Existing Conditions GRTA Xpress

Transcription

1 M E M O R A N D U M To: From: Laura Beall Thomas Wittmann Date: January 9, 2015 Subject: Existing Conditions INTRODUCTION This memorandum describes and analyzes the existing conditions of Georgia Regional Transportation Authority (GRTA) fixed-route commuter express transit services, referred to in this memo as Xpress. The goal of this document is to help identify some of the unmet needs and opportunities in the region as well as providing an overview of the GRTA system, current and past ridership and operating statistics, a review of existing regional plans and documents, and an analysis of the service area s population and demographic characteristics. EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICES GRTA provides fixed-route commuter express and vanpool services in the greater Atlanta, GA region. Xpress operates 33 fixed commuter express routes, most of which connect outlying parkand-ride locations to Downtown and Midtown Atlanta. Routes 408, 410, and 428 are the only routes that do not serve the Atlanta core and instead connect to Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) rail stations in outlying areas of Atlanta. Xpress services operate along five interstate corridors in the region with service contracted by four different operators American Coach Lines (ACL), Cobb Community Transit (CCT), Gwinnett County Transit (GCT), and Professional Transit Management (PTM). Figure 1 summarizes the locations and corridors served by each route as well as the contracted operator for each route. Figure 2 shows the Xpress system map and the location of all 33 parkand-ride locations Xpress serves throughout the greater Atlanta region THIRD AVENUE, SUITE 1200 SEATTLE, WA FAX

2 Figure 1: Description of Xpress Routes Route Description Interstate Corridor 400 Cumming to North Springs and Downtown 408 Doraville to Johns Creek Parkway 410 Sugarloaf Mills to Lindbergh MARTA Station 411 Hamilton Mill/Mall of Georgia to Midtown Atlanta 412 Sugarloaf Mills to Downtown Atlanta 413 Hamilton Mill to Downtown Atlanta 416 Dacula to Downtown Atlanta 418 Snellville to Downtown Atlanta 420 West Conyers to Downtown Atlanta 421 West Conyers to Midtown Atlanta 422 Panola Road to Downtown Atlanta 423 East Conyers/Panola Road to Midtown Atlanta 424 Stone Mountain to Downtown Atlanta 425 East Conyers to Downtown Atlanta 428 Panola Road to Perimeter Center 430 McDonough to Downtown/Midtown Atlanta 431 Stockbridge to Midtown Atlanta 432 Stockbridge to Downtown Atlanta 440 Hampton/Jonesboro to Downtown Atlanta 441 Jonesboro to Midtown Atlanta 442 Riverdale to Downtown Atlanta 450 Newnan to Downtown Atlanta 451** Newnan to Midtown Atlanta 455** Union City to Downtown Atlanta 460 Douglasville to Downtown Atlanta 461/462 Douglasville to Downtown/Midtown Atlanta 470 Hiram/Powder Springs to Downtown Atlanta 475 Mableton to Downtown Atlanta 477 Hiram/Powder Springs to Downtown/Midtown Atlanta 480 Acworth to Downtown Atlanta 481 Town Center/Big Shanty to Midtown 490 Canton-Woodstock to Downtown Atlanta 491 Woodstock to Midtown Atlanta **Routes combined in PM commute Northeast East South West North Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 2

3 Figure 2: Xpress System Map Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 3

4 Fare Structure offers a variety of fare and pass price options for riders using the Xpress service, as shown in Figure 3. These options are exact cash one-way fare, round trip fare, multi-ride fare passes, and multi-day fare passes. Xpress also accepts the MARTA Breeze Card to pay for single, one-way trips using the stored cash value of the Breeze Card. The geographic distribution of the one-way cash fares and operators is shown in Figure 4. Green and Blue Zone fares One-way and round-trip fares as well as multi-trip and multi-day fare pass prices vary according to zones (either the Green or Blue Zone). For the Green Zone: a one-way trip is $3; a round trip is $5; a 10-Ride pass is $25; and a 31-Day pass is $100. For the Blue Zone: a one-way trip is $4; a round-trip fare is $7; a 10-Ride pass is $35; and a 31-Day pass is $125. The Blue Zone pass is valid on all Xpress routes. If a rider has a Green Zone pass and is traveling to the Blue Zone, the rider can add $1 in the fare box to cover the additional cost. All riders pay half the peak-hour fare on routes operating during off-peak hours. Off-peak hours are defined as occurring between 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. and after 6:30 p.m. Gwinnett County Transit and Cobb Community Transit Fares As mentioned previously, several routes in the Xpress system are operated by GCT and CCT. Xpress passes are not valid on routes operated by GCT and CCT; instead, riders wishing to use a pass on these routes must use a GCT or CCT pass. CCT and GCT fares are as follows: For CCT routes, a one-way cash fare is $5. Passes offered include a 20-Ride pass for $65 and a 31-Day pass for $125. GCT fares are split into two zones. In Zone 1, the one-way cash fare is $3.75, a 10-Ride Pass is $32.50, and a 31-Day pass is $130. In Zone 2, the one-way cash fare is $5, a 10- Ride pass is $45, and a 31-Day pass is $180. Figure 3: Xpress Pass Prices Xpress Green Zone Xpress Blue Zone CCT GCT Zone 1 GCT Zone 2 One Way $3 $4 $5 $3.75 $5 Round-Trip $5 $ Ride $25 $ $32.50 $45 20-Ride $ Day $100 $125 $125 $130 $180 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 4

5 Figure 4: Xpress One-Way Cash Fares Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 5

6 SYSTEM PERFORMANCE Service Levels Xpress service operates weekdays only during typical peak commute times. All but five routes operate reverse commute trips, while only three routes (410, 440, and 480) operate midday trips. Figure 5 below illustrates the total number of weekday revenue trips by route in a descending order. Peak direction and reverse commute direction trips in all time periods are included. Figure 6 details the service availability and peak direction span of service for each route. There are three routes (430, 440, and 460) with services that operate a reduced number of trips on Friday compared with other weekdays, and the Friday-specific service on these routes is also shown. Trips were categorized as morning peak if they arrived to their destination between 6 and 10 a.m. and afternoon peak if they departed their origin between 3 and 7 p.m. As shown Figure 6, nearly all routes provide multiple peak direction trips in both the morning and afternoon time periods. However, in some cases, the number of morning peak direction trips does not match afternoon peak direction trips, suggesting the potential for unbalanced capacity for round-trip commuters. Peak direction spans of service are very similar across all Xpress routes, which generally cater to the commute markets in Downtown and Midtown Atlanta. Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 6

7 Figure 5: Revenue Trips by Route / / Peak Trips Reverse Commute Trips Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 7

8 Figure 6: Service Availability and Peak Direction Span of Service Route Direction AM PM Span (Peak Direction Only) Inbound 6 Trips 2 Trips 5:45 a.m. - 8:20 a.m. Outbound 1 Trip 7 Trips 3:40 p.m. - 7:00 p.m. Southbound 2 Trips 4 Trips 3:55 p.m. - 6:30 p.m. Northbound 4 Trips 2 Trips 6:35 a.m. - 9:10 a.m. Inbound 5 Trips 1 Trip 6:30 a.m. - 8:45 a.m. Outbound - 7 Trips 12:45 p.m. - 6:35 p.m. Inbound 6 Trips 2 Trips 5:10 a.m. - 8:50 a.m. Outbound 2 Trips 6 Trips 3:30 p.m. - 7:20 p.m. Inbound 8 Trips 5 Trips 5:30 a.m. - 10:03 a.m. Outbound 4 Trips 10 Trips 3:10 p.m. - 7:50 p.m. Inbound 6 Trips 2 Trips 5:30 a.m. - 9:10 a.m. Outbound 1 Trip 7 Trips 3:15 p.m. - 7:40 p.m. Inbound 6 Trips 1 Trip 5:20 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. Outbound 1 Trip 6 Trips 3:25 p.m. - 7:20 p.m. Inbound 7 Trips - 5:15 a.m. - 9:30 a.m. Outbound - 7 Trips 3:05 p.m. - 7:22 p.m. Inbound 6 Trips 2 Trips 5:30 a.m. - 8:52 a.m. Outbound 3 Trips 6 Trips 3:36 p.m. - 6:30 p.m. Inbound 5 Trips - 5:45 a.m. - 9:05 a.m. Outbound 2 Trips 3 Trips 3:35 p.m. - 6:30 p.m. Inbound 5 Trips 2 Trips 6:00 a.m. - 8:47 a.m. Outbound 2 Trips 5 Trips 3:15 p.m. - 6:20 p.m. Inbound 6 Trips 1 Trip 5:20 a.m. - 9:15 a.m. Outbound 2 Trips 5 Trips 4:15 p.m. - 7:55 p.m. Inbound 5 Trips 1 Trip 6:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. Outbound 1 Trip 5 Trips 3:37 p.m. - 6:50 p.m. Inbound 8 Trips 2 Trips 5:30 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. Outbound 2 Trips 8 Trips 3:28 p.m. - 7:20 p.m. Inbound 4 Trips - 5:15 a.m. - 8:50 a.m. Outbound - 4 Trips 3:30 p.m. - 7:00 p.m. Inbound (Mon-Thurs) 8 Trips 2 Trips 5:45 a.m. - 9:08 a.m. Outbound (Mon-Thurs) 2 Trips 8 Trips 3:31 p.m. - 7:20 p.m. Inbound (Fri) 7 Trips 1 Trip 6:00 a.m. - 9:08 a.m. Outbound (Fri) 2 Trips 7 Trips 3:31 p.m. - 7:20 p.m. Inbound 6 Trips 3 Trips 5:45 a.m. - 9:10 a.m. Outbound 3 Trips 6 Trips 3:07 p.m. - 6:27 p.m. Inbound 10 Trips 4 Trips 5:30 a.m. - 9:25 a.m. Outbound 5 Trips 9 Trips 3:05 p.m. - 7:15 p.m. Inbound (Mon-Fri) 8 Trips 5 Trips 5:30 a.m. - 10:05 a.m. Outbound (Mon-Thurs) 3 Trips 11 Trips 1:00 p.m. - 8:20 p.m. Outbound (Fri) 3 Trips 10 Trips 1:00 p.m. - 8:20 p.m. Inbound 5 Trips 1 Trip 5:30 a.m. - 8:35 a.m. Outbound 2 Trips 4 Trips 3:55 p.m. - 6:55 p.m. Inbound 6 Trips 3 Trips 5:30 a.m. - 8:58 a.m. Outbound 3 Trips 6 Trips 3:32 p.m. - 6:50 p.m. Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 8

