On-board Survey of Bus and Light Rail Customers May 8, 2006 Transit Marketing, LLC CJI Research Corporation.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Mass Transit OSullivan Chapter 11. Outline of the Chapter Analyze some empirical facts about public transit in the United States Analyze the commuters.
Advertisements

Transport Yourself Campaign 1. Strategy Comprehensive campaign to induce trial ridership from non-riders with free pass. Increase frequency and loyalty.
Strategic Fare Development Gerald Chang, Doug Strobl and Anita Wasiuta.
Interim Review of the MBTA Late-night Service Pilot Program February 5, 2015.
N ational T ransfer A ccounts Data Review (Hands On) Amonthep Chawla East-West Center & Nihon University Population Research Institute.
FAIRFAX AREA TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS FOR OLDER ADULTS AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES: SURVEY RESULTS.
Measuring and capturing mind share APTA 2013 Marketing & Communications Workshop.
October 4-5, 2010 TCRP H-37: Characteristics of Premium Transit Services that Affect Choice of Mode Prepared for: AMPO Modeling Subcommittee Prepared by:
Justifying Rail Bias Factor for Houston METRO’s Transit Model Presentation by Vijay Mahal, HDR Inc Vincent Sanders, Houston METRO May 18, 2009 TRB Applications.
The Current State and Future of the Regional Multi-Modal Travel Demand Forecasting Model.
2013 Survey of California Home Buyers. Survey Methodology 1,400 telephone interviews conducted in March 2013 Respondents are home buyers who purchased.
City of West Covina Green Line Evaluation. Presented By Presented By Joanne Coletta Jim Jobst Leticia Llamas Kelly McDonald Ana Rosales Enrique Salgado.
Cheryl Thole, Jennifer Flynn CUTR/NBRTI, Senior Research Associates Transit in GIS Conference September 14, 2011 St. Petersburg, Florida.
Craft is what we are expected to do; art is the unexpected use of our craft. Ed Catmull President of Walt Disney Animation Studios.
2012 Survey of California Home Buyers. Survey Methodology 800 telephone interviews conducted in August 2012 Respondents are home buyers that purchased.
PROJECTED RIDERSHIP OF THE HOUSATONIC RAILROAD STUDY Presented by Julie Pokela, Ph.D. August, 2010.
Public Transit in Sacramento
Business Logistics 420 Public Transportation Lectures 8: The Performance and Condition of Transit in the United States.
2015 CALIFORNIA HOME BUYERS SURVEY 1. Survey Methodology 700 telephone interviews and 567 online surveys conducted in February – April 2015 Respondents.
A Deeper Understanding of Avery Fitness Center Customers
2010 Travel Behavior Inventory Mn/DOT TDMCC- Jonathan Ehrlich October 14, 2010.
Megan Kanagy Capital Projects Manager. What is Bikesharing? Flickr images: ambimb, infomatique, paytonc, midnightglory Miami: Deco Bike Dublin: dublinbikes.
1 Research go bus Impact Study TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference Atlantic City, May 2015.
The Moodie Report May Methodology and Sample  Online survey carried out with travellers at airports around the world  In total,
Transit Estimation and Mode Split CE 451/551 Source: NHI course on Travel Demand Forecasting (152054A) Session 7.
1 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Customer Satisfaction Measurement FY 2006 Q3 Comparison April 28, 2006.
Welcome to the TSIP Project Webinar Planning Technical Working Group 28 July – 3:30 pm.
Materials developed by K. Watkins, J. LaMondia and C. Brakewood Data Collection With Surveys Unit 2: Describing Transit Systems with Data.
Characteristics of Weekend Travel in the City of Calgary: Towards a Model of Weekend Travel Demand JD Hunt, University of Calgary DM Atkins, City of Calgary.
CICOA Aging & In-Home Solutions July 2013 Results of the 2013 Survey.
Transit Connections 2013 The Value of Transit Emerging Trends: The Demographics and Needs of Seniors Richard Weiner Nelson/Nygaard Grady Tarbutton Washoe.
On-Board Transit Survey Presentation to TCC Dec. 13, 2002 Heather Alhadeff, AICP
Prepared by: DECEMBER 2008 Metro Transit Light- Rail and Bus Rider Survey FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS PERISCOPE.
Mary Ross, P.E./Myung Sung. 2 3 Lower Atlantic Regular Gas Price HIGH: $4.03- July 2008 LOW: $1.60- Dec 2008.
2008 Regional Bus Survey Preliminary Results Presentation to the Access for All Advisory Committee Robert E. Griffiths Technical Services Director April.
More than 20% of Americans 65 and older don't drive Older adults use of mass transit increased by 40% in last decade Travel Training vs. Senior familiarization.
STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING APRIL 22, 2014 CITY OF HIGH POINT, NORTH CAROLINA High Point Short Range Transit Improvement Plan.
2013 SURVEY OF CALIFORNIA HOME SELLERS. Methodology Telephone surveys conducted in August/September of 600 randomly selected home sellers who sold in.
Purpose To develop and evaluate a range of transit and transportation alternatives throughout the MPO area, considering: u Regional Goals and Objectives.
Charlie Cards Save Money & Time Daily & Monthly Passes Save Even More.
FTA Workshop on Travel Forecasting for New Starts1March 2009FTA Workshop on Travel Forecasting for New Starts1March 2009 Charlotte South Corridor LRT Bill.
SEPTA FARE SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS Using DVRPC’s Regional Travel Forecasting Model Fang Yuan, Brad Lane, and Vanvi Trieu May 17, 2015.
Greater Minnesota Transit Investment Plan Insert meeting/organization Insert month day, 2010.
Transit Fares for Low Income Calgarians Stephen Hansen Calgary Transit, Manager, Safety and Security Calgary, Alberta.
© 2002 J.D. Power and Associates. All Rights Reserved 2002 Electric Utility Residential Customer Satisfaction Study Cedar Rapids, Iowa August 7, 2002 Presented.
Prepared by: May Metro Transit Train and Bus Rider Surveys COMPARATIVE RESULTS Bruce Howard Director of Marketing.
Analysis of Travel Behavior Using the ACS J.G. Berman, Siim S öö t and Susumu Kudo Urban Transportation Center, UIC.
2009 COMMUNITY SURVEY Presentation of Final Results January 21, 2010.
Review of Fare Collection Concept of Operations and High Level Data Requirements FC RSTWG Webinar May 19, :30 – 4 pm Prepared by: Paula Okunieff,
How the MBTA effects us.. Student Fares Before Bus $0.60 Rapid Transit $0.85 Bus + Rapid Transit $0.85 After Bus $0.75 Rapid Transit $1.00 Bus + Rapid.
2011 RTD Customer Satisfaction Research Results: Executive Summary – Ops Committee March 2013.
Impacts of Free Public Transport – An Evaluation Framework Oded Cats Yusak Susilo Jonas Eliasson.
Photos by Susie Fitzhugh Bell Times Analysis Task Force (Metro Service) (January 22, 2015date)
System Highlights Community Coach. Who We Are History and Milestones Who We Serve Future Transit Opportunities CTD Report Indian River Transit GoLine.
Successful Commute Programs Critical components include: 1.An active and informed Employee Transportation Coordinator (you!) 2.Guaranteed ride home 3.Parking.
FARE STUDY: STRUCTURE & LEVEL RECOMMENDATION Operations & Customer Service Committee February 10,
FARE STUDY RTD Board Study Session April 28,
FARE STUDY ECOPASS Board of Directors Study Session August 25, 2015.
Analysis of time-of-day pricing in optimizing bus transit service in Westchester County, NY NYMTC September 11 th Memorial Program Jeevanjot Singh Rutgers.
2013 RTD Paratransit Customer Satisfaction Survey Results – Executive Summary July, 2013.
Findings of the Petaluma Transit 2014 Onboard Survey
Survey of Potential Overnight Service Passengers
BEST Special topic 2015 What could make PT more interesting for car users? Stockholm, 15th of March 2016.
Transport Yourself Campaign
Comprehensive Operational Analysis (COA)
Measuring and capturing mind share
Transit Fares for Low Income Calgarians
PARTNERSHIPS An experiment! Public Private Partnership
Mass Transit Usage According to IBISWorld, the public transportation industry increased 14.3%, from $63 billion during 2013 to $72 billion for 2017,
Transit Fares for Low Income Calgarians
Presentation transcript:

