Travelers can be classified into two groups: choice users and captive users. Choice users select transit or automobile service when they view one option as superior, whereas captive users have only one travel option. Surprisingly, little is known about captivity effects on mode split models. This research examines the way transit service factors such as accessibility and connectivity relate to mode captivity and mode choice. Data for this investigation come from the Portland, Oregon, 1994 Household Activity and Travel Diary Survey, the Regional Land Information System for the Portland area, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency fuel economy database, and the U.S. Department of Energy. Individual trip data were segmented into transit captive, automobile captive, and choice users based on information about private vehicle availability, transit connectivity, and distance from a transit stop. Traditional transit mode split models are compared with models that segment users into choice and captive groups. It was found that traditional models underestimate the variation in mode choice for captive users, while overestimating the attractiveness of transit for choice users. These results indicate that better transit forecasts can result if accessibility and connectivity are used to help identify captive users. Additionally, among choice transit users, differences in travel times between automobile and transit modes do little to influence mode selection, while walk access to transit has more effect than previously thought.

An evaluation of an innovative transit program, UPASS, is summarized. UPASS provides unlimited use of the Milwaukee County Transit System at any time and any place and for any purpose for all students enrolled at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. The pass program, paid for by a special fee attached to students’ tuition, was implemented in fall 1994 and was extensively evaluated to determine its impact on ridership and other factors and to determine whether the concept has the potential for transfer to other organizations and employers. Benefits and disbenefits to transit users, nonusers, employers, and transit agencies are described. In addition, elements of a successful program are outlined.

An attitudinal survey on transit riders’ perception of the importance transit users place on features of an automatic vehicle location (AVL) system is reported. Onboard surveys and on-time field checks were conducted in the cities of Manitowoc and Racine, Wisconsin, to determine how users in those cities perceive their transit systems and how well each transit system performs. The surveys indicate that transit riders put a great value on increased on-time performance and improved schedule reliability. Passengers value features that AVL technology could bring, such as improving on-time performance, knowing when the next bus will arrive, knowing how long the delay is in case of delay, and knowing that another bus could be dispatched in case of breakdown. The surveys indicate that AVL technology could improve transit services and add value to passengers. The survey also found the expected ridership increase resulting from the AVL technology to be moderate. On-time performance surveys conducted in each city indicate that transit services in these communities generally operate on time at the route level. Although there are bigger variations at the timepoint level, transit services are usually on time. The implementation of AVL could further improve on-time performance, but maybe only marginally.

No abstract

No abstract