9 Route Direction AM PM Span (Peak Direction Only) 450 Inbound 6 Trips 2 Trips 5:30 a.m. - 8:35 a.m. Outbound 1 Trip 6 Trips 3:05 p.m. - 7:05 p.m. 451* Inbound 4 Trips - 5:45 a.m. - 9:15 a.m. Outbound 2 Trips - See 451/455 for peak svc 455* Inbound 4 Trips - 5:45 a.m. - 9:13 a.m. Outbound 2 Trips - See 451/455 for peak svc 451/455 Inbound - 2 Trips See 451 or 455 for peak svc Outbound - 7 Trips 3:10 p.m. - 8:11 p.m. Inbound (Mon-Thurs) 8 Trips 4 Trips 5:30 a.m. - 8:38 a.m. 460 Outbound (Mon-Thurs) 2 Trips 10 Trips 3:10 p.m. - 7:25 p.m. Inbound (Fri) 5 Trips 2 Trips 5:30 a.m. - 8:38 a.m. Outbound (Fri) 1 Trip 6 Trips 3:10 p.m. - 6:50 p.m. 461/462 Inbound 6 Trips 1 Trip 5:30 a.m. - 9:25 a.m. Outbound 2 Trips 5 Trips 3:56 p.m. - 7:20 p.m. 470 Inbound 6 Trips 1 Trip 5:20 a.m. - 8:59 a.m. Outbound 1 Trip 6 Trips 3:45 p.m. - 7:18 p.m. 475 Inbound 4 Trips - 5:40 a.m. - 8:22 a.m. Outbound - 4 Trips 3:45 p.m. - 6:23 p.m. 477 Inbound 4 Trips 1 Trip 5:35 a.m. - 8:20 a.m. Outbound - 5 Trips 3:05 p.m. - 7:16 p.m. 480 Inbound 6 Trips 1 Trip 5:40 a.m. - 8:57 a.m. Outbound - 6 Trips 12:57 p.m. - 6:35 p.m. 481 Inbound 5 Trips - 6:00 a.m. - 8:47 a.m. Outbound - 5 Trips 3:30 p.m. - 6:25 p.m. 490 Inbound 4 Trips - 5:45 a.m. - 8:50 a.m. Outbound - 4 Trips 3:45 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. 491 Inbound 5 Trips 1 Trip 5:45 a.m. - 8:48 a.m. Outbound 2 Trips 4 Trips 3:45 p.m. - 6:40 p.m. Total (Mon-Thurs) 245 Trips 250 Trips *Routes combined in PM commute Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 9

10 A total of 495 revenue trips are operated each weekday, with 384 trips operating in the morning and afternoon peak commute directions (or approximately 77% of all trips). Figure 7 below summarizes the service availability by regional corridor. As shown, the South Corridor operates the most revenue and peak commute direction trips, while the North Corridor operates the least amount of total and peak commute direction trips. Figure 7: Service Availability by Corridor Corridor Weekday Revenue Trips % of Total Weekday Peak Commute Direction Trips % of Total Northeast % 88 23% East % 89 23% South % % West 70 14% 58 15% North 43 9% 39 10% Total % % Xpress patrons predominantly access service via park-and-ride lots. Xpress serves dozens of park-and-rides, and the majority of them have capacity for additional vehicles, but some are nearing capacity. In Fall 2014, a parking stall utilization count of select park-and-rides was conducted to determine the extent of potential crowding. Figure 8 shows the number of spaces and approximate capacity available at these park-and-ride lots. According to the parking count, six facilities have more than 80% of stalls occupied, which will limit the amount of potential growth at these locations. Three of the most utilized park-andrides (Stockbridge, Sugarloaf Mills, and Busbee Drive) are located in close proximity to other park-and-ride lots with available parking capacity. Figure 8: Select Park-and-Ride Lot Capacity Park-and-Ride Lot Number of Spaces Stalls Utilized Stockbridge % Jonesboro % Sugarloaf Mills % Indian Trail % Busbee Drive % Riverdale % Panola % Powder Springs % McDonough % BrandsMart % Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 10

11 Ridership and Productivity Average daily boardings, daily revenue hours, daily trips, boardings per revenue hour, and boardings per trip for each weekday route are shown in Figure 9, based on 2013 ridership figures. On a typical weekday, the system carries just fewer than 9,000 boardings. The systemwide average number of boardings per revenue hour is 16.8, with productivity ranging from 9.5 boardings per revenue hour (Route 410) to 28.8 boardings per revenue hour (Route 431). The route ranking by average weekday ridership is shown in Figure 10. Route 432 and 440 have the most ridership, each with over 500 daily boardings. Route 475 has the fewest number of boardings, with less than 100. Figure 11 shows route-level passenger boardings per peak trip. Passenger boardings per trip is a more common productivity indicator for peak-based, commuter express service with few stops and longer-distance travel. It can also summarize vehicle capacity utilization. Xpress service averages approximately 24.2 passenger boardings per peak trip, which utilizes just under 42% of the total 57-seat capacity of vehicles 1 most common in the Xpress system fleet. As shown in Figure 11, Routes 431 is the most productive, with more than 35 passengers per trip, while Route 475 is the least productive, with 10 passengers per trip. 1 MCI D4500 Vehicles have a seated capacity of 57. Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 11

12 Figure 9: Service Statistics by Route Route Average Daily Boardings Average Daily Revenue Hours Daily Trips Boardings per Revenue Hour Boardings per Peak Trip / / Systemwide 8, Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 12

13 Figure 10: Average Daily Boardings by Route Average = Figure 11: Boardings per Peak Trip by Route Average = Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 13

14 Figure 12 below summarizes service ridership and performance on a corridor basis. As shown, nearly 60% of all weekday ridership is being generated by the East and South Corridors. Both the East and South Corridors are the most productive in terms of passengers per trip as well. Figure 12: Service Ridership and Performance by Corridor Corridor Average Weekday Ridership % of Total Passenger Boardings per Trip Northeast 1,720 19% 21.3 East 2,274 25% 27.0 South 2,877 32% 25.8 West 1,288 14% 23.2 North 810 9% 21.6 Total 8, % 24.2 Service Speed Figure 13 below illustrates route-level average operating speed using reported revenue miles and observed running time on peak trips, derived from data collected during the ridecheck conducted in Spring Reviewing speed is useful to identify both operating delays particularly along regularly congested interstate highways as well as opportunities to improve service efficiency. Safely increasing operating speeds will provide a more attractive service to customers while potentially reducing resources required for operation, thereby allowing for reinvestment elsewhere in the system. It should be noted that the average speed for most routes reflects operations in Downtown and Midtown Atlanta in addition to highway operations. Route 410 has the highest average speed due to the fact that it operates between two stops only, operates entirely on highways, and operates on HOV/managed lanes, including an HOV exit. In contrast, the slowest route, Route 461/462, serves two park-and-rides as well as both Downtown and Midtown on all trips, adding dwell time and a much longer surface street alignment than most routes. The length of the surface street alignment and the number of park-and-rides served by a route correlate to overall route speed. Average service speed by corridor is shown below in Figure 14. As shown, speeds are generally similar in the Northeast, East, and South Corridors, with speeds very similar to the system average. Service along the Northeast Corridor experiences the highest speeds, while the West Corridor is the slowest, with all routes in that corridor operating below average speeds. Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 14

15 Average Speed (mph) Existing Conditions Figure 13: Average Speed by Route (mph) Median = 25.1 Route Figure 14: Average Corridor Service Speed Corridor Average Service Speed Northeast 30.3 East 27.5 South 25.6 West 21.6 North 26.1 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 15