On-board Survey of Bus and Light Rail Customers May 8, 2006 Transit Marketing, LLC CJI Research Corporation

On-Board Survey Pre-survey to identify key satisfaction factors 2312 Passengers Surveyed –1487 Bus –728 Light Rail –97 Neighborhood Ride Data weighted to reflect ridership Survey Administered by in –English –Spanish –Russian –Hmong –Vietnamese –Chinese Option provided for passengers with disabilities or those making short trips 2

Usage Characteristics

4 4 User Segments by Mode

5 5 Frequency of Use  Most riders are regular users.  81% ride 4+ days per week.

6 6 Duration of Ridership  45% of riders began riding RT between 2004 and 2006

7 7 Trip Purpose  72% of transit trips are work or school commutes  73% of rail-only riders were making work trips

Rider Demographics

9 9 Age  51% of riders are age 31 or younger  Rail-only riders are somewhat older

10 Age or RT Riders vs. Population  Heavy transit use among younger age groups is typical of transit systems nationally

11 Employment Status  88% of riders are commuters: either employed or students  83% of rail-only users are employed

12 Transit Dependence

13 Income  53% of riders have household incomes of $25K or less  34% of all riders but 65% of rail- only riders have HH incomes of $35K or more

14 Income of Riders vs. Population  Riders are lower income than the overall population  Relative youth and lower income of riders are related

Fares and Information

16 Fare Payment  33% of riders pay fare in cash  37% use a monthly or half- month pass  31% pay a student fare or use a college pass  10% receive an elderly/ disabled discount

17 Fare Preferences

18 Primary Information Sources  65% of riders have internet access at home or work  44% of riders have visited RT website

Customer Satisfaction

20 Customer Satisfaction: Overall 72% of riders rated RT positively (5 or above on a 7 point scale)

21 Customer Satisfaction: Top Box Scores Percent rating each aspect of service as excellent (7)

22 Ratings by Rider Type

23 Customer Satisfaction: Impact Scores

24  Rail-only riders are more impacted by other passengers, overcrowding, vehicle cleanliness and security. 24

25  Bus and Mixed mode riders are more concerned with on- time performance and hours of service 25

26 Ridership Retention  31% of RT riders expect or hope to stop using RT  Rail-only riders are most “loyal”

27 Rider Retention – A Closer Look  Loyalty increases with age  Young riders are most likely to “expect” to get a car and stop using RT

28 Conclusions Regional Transit services carry a diverse ridership population, with large components of work and school commuters. Most riders rate the system positively (5 or above on a 7 point scale) but there are distinct opportunities to improve satisfaction and rider retention. There are distinct differences in the demographics and concerns of users of different modes.