Browsing by Subject "Captive riders"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Better Understanding the Potential Market of Metro Transit's Ridership and Service(University of Minnesota Center for Transportation Studies, 2006-10) Krizek, Kevin; El-Geneidy, AhmedRidership is a key element in the transit industry. Conventional travel analysis focuses on two types of transit users: captive and choice riders. Captive riders are typically those who lack an alternative to transit; they therefore use it as their primary mode of transportation to reach their destination. Choice riders are those who have realistic alternatives (e.g., driving) but choose to use transit for various trips. Service reliability and availability affects the ridership of both populations. However, substantial increases in ridership are usually assumed to be derived only from choice riders. Populations not using transit may be further considered as two distinct populations: auto captives and potential riders. Auto captives are mainly auto users who don’t have transit as a potential mode of transportation or would not even realistically consider using transit. Potential riders are currently not using transit for certain reasons and/or concerns, but may consider the idea of using transit based on certain criteria. This research analyzes results from two surveys conducted in the Twin Cities metropolitan region: one of existing riders and the other of non-riders. The aim is to understand the characteristics of both captive and choice riders, with an eye toward the factors that can increase ridership of the latter population. This research classifies riders and non-riders differently from previous research. In addition to the captivity of modes, the classification considers regularity of commuting. Accordingly, transit riders are classified as one of four categories: captive riders with regular commuting habits, captive riders with irregular commuting habits, choice riders with regular commuting habits, and choice riders with irregular commuting habits. Similarly, there are four types of non-riders: auto captives with regular commuting habits, auto captives with irregular commuting habits, potential riders with regular commuting habits, and potential riders with irregular commuting habits. Using the survey data to uncover such population, this research then comments on how using advanced forms of technology could increase the ridership from various populations.Item Transportation Impact of Transitways: A Case Study of Hiawatha Light Rail Transit in Minneapolis(Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, 2013-03) Cao, Jason; Schoner, JessicaThe Metropolitan Council in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area (Twin Cities) aims to greatly increase transit ridership in the next two decades. A network of transitways is an essential component to achieve the ridership goal. Since transitways represent significant infrastructure investments from federal, state, and local governments, the public and planners are interested in their ridership bonus. This study investigated transportation impact of the Hiawatha light rail transit (LRT) using a 2011 dataset collected in the Twin Cities. By employing a match-pair cross-sectional design, we surveyed residents living in the middle section of the Hiawatha LRT corridor and those in two urban control corridors and two suburban control corridors in the region. We first explored the reasons that motivated residents moving into the LRT corridor (or residential preferences) and their connections with transit use. Then we employed a propensity score matching approach to study the impact of Hiawatha LRT on transit use for residents who moved to the corridor before its opening and for those who moved after its opening. Finally, we tested the carryover effect of the LRT and built environment effect on active travel: walking to stores and strolling. The study produced interesting results and offered important implications for land use and transportation policies associated with light rail transit.