16 On-Time Performance Figure 15 and Figure 16 show on-time performance data collected during the ridecheck conducted in Spring On-time departures are those that occurred between 0 and 5 minutes after the scheduled time at all scheduled time points on a route not just the start and end points. All departures before the scheduled time were considered early except for those that benefit the customer on board without inconveniencing customers trying to catch the bus. For example, an early departure at Powder Springs Park-and-Ride on Route 477 in the afternoon outbound direction is not considered early since it is convenient for passengers alighting at the next stop, Hiram Park-and-Ride, to reach their home destination sooner than the scheduled time; in this case, an early departure has no negative impact on passengers. However, an early departure in Downtown on the same trip is considered early, since passengers need to plan when to board the bus to travel home and could get left behind if the bus departs early. Late departures are those that occur more than five minutes after the scheduled time. Systemwide, Xpress services have an average on-time percentage of 64%, according to the sample collected as part of the ridecheck. Route 412 had the best on-time performance (88% on time) while Route 481 had the worst (37% on time, 60% late). Route 410 had the most frequent occurrence of early running, at 16%. As shown in Figure 17, on-time performance varies by interstate highway corridor for routes that serve Downtown and Midtown. Specifically, routes that operate on I-85 North into Downtown or Midtown experience better on-time performance than routes on other corridors, with 74% of trips operating on time compared to the system average of 64%. There are HOV lanes or managed lanes on I-85 between SR 120 and the Williams Street interchange, which helps routes on the I-85 North corridor stay on time. On-time performance is also affected by Downtown and Midtown alignments. The more turning movements a bus makes in a congested environment, the more likely it is that on-time performance will be variable. Most Xpress routes have an indirect travel pattern through Downtown. While the aim of indirect routing is to minimize walking distance for patrons, it also serves to decrease reliability. In Downtown Atlanta, routes using the Spring Street and Centennial Olympic Park have significantly more variable running times than routes using Peachtree Center Avenue and Courtland Street, for example. The closure of the Spring Street viaduct has further exacerbated the running time variability. As noted in Figure 18 service providers have varying levels of on-time performance. However, being that providers often operate on different corridors and thus encounter different levels of congestion and corridor speed, it is difficult to draw conclusions from across-the-board comparisons. For example, ACL and GCT operate on some of the same corridors and share the same rate of on-time performance (71%). PTM and CCT have much lower rates of on-time performance (64% and 54%, respectively) and late running (30% and 43%, respectively). Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 16

17 Figure 15: Schedule Adherence by Route (Spring 2014) Route On Time Early Late % 9% 18% % 0% 39% % 16% 18% % 4% 42% % 7% 5% % 12% 11% % 12% 9% % 6% 24% % 3% 26% % 0% 29% % 4% 28% % 0% 39% % 15% 43% % 2% 21% % 7% 36% % 9% 31% % 8% 37% % 4% 34% % 6% 40% % 10% 18% % 3% 20% % 6% 16% % 15% 22% % 6% 30% % 6% 45% % 7% 40% % 0% 37% % 8% 29% % 0% 49% % 3% 60% % 6% 30% % 6% 24% Systemwide 64% 6% 30% Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 17

18 Figure 16: On-Time Percentage by Route (Spring 2014) 100% 90% 80% 70% Average = 64% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Figure 17: Average On-Time Performance by Corridor GRTA Corridor Interstate Corridor Average On Time Average Early Average Late NE* I-85 North 74% 9% 17% E** I-20 East 66% 4% 30% S I-85 & I-75 South 65% 8% 27% W I-20 West 59% 5% 36% N I-75 North 56% 4% 41% Systemwide*** 64% 6% 30% *Excludes Routes 400, 408, and 410 **Excludes Route 428 ***Excludes Routes 400, 408, 410, and 428 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 18

19 Figure 18: On-Time Performance by Provider On Time Early Late ACL 71% 9% 20% GCT 71% 7% 21% CCT 54% 3% 43% PTM 64% 6% 30% ACL = American Coach Lines; GCT = Gwinnett County Transit; PTM = Professional Transit Management; CCT = Cobb Community Transit Real-Time Schedule Information With plans to implement real-time information systems, Xpress is on track to improve its image and ease of use among current and potential riders. For those already comfortable with riding transit, knowing whether or not a bus is delayed allows riders to better manage their time. For potential riders, access to real-time information minimizes the uncertainty associated with trying a new service. A before and after study on the effects of real-time information displays found a 20% reduction in riders perceived waiting time (Dziekan & Kottenhoff, 2007). Considering its ability to improve the quality and image of transit services, addition of real-time information systems will attract additional ridership and improve customer satisfaction with Xpress service. Interagency Transfers Interagency transfer patters from a three-month period between October and December 2013 were used to calculate average daily transfers between area agencies. As shown in Figure 19 below, a weekday average of more than 1,000 transfers occur from and to Xpress services, which accounts for nearly 12% of Xpress average daily ridership. In addition, approximately 99% of all transfers from or to Xpress occur with the MARTA System, with MARTA rail transfers making up the vast majority (approximately 85%). A more detailed analysis of transfer patterns is shown in the on-board survey discussion. Figure 19: Interagency Transfers From Xpress to: Xpress MARTA Bus MARTA Rail GCT CCT Total To Xpress from: Xpress MARTA Bus MARTA Rail GCT CCT Total Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 19

20 Historical Trends The annual ridership trends for total boardings, revenue hours, miles, costs, and farebox revenue was examined between 2009 and 2013, as shown in Figure 20. According to this analysis, service units, cost, and farebox revenues all increased over the five-year period. At the same time, ridership declined by 15.9%. As a result, service has become more cost efficient but also less cost effective in terms of operating cost per passenger and average subsidy per passenger. Figure 20: Operating Trends Operating Data % Change Ridership 2,110,419 2,139,850 2,299,098 2,316,005 1,773, % Revenue Hours 82,503 89,875 93, , , % Revenue Miles 2,051,852 2,273,343 2,382,321 2,670,200 2,632, % Operating Costs $14,660,391 $15,833,784 $17,487,975 $20,858,957 $16,406, % Farebox Revenue $5,375,504 $5,032,814 $6,197,694 $7,107,738 $6,932, % Performance Indicators Cost Efficiency Operating Cost per Revenue Hour Operating Cost per Revenue Mile Cost Effectiveness $ $ $ $ $ % $7.14 $6.96 $7.34 $7.81 $ % Operating Cost per Passenger $6.95 $7.40 $7.61 $9.01 $ % Farebox Recovery Ratio 36.67% 31.79% 35.44% 34.08% 42.26% 15.2% Average Fare per Passenger $2.55 $2.35 $2.70 $3.07 $ % Average Subsidy per Passenger Service Effectiveness Passengers per Revenue Hour $4.40 $5.05 $4.91 $5.94 $ % % Passengers per Revenue Mile % Service Speed % Source: National Transit Database (NTD) Note: Farebox Revenue includes Commuter Bus service only Overall, the number of revenue hours and revenue miles increased substantially over the five-year period as a result of service increases between 2009 and The farebox recovery ratio has hovered in the mid-30% to low 40% range, which is excellent for a commuter-based system. Figure 21 and Figure 22 illustrate the historical ridership and productivity changes. Ridership dropped dramatically in 2013 compared with previous years, despite increases in service in the previous four years. In turn, productivity has continued to decrease as well. Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 20

21 Figure 21: Annual Ridership ( ) 2,400,000 2,300,000 2,200,000 2,299,098 2,316,005 2,100,000 2,000,000 2,110,419 2,139,850 1,900,000 1,800,000 1,700,000 1,600,000 Ridership 1,773, Source: National Transit Database (NTD) Figure 22: Passengers per Revenue Hour ( ) Passenger per Revenue Hour Source: National Transit Database (NTD) Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 21

22 Contract Service Providers Xpress services are operated by four different contracted operators. GCT and ACL operate service in Gwinnett County and CCT operates service in Cobb County. The fourth contractor, PTM, operates service in all twelve counties, including through Cobb and Gwinnett Counties. Figure 23 summarizes which operator is responsible for each route. The multiple contractor service delivery model has benefits, but also introduces challenges to both operations staff and to customers. Some challenges include: Deadhead Costs Deadhead is an industry term of out-of-service travel to/from the beginning or end of a route. Xpress routes are not assigned to contractors with an eye to controlling overall deadhead costs. Street Supervision Costs Four different contractors necessitate four different street supervision staff to respond to incidents. This requirement increases the overall cost of contracted operations. Different Fares Both Gwinnett and Cobb Counties have maintained control of fares on Xpress routes, leading to situations where fares for shorter-distance trips in the same freeway corridor are higher than longer-distance trips. Moreover, fare media that are valid on some Xpress routes are not valid on others, which can be infuriating for customers. Customer Confusion In addition to different fare media acceptance rules by contractor, there are several other practices that aid customer confusion. Different contractors create different customer expectations. CCT operators stop at every stop, whether it is an Xpress stop or not, whereas other operators do not. Most routes operate with over-the-road coaches featuring Xpress logos. However, several routes operate with traditional transit vehicles featuring contractor decals as opposed to Xpress logos, which may confuse customers. Finally, when buses break down, a non-xpress bus may be substituted, which can confuse potential patrons. Facility Overhead Four different garages are used for the service. While multiple garages can be beneficial in reducing deadhead costs, it also increases the amount of overhead necessary to operate each facility. For instance, separate parts inventories must be kept. Also, rather than having a systemwide spare ratio, spare vehicles must be kept at every facility, which increases fleet size requirements without necessarily benefiting customers. Fuel Costs Fuel is a major cost component of providing Xpress service. Each contractor purchases fuel separately. Pooling fuel purchases could give GRTA greater leverage in negotiating more favorable fuel rates. GRTA Staff Time Four different contracts with four different reporting requirements and terms requires significantly more staff resources to verify and oversee each contract. GRTA s overhead costs are higher due to additional oversight requirements. Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 22

