as
San Diego map, showing
tram lines superimposed on
San Diego (with our Trolley
lines in red).


88

So how DO we develop an
effective local transit plan?



89

We start with what we
know about San Diegans
and what makes them decide
to choose a transit option.



90

What Attracts New Transit Riders?
SAN DIEGO
1/6
strongly
prefer
transit

1/6 will
never use
transit

Source: 2000 MTDB Survey of San Diegans


91

SAN DIEGO
1/6
strongly
prefer
transit


2/3 will use transit
if and when it
meets their needs:

1/6 will
never use
transit


92

SAN DIEGO
1/6
strongly
prefer
transit

if and when it
meets their needs:

1/6 will
never use
transit

“Get me
from point A
to point B…”

A


B


93

SAN DIEGO
1/6
strongly
prefer
transit

if and when it
meets their needs:
“… quickly
and don’t
make me
wait…”

“Get me
from point A
to point B…”

A

B

NEXT VEHICLE:
< 10


1/6 will
never use
transit

minutes


94

SAN DIEGO
1/6
strongly
prefer
transit

if and when it
meets their needs:
“… quickly
and don’t
make me
wait…”

“Get me
from point A
to point B…”

A

B

“…and I
want to feel
good about
it.”

NEXT VEHICLE:
< 10


1/6 will
never use
transit

minutes


95

SAN DIEGO
1/6
strongly
prefer
transit
“Get me
from point A
to point B…”

Network
A Structure B
(Connectivity)


if and when it
meets their needs:
“… quickly
and don’t
make me
wait…”

1/6 will
never use
transit
“…and I
want to feel
good about
it.”

System
NEXT VEHICLE:
Performance
<(Time)
10 minutes

Customer
Experience


96

In other words:
faster, more direct,
more convenient,
less waiting, and
improved experience.



97

How do you make transit that
much faster, pervasive, and
more convenient?



98

Here’s how:
A true regional express network.
Better-designed stations.
Better-located stations.
Improved frequencies.



99

Has any comparable
city recently done this?



100

Brisbane: A Model City

“Brisbane is now at the leading edge in
urban mass transit… the new busway… will attract
international attention for the level of
quality and customer focus that [has been]
incorporated.”


— Hans Rat, Secretary General
International Public
Transport Association (IUTP)


101

Brisbane—Southeast Busway
The Challenge:
Brisbane has an extensive
electrified commuter rail
system, but they faced a real
problem: people who didn’t live
by train stations were a lot less
likely to ride the train than
people who did… and most
people didn’t live by a station!



102

The Solution:
A system of gradeseparated busways
(Quickways) with
stations spaced
every mile, passing
lanes at stations,
and high-speed
geometries. With
no cross-traffic
and no pedestrians,
fast travel times
are possible.


103

The Solution:
Brisbane’s Quickways not
don’t behave just like a rail
line, but support an extensive
network of express services
that reach into
neighborhoods, get on the
Quickway, but stop only at
major destinations. The result?
Travel times at peak hours
faster than driving.


104

Grade separation = no cross
traffic, leading to faster and
more reliable travel times.


105

Tunnels and fly-overs let transit
avoid congestion and place
stations in optimal locations.


106



107

In this case, a hospital wing
was built floating over the
Quickway station, which was
integrated into the hospital.
This tight integration drives
ridership higher.



108

Bikeways and bike storage
facilities are built into several
Quickway stations.



109

An elevated station links directly
into Brisbane’s largest hospital.



110

This bridge is just for transit,
pedestrians, and bicycles. It
connects a large university campus
with the Quickway network.


111

Because Quickways aggregate
many routes together,
frequencies are high—and
waiting times tend to be much
shorter than on equivalent light
rail or BRT systems.


112

This underground station in
Brisbane’s downtown keeps
passengers separated from
transit vehicles.



113

This underground station in
Brisbane’s downtown keeps
passengers separated from
transit vehicles.



114

Passengers board
buses through
sliding glass doors.



115

Comparison: Peak Ridership

at the Busiest Spot
during the Busiest Hour
in the Peak Direction

7,800

18,000

2,700

6-Lane Freeway

Southeast Busway
(2-lane)

SD
Trolley



116

Comparison: Peak Ridership

7,800

at the Busiest Spot
during the Busiest Hour
in the Peak Direction

18,000

2,700

At its busiest point, the Southeast Busway is moving
more than twice as many people as the adjacent
freeway and more than six times as many passengers
as the San Diego Trolley at its busiest point.

6-Lane Freeway

Southeast Busway
(2-lane)

SD
Trolley


117

Brisbane: Ridership Growth
2008 Ridership:
Rail: 60 million
Busway: 50 million

100%
80%
60%
40%
20%

2003


2009

118

2008 Ridership:

160%

Rail: 60 million
Busway: 50 million

140%

+ 60%

120%

2010 Ridership:
Busway: 72 million

100%
80%
60%
40%
20%

2003


2009

119

2008 Ridership:

160%

Rail: 60 million
Busway: 50 million

140%

+ 60%

120%

2010 Ridership:
Busway: 72 million

100%
80%
60%
40%
20%

The creation of just 13 miles
of Quickway enabled
Brisbane to support a robust
express network that led to
a massive increase in transit
ridership.

2003


2009

120

The FAST Plan is modeled on
Brisbane’s successful approach to
transit for a dispersed metro area
like San Diego.



121

In Part II of this presentation, we’ll
show you the elements
of the FAST Plan and how we
put them together to fashion
a world-class transit system .



122

FAST Plan pt 1: The Need for a New Transit Plan

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (19)

Similar to FAST Plan pt 1: The Need for a New Transit Plan

Similar to FAST Plan pt 1: The Need for a New Transit Plan (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

FAST Plan pt 1: The Need for a New Transit Plan