23 Figure 23: Xpress Route Contractor Route Description Contractor* 400 Cumming to North Springs and Downtown ACL 408 Doraville to Johns Creek Parkway GCT 410 Sugarloaf Mills to Lindbergh MARTA Station GCT 411 Hamilton Mill/Mall of Georgia to Midtown Atlanta ACL 412 Sugarloaf Mills to Downtown Atlanta GCT 413 Hamilton Mill to Downtown Atlanta ACL 416 Dacula to Downtown Atlanta ACL 418 Snellville to Downtown Atlanta GCT 420 West Conyers to Downtown Atlanta PTM 421 West Conyers to Midtown Atlanta PTM 422 Panola Road to Downtown Atlanta PTM 423 East Conyers/Panola Road to Midtown Atlanta PTM 424 Stone Mountain to Downtown Atlanta PTM 425 East Conyers to Downtown Atlanta PTM 428 Panola Road to Perimeter Center PTM 430 McDonough to Downtown/Midtown Atlanta PTM 431 Stockbridge to Midtown Atlanta PTM 432 Stockbridge to Downtown Atlanta PTM 440 Hampton/Jonesboro to Downtown Atlanta PTM 441 Jonesboro to Midtown Atlanta PTM 442 Riverdale to Downtown Atlanta PTM 450 Newnan to Downtown Atlanta PTM 451** Newnan to Midtown Atlanta PTM 455** Union City to Downtown Atlanta PTM 460 Douglasville to Downtown Atlanta PTM 461/462 Douglasville to Downtown/Midtown Atlanta PTM 470 Hiram/Powder Springs to Downtown Atlanta CCT 475 Mableton to Downtown Atlanta CCT 477 Hiram/Powder Springs to Downtown/Midtown Atlanta CCT 480 Acworth to Downtown Atlanta CCT 481 Town Center/Big Shanty to Midtown CCT 490 Canton-Woodstock to Downtown Atlanta PTM 491 Woodstock to Midtown Atlanta PTM *ACL = American Coach Lines; GCT = Gwinnett County Transit; PTM = Professional Transit Management; CCT = Cobb Community Transit Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 23

24 PLANNING DOCUMENT REVIEW This section provides a summary of relevant planning documents to identify regional goals, policies, and actions that relate to Xpress transit service. All the included documents generally prioritize strategic investment decision-making to yield the highest rate of return. Utilizing effective performance monitoring and identifying opportunities to enhance transit service allow operators like Xpress to become major players in both regional and state mobility goals. GDOT Statewide Strategic Transportation Plan, Purpose: Provide comprehensive direction for transportation investment projects and programs in the State of Georgia under a fiscally constrained budget. Provide a framework for regular progress reports that summarize and monitor current and future transportation investments. The Statewide Strategic Transportation Plan (SSTP) is the official, comprehensive transportation plan for the State of Georgia, necessary to support implementation of the state s transportation goals. The plan provides a framework to manage the performance of existing and future transportation projects to achieve the highest rate of return on funded investments. The goals of the plan include: Improving the movement of people and goods across and within the state Expanding the state s role as a major logistics hub Leveraging public-private partnerships and improving regional coordination Increasing safety and security on Georgia s transportation facilities Caring for and building cost-effective and efficient transportation assets Local and regional partnerships will be critical for the future of transit planning, which will be able to expand access to employment and activity centers, mitigate congestion costs, and support efficient development patterns. Implementation: Funding is earmarked for new dedicated managed lanes throughout the Atlanta region, including I-85 in Gwinnett/DeKalb Counties, I-75 in Henry County, and I-75 in Cobb/Cherokee Counties. This is relevant for Xpress services, since the implementation of additional managed lanes will allow the opportunity to increase the speed of transit service versus general purpose traffic and, in turn, enhance the attractiveness of service for passengers. Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 24

25 GRTA Strategic Plan, FY Purpose: Support and implement the Governor s strategic goals and align GRTA s goals with updated state legislation. Set internal strategic goals with focus on two major priorities: regional commuter transit service and transportation performance management, both necessary to effectively leverage GRTA s assets. The Strategic Plan established a series of seven goals to achieve in the Atlanta region: Reduce the burden of congestion Increase number of reliable commutes Increase access to employment centers within a 45-minute morning and afternoon commute Increase Xpress cost-effectiveness while maintaining or improving the level of service Increase Georgia s rural and human services transportation (RHST) cost-effectiveness Improve first and last-mile connectivity to freight and logistics centers Remove freight bottlenecks on regional highways To achieve these goals, the plan focuses on prioritizing Xpress service and monitoring transportation performance on a regular basis to ensure effective use of agency resources. The goal of Xpress service is to provide long-distance commute alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles and reduce congestion. Additional goals include increasing ridership, optimizing service in managed lanes, and creating more strategic partnerships throughout the region. Improved service planning, preventative maintenance, capital improvement programming, marketing, customer service are specific strategies to remove 1.5 million cars from the most congested roads to lower statewide operating costs and increase commuter savings. Implementation: GRTA has collaborated with regional partners to develop an Atlanta Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) framework, which aligns with GRTA s mobility goals using a performance-based investment allocation process. In addition, GRTA s Xpress service continues to remove vehicles from regional highways and provide access to major employment centers. Providing cost-effective, reliable transit service will continue to attract riders throughout the region. ARC Plan 2040, 2014 Update Purpose: Financially constrained, long-range transportation plan for the 18-county Atlanta Regional Council (ARC) planning boundary with a heavy sustainability focus. The plan serves as both the regional transportation plan and regional comprehensive plan, which amounts to $58.6 billion in transportation projects. Atlanta has become one of the fastest-growing regions in the nation, and another 2.6 million people are expected to be living in the region by 2040 a 50% increase from 2010 figures. The Atlanta region has grown substantially due to migration to the southeastern U.S. over the last four decades and faces challenges with decentralized growth as a result of abundant highway construction. Growth in Gwinnett and Fulton County will account for nearly one-third of the region s population growth. Current travel demand is concentrated within counties closest to the Atlanta Central Business District (Fulton, Cobb, DeKalb, and Gwinnett Counties). However, as Figure 24 shows, travel demand is expected to change dramatically, increasing in complexity as population and Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 25

26 employment increases throughout the region. Particular demand to and from activity centers on the south side of the region emerge, while future suburban employment centers will attract trips from all areas of the region. Figure 24: Regional Trip Demand Change Source: ARC Plan 2040 Although a regional sales tax referendum for transit funding failed in 2012, there is still $4.1 billion dedicated to transit investment in the RTP. Additionally, an ARC policy committee called the Regional Transit Committee approved a three year work program, which directly affects GRTA. The program includes: Development of a regional trip planning tool Unified bus stop signage in Downtown and Midtown Atlanta Unified bus stop and bus route numbering scheme Development of a regional fare policy and universal fare products Strategies for coordinated marketing efforts Identifying priority bus corridors with appropriate capital and operating improvement Developing a regional paratransit eligibility and coordination framework Implementation: The ARC Plan 2040 includes specific regional transit-related projects, including the Georgia Multimodal Passenger Terminal, which would greatly benefit Xpress Downtown operations and passenger convenience. In addition, the Plan s FY TIP includes funding for Xpress operating assistance, a new park-and-ride facility in Rockdale County near Salem Road, new vehicles, and new managed highway lanes to support transit speed and reliability. Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 26

27 POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT DENSITY When it comes to typical fixed-route transit service, population and employment density tend to demonstrate the greatest influence on the demand for those services. However, since Xpress is a park-and-ride based commuter express service, it is not as dependent on population density. Park-and-rides are utilized to concentrate potential riders from low density areas, creating demand to support service. Commuter bus service, however, is dependent on areas of high employment density or other significant destinations that create a need for the service and provide potential ridership. Existing and projected population and employment density for the Atlanta region are illustrated in the maps on the following pages. This information identifies areas where there is existing demand for express services and how that demand may change in the future based on projected growth in the region. The maps are split into corridors based on existing Xpress service, displaying six different areas within the Atlanta region. The extents of the maps vary and occasionally overlap, so there are some locations that appear in multiple maps. As mentioned previously, population density does not necessarily influence where Xpress service is provided in the same way that it influences local bus service, so there may be areas of high population density that are not currently served by express buses or areas of low population density that are. For example, Figure 25 illustrates the northern corridor of Xpress service, which provides service to Canton, where there is minimal population density. Much of the population growth projected for the region is identified in and around already-developed centers where there is existing Xpress service. There are three locations not currently served by Xpress bus, however, that show significant projected population growth. Gainesville, Griffin, and Carrolton are fairly low density centers today, but are projected to grow to a population density much greater over the next 15 years. These cities are located in the northeast (Figure 26), south (Figure 28), and west (Figure 29) corridors, respectively. Xpress serves those who are commuting to work from the suburban areas of the region. For this reason, Xpress services are dependent on ridership demand generated by significant employment centers, which, in the Atlanta region, have historically been Downtown and Midtown. As the region has grown and continues to grow, employment has expanded to a number of different satellite centers outside of Downtown and Midtown. Many of these new employment centers are projected to increase in both population and employment density, creating potential new destinations for Xpress services. Within the northern service corridor shown in Figure 37 and Figure 43, there is a fair amount of projected employment growth spread along existing Xpress routes. Cumberland and Marietta are two significant and expanding employment centers not currently served by Xpress. Marietta hosts a single park-and-ride lot for regional trips and has local service provided by CCT. Xpress service passes through Cumberland, but does not stop there. CCT regional service does service Cumberland. The northeast corridor, shown in Figure 38 and Figure 44, demonstrates a similar growth pattern, with employment expanding along existing service routes. Notable employment centers along this corridor include Perimeter, Northpoint, Norcross/Peachtree Corners, and Gwinnett Place/Sugarloaf Mills. Perimeter and Sugarloaf Mills are currently served by Xpress, while the other locations are not. The area just north of Northpoint, the city of Norcross, and the city of Lawrenceville just east of Gwinnett Place are all identified as locations with significant projected employment growth. Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 27

28 The eastern corridor is not projected to have as much employment growth as the north and northeast, illustrated in Figure 39 and Figure 45. However, the areas around Emory University just east of Midtown as well as the city of Decatur are two significant and expanding employment centers. Both locations are served by MARTA buses, and Decatur has a MARTA rail station. The city of Decatur offers a number of transportation options to area residents and employees, but may not be a large enough commuter destination to support express bus service. Emory University has a limited and congested road network serving it and has developed both local and park-and-ride based service to address congestion. In addition, there have been a number of studies considering various enhanced transit options to better connect the Emory University/CDC area, but none have come to fruition. The southern corridor boasts the state s largest employment center, the Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport. As illustrated in Figure 40 and Figure 46, the airport area is the largest and most significant employment zone along this corridor with multiple Xpress routes passing by, but not providing service to it. The airport is connected to MARTA rail and has its own internal transit. Clayton County (the airport and southward) has passed a referendum that imposes a sales tax to support renewed MARTA service (including potential rail extension). Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 28

29 Figure 25: Population Density (2015): North Corridor Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 29

30 Figure 26: Population Density (2015): Northeast Corridor Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 30

31 Figure 27: Population Density (2015): East Corridor Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 31

32 Figure 28: Population Density (2015): South Corridor Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 32

33 Figure 29: Population Density (2015): West Corridor Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 33

34 Figure 30: Population Density (2015): Downtown Existing Conditions Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 34

35 Figure 31: Projected Population Density (2030): North Corridor Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 35

36 Figure 32: Projected Population Density (2030): Northeast Corridor Existing Conditions Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 36

37 Figure 33: Projected Population Density (2030): East Corridor Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 37

38 Figure 34: Projected Population Density (2030): South Corridor Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 38

39 Figure 35: Projected Population Density (2030): West Corridor Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 39

40 Figure 36: Projected Population Density (2030): Downtown Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 40

41 Figure 37: Employment Density (2015): North Corridor Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 41

42 Figure 38: Employment Density (2015): Northeast Corridor Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 42

43 Figure 39: Employment Density (2015): East Corridor Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 43

44 Figure 40: Employment Density (2015): South Corridor Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 44

45 Figure 41: Employment Density (2015): West Corridor Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 45

46 Figure 42: Employment Density (2015): Downtown Existing Conditions Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 46

47 Figure 43: Projected Employment Density (2030): North Corridor Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 47

48 Figure 44: Projected Employment Density (2030): Northeast Corridor Existing Conditions Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 48

49 Figure 45: Projected Employment Density (2030): East Corridor Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 49

50 Figure 46: Projected Employment Density (2030): South Corridor Existing Conditions Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 50

51 Figure 47: Projected Employment Density (2030): West Corridor Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 51

52 Figure 48: Projected Employment Density (2030): Downtown Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 52

53 ON-BOARD SURVEY An on-board survey was conducted in April Surveys were distributed on every trip on each Xpress route over the course of the two-week study period. A total of 4,830 surveys were received, although some surveys did not have complete responses. There were 4,204 unique survey respondents and 626 surveys that were filled out after the respondent completed a survey previously. There were 9,569 boardings observed during the survey period. Assuming that most Xpress riders board twice each day (once in the morning and once in the afternoon), the survey response rate was 88%. The number of surveys included in the analysis of each question is denoted as n in each figure. Survey Overview The survey response was highest in the morning, which is common for surveys of commuteoriented service. Although respondents were asked to take the survey each time they were on a trip with a surveyor, many riders do not typically take the survey a second time. In total, 62% of responses were on morning service (Figure 49). Figure 49: Survey Results by Time of Day Afternoon 38% Morning 62% Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 53

54 Figure 50 shows response by route. Overall, the number of surveys was sufficient to ensure a 2% margin of error at a confidence level of 99%. Figure 50: Total Number of Surveys by Route / / Number of Surveys Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 54

55 Figure 51 shows response rate by route using the number of average daily boardings for each route. Nearly all routes had a response rate of more than 40%, while Route 422 had the lowest response rate, at 25%. Figure 51: Response Rate by Route Percent of Surveys 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% / / % 26% 54% 44% 37% 55% 45% 62% 48% 57% 63% 32% 40% 59% 55% 44% 52% 47% 45% 64% 61% 50% 47% 63% 52% 47% 60% 52% 53% 36% 75% 81% Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 55

56 Trip Profile The survey asked several questions about the trip that was in progress during the time of the survey. For these questions, all responses were included in the analysis regardless of whether the respondent had taken the survey previously. Trip Purpose Figure 52 shows the type of trip origin and destination location. Over 90% of Xpress riders started or ended their trip at work or home. A small percentage of riders, 5%, were traveling to or from college/university. Few riders reported traveling to or from a destination for school/daycare, personal business, or between two non-home locations (indicated below as other ). Figure 52: Trip Origin 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 91% 5% 2% 2% 1% 0% 0% Origin and Destination Patterns Survey respondents were asked to provide the address or intersection of their trip origin and destination. The purpose of this question was to determine where customers were actually traveling between, rather than just which park-and-ride and bus stop they used. For the purpose of the analysis, morning destination locations and afternoon origin locations were considered non-home destinations. It was assumed that morning origins and afternoon destinations were home locations. While the majority of customer trips ended in Downtown or Midtown Atlanta, there were three concentrations of non-home destinations outside of those areas, indicating that customers were transferring to other transit services. Concentrations of non-home destinations outside of Downtown occurred in the Lenox Mall/Buckhead, Lindbergh, and Dunwoody areas, all of which are served by MARTA rail or bus. Lindbergh is also served by Xpress Route 410, but the majority of survey respondents who listed this area as a non-home destination took the survey while riding other routes. Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 56

57 Travel Mode Survey respondents were asked what mode of travel they used to reach the first bus or train in their trip and what mode they would use to reach their final destination from the bus or train stop. As Figure 53 shows, the most common mode of travel to park-and-rides was driving alone, followed by getting dropped off, walking, and driving with others. Figure 53: Travel Mode to/from Park-and-Ride 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0% Biked 14% Dropped Off/ Picked Up 75% 3% 1% 6% Drove Alone Drove With Other Walked n = 4696 Figure 54 shows that the majority of passengers (77%) walk from the bus to their final destination Downtown. An additional 15% drive, while 4% are dropped off or picked up, 1% take a shuttle, and 4% report other. Figure 54: Travel Mode to/from Downtown 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0% Biked 4% Dropped Off/ Picked Up 77% 15% 4% 1% Drove Alone Other Shuttle Walked n = 4495 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 57

58 Survey respondents were asked how they would otherwise make their trip that day without Xpress service (Figure 55). The majority of respondents (67%) said they would drive alone, and 17% said they would drive to MARTA. An additional 6% said they would carpool, 4% would not make the trip at all, 3% chose other, and 1% chose taxi and vanpool. Figure 55: Mode if Xpress Service Was Not Available 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 67% Drive Alone 17% Drive to MARTA 6% 3% 1% 1% Carpool Other Taxi Vanpool Would not make this trip 4% n = 4707 Fare Payment When asked how they paid for the trip (Figure 56), a third of riders (32%) reported using a 10- Trip or 20-Ride pass. An additional quarter of all riders reported using a 31-Day pass (24%) or Breeze Card (23%). An additional 14% of riders reported paying with cash for the round-trip, and 7% paid with cash one-way. Figure 56: Fare Payment Medium 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 32% 24% 23% 10 or 20-Ride Pass 31-Day Pass Breeze Card Cash One-Way Cash Round-Trip 7% 14% n = 4740 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 58

59 Figure 57 shows how survey respondents purchased their fares. The largest group (35%) reported that their fare was purchased through an employer, with 23% purchasing their fare from a Breeze vending machine, and 22% from online Xpress. Only 10% purchased their fare through online Breeze, 6% purchased their fare through GCT, 3% through CCT, and 2% by mail. Figure 57: Fare Purchase Method 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 23% Breeze Vending Machine 3% 35% 0% 6% 2% 10% CCT Employer Fax GCT Mail Online Breeze 22% Online Xpress n = 3900 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 59

60 Rider Profile The survey also asked a number of rider characteristic questions from respondents. The analysis of these questions excludes repeat surveys and includes only the first survey completed by a passenger. Riding Characteristics Figure 58 shows how long respondents have been riding Xpress. The most common response was one to five years (47%). A quarter of respondents (25%) reported riding for more than five years, while 15% have been riding for 6 months to a year, and 13% have been riding for less than six months (13%). Typically, systems average about 20% new riders annually, which suggests that Xpress has more turnover than average. Systemwide ridership can be increased by reducing turnover. In addition, the amount of turnover highlights the importance of the marketing program to continually attract new riders. Figure 58: Length of Time Riding Xpress 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 25% 47% 15% 13% More than 5 years 1 to 5 years 6 months to 1 year Less than 6 months n = 4137 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 60

61 Figure 59 shows how frequently survey respondents ride Xpress service. The majority of riders (60%) ride every weekday. Another fifth of all riders use Xpress four days a week, 11% ride three days a week, 5% ride two days a week, and 2% ride one day per week or less. Figure 59: Frequency Riding 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1% 1% Less than once per week Respondents were asked whether they would have had a car available for the trip they were making (Figure 60). A large majority of respondents (75%) reported that they would have a car available, while only 12% said they would not. Another 10% reported they would, but it would be inconvenient. This underscores the importance of Xpress service for congestion reduction; the majority of riders are riding by choice and would likely drive otherwise. This finding was also supported by the results of a previous question which asked how respondents would make their trip if Xpress service was not available. Most respondents reported that they would utilize autobased modes. Figure 60: Availability of a Car 5% 11% 1 day 2 days 3 days 4 days 5 days Yes but inconvenient 10% No 12% 21% n = % Yes 78% n = 4081 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 61

62 For most riders (69%), their employer does not pay any of the cost of the fare (Figure 61). Close to a third (31%) reported that their employer does pay some or all of the fare. Figure 61: Employer Contribution to Fare Does pay 31% Does not pay 69% Figure 62 shows which types of passes employers are buying or subsidizing by the percent of total employer-purchased passes. A 31-Day pass is the most common fare type purchased by employers, followed by 10- or 20-Ride passes. Figure 62: Employer-Purchased Passes by Fare Type 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% n = % 10 or 20-Ride Pass 31-Day Pass Breeze Card Cash One-Way Cash Round-Trip n = 1489 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 62

63 Satisfaction and Reason Riding Overall satisfaction with Xpress service is high (Figure 63). Nearly half of all riders (47%) reported that if they were asked to talk about riding Xpress they would say I love it. An additional 35% would say I like it, and 17% would say It is ok. Only 1% would say I don t like it, and 0% would say I will never ride again. Figure 63: Description of Satisfaction with Xpress Service 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 47% 35% 17% 1% 0% I love it I like it It is ok I don't like it I will never ride again n = 4117 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 63

64 Figure 64 and Figure 65 show detailed results of survey questions asking respondents to rate their satisfaction with different aspects of Xpress service on a scale of 1 ( Poor ) to 5 ( Excellent ). Overall, customer satisfaction with all attributes of Xpress service is high. The attributes that were rated Above Average (most ratings of 4 or 5) were cleanliness of the bus, safe operation of buses, and driver courtesy. The aspects of service with the poorest ratings were customer service, ontime performance ( buses arriving and departing on time ), the XpressGA.com website, and cost of service. Safety and security of park-and-ride lots had the poorest rating in terms of satisfaction with park-and-ride lot attributes. Figure 64: Satisfaction with Xpress Service Attributes Overall Satisfication Availability of Schedule Info Customer Service XpressGA.com Website Cost of Service Driver Courtesy Safe Operation of Buses Cleaniness of the Bus Comfort of the Bus Interior Ride Quality of the Bus Comfort of the Bus Interior Ride Quality of the Bus Adequate Notice of Upcoming Stops Directness of the Route Buses Arriving/Departing on Time 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Poor Below Average Good Above Average Excellent Figure 65: Satisfaction with Park-and-Ride Lot Attributes Cleaniness of the Park-and-Ride Lots Availability of Parking at Park-and-Ride Lots Safety/Security of Park-and-Ride Lots 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Poor Below Average Good Above Average Excellent Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 64

65 Additional analysis was conducted to examine the correlation between satisfaction with specific attributes of service and overall satisfaction with service using bivariate correlation analysis. 2 If an attribute is uncorrelated with overall satisfaction, it is assumed that the attribute does not have a significant influence on overall satisfaction and is thus relatively unimportant to riders. In contrast, if an attribute is highly correlated with overall satisfaction, it is assumed that the attribute does affect overall satisfaction and is more important to riders. By measuring the correlation of each attribute with overall satisfaction, the attributes can be ranked in order of importance. To derive the importance, Pearson correlation coefficients are calculated to measure the linear dependence between the performance rating of each service attribute and the overall satisfaction rating. Next, the ratio between the correlation coefficient of each attribute and the median correlation coefficient is calculated, and the median coefficient is given an index score of 100. Service attributes with higher scores than 100 are more correlated with overall satisfaction and are considered more important. Attributes with lower scores than 100 are less correlated and less important. Each service attribute is plotted using its weekday importance and performance scores in Figure 66. The division between lower importance and higher importance is set at 100, which is the median importance score. For performance, the division is set at 4.1, which is the mean rating on overall satisfaction. These divisions create four quadrants: High importance/high performance: Attributes in the high importance/high performance quadrant are items that Xpress is performing well on and that riders feel are important. Attributes in this category are safe operation of buses, ride quality of the bus, driver courtesy, and comfort of the bus interior. Low importance/high performance: Attributes in the low importance/high performance also receive high marks, but are less important to riders. In some cases, attributes in this quadrant may be rated low in terms of performance because Xpress is already doing a very good job on them and riders are taking them for granted. Attributes in this category are availability of parking at park-and-ride lots, directness of routes, cleanliness of park-and-ride lots, and adequate notice of upcoming stops. High importance/low performance: Attributes in the high importance/low performance quadrant are the most important issues for Xpress to address if there is a desire to improve overall rider satisfaction. Attributes falling in this category included customer service, availability of schedule info, XpressGA.com website, and cost of service. Low importance/low performance: The low importance/low performance attributes are low performing but also have low importance, so improving them should be a lesser priority for Xpress. Safety/security of park-and-ride lots and buses arriving/departing on time fall into this category. 2 Aaron Weinstein, Customer Satisfaction Among Transit Riders: How Customers Rank the Relative Importance of Various Service Attributes, Transportation Research Record 1735 (2000): Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 65

66 Performance Existing Conditions Figure 66: Importance and Performance of Service 4.6 Low Importance High Performance High Importance High Performance 4.4 Availability of parking at P&R Lots Cleaniness of bus 4.2 Cleaniness of P&R lots Directness of route Adequate notice of upcoming stops Driver courtesy Comfort of bus interior Safe operation of buses Ride quality of the bus 4.0 Safety/Security of P&R Lots Cost of service Availability of schedule info 3.8 Buses arriving/departing on time XpressGA.com website 3.6 Customer Service Low Importance Low Performance High Importance Low Performance Importance Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 66

67 Detailed Evaluation of Customer Satisfaction Several cross tabulations were performed to identify specific trends related to customer satisfaction. These results were not tested individually for statistical significance. Riders were asked to rate their overall satisfaction with Xpress services on a scale from 1 ( Poor ) to 5 ( Excellent ), as previously described in Figure 65. When the results are broken down by service provider (Figure 67 below), there is some variability in ratings, with service operated by GCT having significantly lower satisfaction ratings than the other providers. Figure 67: Satisfaction with Xpress Service by Provider ACL CCT GCT PTM 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Poor Below Average Good Above Average Excellent ACL = American Coach Lines; GCT = Gwinnett County Transit; PTM = Professional Transit Management; CCT = Cobb Community Transit Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 67

68 Figure 68 shows satisfaction with Xpress service for riders using ACL routes. Overall, customer service had the lowest customer satisfaction of any Xpress service attribute, with more than 10% of ACL respondents ranking customer service as Poor or Below Average. However, the high ranking of driver courtesy suggests that dissatisfaction with customer service is not a result of interactions with drivers and instead relates to interactions with other types of staff. After customer service, satisfaction with the XpressGA.com website had the next highest proportion of Poor and Below Average rankings in terms of customer satisfaction attributes. Since the XpressGA.com website is the means by which most ACL riders obtain passenger information, GRTA should prioritize user-friendliness of the website to increase customer satisfaction. On-time performance was third in terms of the number of Poor or Below Average customer satisfaction responses. ACL provides service on four routes in the Xpress network, and travel time variability in Downtown Atlanta on Route 400, 413, and 416 likely contributes to a negative impression of on-time performance, with travel times in Downtown takes as much as 8, 16, and 25 minutes longer than scheduled, respectively. Additionally, though Route 411 serves Midtown, it has below average on-time performance compared to other routes in the Xpress network, with only 54% of trips departing on time from scheduled timepoints. Figure 68: Satisfaction with Xpress Service Attributes ACL Routes Customer Service XPressGa.com Website Buses Arriving/Departing on Time Adequate Notice of Upcoming Stops Availabilty of Schedule Info Safety/Security at Park-and-Ride Lots Directness of the Route Cost of Service Driver Courtesy Comfort of the Bus Interior Ride Quality of the Bus Overall Satisfaction Cleanliness of the Bus Cleanliness of Park-and-Ride Lots Safe Operation of Buses Availability of Parking at Park-and-Ride Lots 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Poor Below average Good Above average Excellent Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 68

69 Figure 69 shows satisfaction with Xpress service for riders on CCT routes. Customer service had the highest proportion of Poor and Below Average responses. As with ACL routes, the high ranking of driver courtesy suggests that dissatisfaction with customer service is not a result of interactions with drivers and instead relates to interactions with other types of staff. In addition to customer service, CCT routes had two categories that were ranked Poor or Below Average by more than 10% of respondents buses arriving/departing on time and cost of service. CCT operates five routes in the Xpress network, four of which provide service in Downtown Atlanta. On Route 470, 475, 477, and 480, travel time variability in Downtown Atlanta likely contributes to the negative impression of on-time performance, with travel times in Downtown taking as much as 16, 23, 13, and 13 minutes longer than scheduled, respectively. Route 481 does not serve Downtown Atlanta and instead provides service from Town Center/Big Shanty to Midtown. However, this route has the worst on-time performance systemwide, with only 37% of trips operating on time, further contributing to customer dissatisfaction on CCT routes. The low ranking of cost of service is likely due to that fact that CCT routes cost more to ride than routes operated by ACL and PTM. A one-way cash fare in the Green Zone and Blue Zone costs $3 and $4 respectively, but a one-way cash fare on CCT routes is $5. Though 31-Day passes on Blue Zone and CCT routes both cost $125, 31-Day passes on Green Zone routes are $100 a 20% savings compared to the CCT cost. Figure 69: Satisfaction with Xpress Service Attributes CCT Routes Customer Service Buses Arriving/Departing on Time Cost of Service XPressGa.com Website Ride Quality of the Bus Comfort of the Bus Interior Availabilty of Schedule Info Directness of the Route Cleanliness of the Bus Safety/Security at Park-and-Ride Lots Adequate Notice of Upcoming Stops Driver Courtesy Cleanliness of Park-and-Ride Lots Safe Operation of Buses Overall Satisfaction Availability of Parking at Park-and-Ride Lots 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Poor Below average Good Above average Excellent Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 69

70 Figure 70 shows customer satisfaction attributes for routes operated by GCT. While customer service ranked highest in terms of the proportion of Poor and Below Average responses for ACL, CCT, and PTM services, GCT services differ in that dissatisfaction with cost of service far outranked other attributes, with 27% of passengers dissatisfied with the cost of service. Low satisfaction with this attribute is likely due to high fare costs on GCT routes compared to routes operated by other providers. Differences in cost are especially pronounced for a 31-Day pass. 31-Day passes in GCT Zone 1 and Zone 2 are $130 and $180, respectively. In contrast, 31- Day passes in the Green Zone are $100, and Blue Zone and CCT 31-Day passes both cost $125. Passengers in GCT Zone 2 spend $660 more annually on 31-Day Passes than riders in the Blue Zone or using CCT services. Customer service had the next highest proportion of responses ranked Poor or Below Average. Similar to ACL and CCT routes, the high ranking of driver courtesy suggests that dissatisfaction with customer service relates to interactions with staff besides drivers. Additionally, more than 10% of responses related to adequate notice of upcoming stops were rated Poor or Below Average for GCT services. Route 408 is operated by GCT and is one of three Xpress routes that serve neither Downtown nor Midtown. Route 408 is also unique in the Xpress network in that it operates more like local service, serving multiple stops along the route rather than limited stop express service. Passenger experience on Route 408 is likely a contributing factor to GCT s poor rankings in terms of adequate notice of upcoming stops. More than 10% of responses related to ride quality of the bus were also ranked Poor or Below Average by GCT riders. Overall, GCT provides service on four routes in the Xpress network. On two of these routes Route 408 and Route 410 GCT uses Orion coaches with GCT decals as opposed to the over-the-road coaches with Xpress logos used on most other routes in the network. Riders on these routes likely experience lower levels of comfort compared to passengers, especially for long trips. Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 70

71 Figure 70: Satisfaction with Xpress Service Attributes GCT Routes Cost of Service Customer Service Adequate Notice of Upcoming Stops Ride Quality of the Bus Buses Arriving/Departing on Time Comfort of the Bus Interior XPressGa.com Website Availabilty of Schedule Info Safety/Security at Park-and-Ride Lots Directness of the Route Overall Satisfaction Driver Courtesy Safe Operation of Buses Cleanliness of Park-and-Ride Lots Cleanliness of the Bus Availability of Parking at Park-and-Ride Lots 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Poor Below average Good Above average Excellent Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 71

72 PTM operates the remaining 20 of 33 total routes in the Xpress network. As with other providers, customer service ranked poorly in terms of customer satisfaction, though likely due to interactions with staff other than drivers given the relatively high ranking of driver courtesy. On-time performance had the second lowest level of customer satisfaction, with 11% of riders ranking buses arriving/departing on time as Poor or Below Average. With the majority of PTM s services running within Downtown Atlanta (13 of 20 routes), travel time variability in Downtown Atlanta contributes to poor customer satisfaction with on-time performance. Approximately 8% of riders on PTM routes ranked the XPressGA.com website, safety/security at park-and-ride lots, and availability of schedule information as Poor or Below Average. Since approximately half of PTM riders use the website to receive communications, GRTA should consider updating passenger information on the website to increase customer satisfaction. Improving the website will also serve to increase customer satisfaction with the availability of schedule information. In terms of safety/security, Union City Park-and-Ride had the lowest customer satisfaction of all park-and-ride lots (described in Figure 76, Figure 77, and Figure 78 later in this section), including a very poor ranking in terms of safety/security. This park-and-ride lot is served by PTM services only and likely contributes to the poor ranking of safety and security at park-and-ride lots. Figure 71: Satisfaction with Xpress Service Attributes PTM Routes Customer Service Buses Arriving/Departing on Time XPressGa.com Website Safety/Security at Park-and-Ride Lots Availabilty of Schedule Info Directness of the Route Cost of Service Cleanliness of Park-and-Ride Lots Driver Courtesy Adequate Notice of Upcoming Stops Overall Satisfaction Ride Quality of the Bus Comfort of the Bus Interior Availability of Parking at Park-and-Ride Lots Safe Operation of Buses Cleanliness of the Bus 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Poor Below average Good Above average Excellent Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 72

73 Figure 72 shows customer ratings of satisfaction with service by fare zone. Routes that serve both Blue and Green zones were grouped together. The most negative ratings came from riders on routes in GCT Zone 1 and GCT Zone 2, followed by CCT zones. Very few riders in the Blue or Green zones rated their satisfaction with cost of service as Below Average or less. As discussed previously, GCT and CCT fares are typically higher than either Blue or Green Zone fares for daily fares and monthly passes, a likely reason for the significantly lower customer satisfaction especially for GCT routes. Figure 72: Satisfaction with Service by Fare Zone Blue & Green GCT Zone 2 GCT Zone 1 CCT Blue Green 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Poor Below Average Good Above Average Excellent Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 73

74 Figure 73 shows ratings of on-time performance by route. While customers were satisfied with many routes, there is also room for improvement on many others in the system. Route 408 had the worst rating, with 35% of respondents indicating on-time performance as Poor or Below Average. As mentioned previously, Route 408 operates more like local service than commuter express service and is an exception in the Xpress network. While Route 408 has observed on-time performance similar to other routes in the system, the fact that 39% of trips are late while traveling on local streets is likely less acceptable for passengers than buses that are late due to unpredictable highway congestion. Other routes with poor on-time performance satisfaction ratings include Routes 424, 423, 432, 430, and 480. Figure 73: On-Time Performance Satisfaction by Route / % 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Poor Below Average Good Above Average Excellent Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 74

75 Figure 74 shows satisfaction with customer service by route. As previously shown in Figure 66, customer service is an attribute of Xpress service that is important to customers but has low average performance. Customer service satisfaction does not appear to differ dramatically by route. On nearly all routes, more than 10% of customers rated customer service as Poor or Below Average, which the exception of Routes 442, 470, and 491. This likely reflects that fact that satisfaction with customer service may not be correlated with a specific route, but with the agency s customer information and service in general. Figure 74: Satisfaction with Customer Service by Route / % 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Poor Below Average Good Above Average Excellent Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 75

76 Figure 75 shows overall satisfaction with customer service by provider. While PTM had the highest proportion of respondents rating customer service as Poor or Below Average, this provider also had the greatest share of respondents reporting Excellent customer service. CCT had the fewest Poor and Below Average responses. Figure 75: Satisfaction with Customer Service by Contractor PTM GCT CCT ACL 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Poor Below Average Good Above Average Excellent ACL = American Coach Lines; GCT = Gwinnett County Transit; PTM = Professional Transit Management; CCT = Cobb Community Transit Figure 76, Figure 77, and Figure 78 show satisfaction with park-and-ride characteristics for each park-and-ride lot, including cleanliness, availability of parking, and safety/security. Four locations Canton, Doraville, Panola Road, and Union City had consistently lower cleanliness ratings than the other park-and-rides. Union City Park-and-Ride had the lowest satisfaction regarding availability of parking. Passengers also reported safety and security concerns at Canton, Hewatt, Panola Road, Riverdale, Stone Mountain, and Union City. Overall, customer perceptions of the Union City Park-and-Ride appear much more negative than other park-and-ride locations and could impact the number of customers willing to park at this location. Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 76

77 Figure 76: Customer Satisfaction with Cleanliness of Park-and-Ride Lots Acworth BrandsMart Buford Busbee Canton Cumming Dacula Doraville Douglas County MMTC East Conyers Hamilton Mill Hampton Hewatt Hiram Indian Trail Jonesboro Mableton Mall Of GA McDonough Newnan Panola Road Powder Springs Riverdale Snellville Stockbridge Stone Mountain Sugarloaf Mills Town Center/Big Shanty Union City West Conyers West Douglas Woodstock 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Poor Below Average Good Above Average Excellent Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 77

78 Figure 77: Customer Satisfaction with Availability of Parking at Park-and-Ride Lots Acworth BrandsMart Buford Busbee Canton Cumming Dacula Doraville Douglas County MMTC East Conyers Hamilton Mill Hampton Hewatt Hiram Indian Trail Jonesboro Mableton Mall Of GA McDonough Newnan Panola Road Powder Springs Riverdale Snellville Stockbridge Stone Mountain Sugarloaf Mills Town Center/Big Shanty Union City West Conyers West Douglas Woodstock 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Poor Below Average Good Above Average Excellent Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 78

79 Figure 78: Customer Satisfaction with Safety/Security of Park-and-Ride Lots Acworth BrandsMart Buford Busbee Canton Cumming Dacula Doraville Douglas County MMTC East Conyers Hamilton Mill Hampton Hewatt Hiram Indian Trail Jonesboro Mableton Mall Of GA McDonough Newnan Panola Road Powder Springs Riverdale Snellville Stockbridge Stone Mountain Sugarloaf Mills Town Center/Big Shanty Union City West Conyers West Douglas Woodstock 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Poor Below Average Good Above Average Excellent Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 79

80 Figure 79 shows customer satisfaction with safety at park-and-ride lots by route. The purpose of this analysis was to show correlation between routes and any safety issues at specific park-andrides. Interestingly, Route 408, which does not serve any Xpress park-and-ride, had the lowest safety rating, which suggests that Doraville MARTA Station is not seen as safe. Routes 422 and 423 also had relatively low safety ratings and serve the Panola Road Park-and-Ride. Route 451/455, which serves the Union City Park-and-Ride, has the worst satisfaction with perceptions of safety and security at park-and-ride lots, supporting what was shown previously in Figure 78. Figure 79: Satisfaction with Safety/Security at Park-and-Ride Lots by Route / % 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Poor Below Average Good Above Average Excellent Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 80

81 Avoid traffic Convenience of park-and-ride lots Don't drive/ Don't have access to vehicle Environmental concerns Save money Save time To read/rest/work during trip Use HOV/HOT lanes Other Existing Conditions Figure 80 shows the primary reason that respondents ride Xpress. The most common response was to save money (35%), followed by avoiding traffic (28%). Approximately 10% of riders reported their reason for riding was to save time, because they do not drive or do not have access to a vehicle. Approximately 9% reported riding Xpress to read, rest, or work during the trip. Less than 5% of riders reported the convenience of park-and-rides, other, use of HOV/HOT lanes, or environmental concerns as their primary reason for riding. Since saving money is the most common reason for riding and two-thirds of riders do not receive any employer contribution to fares, efforts to expand employer-funded commute programs could help increase ridership. The findings from this question also suggest that price and total travel time are important to Xpress ridership. Figure 80: Reason Riding 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 28% 35% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 4% 8% 1% 11% 9% 1% 2% n = 4704 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 81

82 As can be seen in Figure 81, 56% of respondents use the Xpress website to access their information. Approximately 27% use , 17% call customer service, and 7% use Twitter. Other and the Xpress blog constituted 2% and 1%, respectively, of the remaining responses. Respondents were able to select more than one answer for this question and the following, so responses total more than 100%. Figure 81: Current Method of Accessing Customer Information 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 56% Website 17% Call customer service 27% 1% 7% 2% Xpress Blog Twitter Other n = 3904 Riders were asked to indicate their preferred method of accessing Xpress information with the option of choosing multiple responses (Figure 82). The highest number of respondents (29%) indicated that the website was their preferred method of communication, followed closely by (25%). Text messaging and the mobile app were the preferred methods of 16% and 14% of respondents, respectively. Only 10% total of riders reported preferring phone-based services. Figure 82: Preferred Communication Method for Xpress Information 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 29% 25% 16% Website Text message 14% Mobile app 7% Call customer service 3% 3% 2% Robo call (for service alerts) Twitter Facebook Other social media 0% 0% Other Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 82

83 TO Total Existing Conditions When asked what type of improvements Xpress should provide, the largest group of respondents (38%) chose midday service, 28% chose more frequency, 21% chose weekend service, and 10% chose evening service, as shown in Figure 83. Only 3% preferred more reverse commute service, and 1% preferred more parking. Figure 83: Preferred Service Improvements 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 38% 28% 1% 3% Evening service Midday service More frequency More parking Reverse commute 21% Weekend service n = 3732 Transfer Analysis Approximately 16% of existing riders transferred to or from Xpress routes to another route. Figure 84, Figure 85, and Figure 86 show the number of transfers to and from Xpress routes and other service. Transfers between Xpress routes were minimal (Figure 84). The predominant transfer pattern is between Xpress buses and MARTA rail service. The data suggest that the Red and Gold Lines, which operate on a north/south alignment, are the biggest transfer destinations (Figure 85 and Figure 86). Routes 400 and 408 are most dependent on rail transfers. Continued and convenient connections to MARTA rail service are a key part of the Xpress market. Figure 84: Transfers to and from Xpress Routes FROM Total Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 83

84 Figure 85: Transfers to Other Routes TO BLUE LINE GOLD LINE MARTA RED LINE RED/GOLD TRAIN Total FROM Total Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 84

85 TO Total Existing Conditions Figure 86: Transfers from Other Routes and MARTA FROM BLUE LINE GOLD LINE MARTA RED LINE RED/GOLD TRAIN Total Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 85

86 RIDER DEMOGRAPHICS Given that most Xpress riders are commuting to and from work, it is not surprising that most riders fall into typical working-age groups with less representation from very young or very old age groups (Figure 87). The largest group of riders (33%) is 45-54, 24% are 35-44, 21% are 55-65, and 11% are Only 8% of riders are college-aged (18-24), and only 2% are 65 or over. Less than 1% of riders are under 18. Figure 87: Age 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 33% 24% 21% 8% 11% 0% 2% Under Figure 88 shows that the majority of all riders (58%) are female, while 42% are male. Figure 88: Gender Male 42% Female 58% n = 4560 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 86

87 Figure 89 shows the income level of survey respondents. In general, riders have relatively high incomes; only 11% reported earning less than $30,000, which is near the federal poverty line. The largest group of riders (35%) reported earning between $30,000 and $69,999, while a quarter of riders (25%) earn between $70,000 and $99,999, 17% earn between $100,000 and $134,999, and 12% early $135,000 or more. Figure 89: Income 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 4% 7% 35% 25% 17% 12% n = 4090 Figure 90 shows income by the number of people employed per household. The largest proportion of households with one-person employed earn between $30,000 and $69,999 per year, while the largest proportion of households with two employed persons earn $135,000 or more. Figure 90: Income by Number Employed per Household 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% n = 3681 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 87

88 Figure 91 shows household size of survey respondents. Nearly three quarters of riders live in households of two to four people. Only 12% of riders live in one-person households, 10% live in households of five people, and 5% live in households of six or more. Figure 91: Household Size 6 or more 5 people 5% 10% 1 person 12% 4 people 23% 2 people 28% 3 people 22% n = 4488 Figure 92 shows the number of people employed per household among survey respondents. The majority of respondents live in homes with one to two persons employed (35% and 45%, respectively). Only 5% of respondents live in homes with no persons employed. Figure 92: Number of People Employed per Household 4 people 3% 3 people 11% 5 or more 1% None 5% 1 person 35% 2 people 45% n = 3694 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 88

89 Figure 93 shows the number of vehicles per household among riders. Among respondents, 45% reported having two vehicles per household. The next largest group (29%) reported having three or more vehicles. Approximately 23% live in one-vehicle households, and only 3% live in carless households. This suggests that very few existing riders may be classified as transit dependent, and virtually all are choice riders. Figure 93: Number of Vehicles 3 or more 29% None 3% 1 23% 2 45% n = 3919 Figure 94 shows the percentage of respondents identifying as Hispanic or Latino. Only 3% of respondents reported as being Hispanic or Latino. Figure 94: Race Hispanic or Latino Hispanic or Latino 3% Non Hispanic or Latino 97% n = 4204 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 89

90 Figure 95 shows the racial demographics among riders who took the survey. Respondents identifying as black represent 55% of riders. The next highest group was those identifying as white, at 39%. Approximately 5% identified as Asian, and 1% identified as American Indian. Figure 95: Race 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 55% 39% 1% 5% 0% American Indian Asian Black Native Hawaiian White Figure 96 shows the language that respondents speak in their homes. Approximately 96% reported speaking English as their primarily language at home. Spanish speaking homes and other make up 1% each among the remaining responses. Figure 96: Language Spoken at Home n = % 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 96% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0% Cantonese English Japanese Korean Mandarin Other Spanish Vietnamese n = 3904 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 90

91 Figure 97 shows the levels of proficiency in English among respondents. Of those surveyed, 99% reported to being fluent in English while 1% reported to being somewhat fluent. Figure 97: English Proficiency 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 99% 0% 1% Fluently Not fluent Somewhat n = 3904 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 91

92 Park-and-Rides Respondents were asked to write in the name of the park-and-ride lot that they use. The most commonly used lot was Stockbridge, followed by West Conyers, Jonesboro, and the Douglas County Multimodal Transportation Center (MMTC). Figure 98: Park-and-Rides Used Park-and-Ride Surveys Park-and-Ride Surveys Stockbridge 304 Stone Mountain 69 West Conyers 254 Hampton 63 Jonesboro 253 Town Center-Big Shanty 48 Douglas County MMTC 247 Hewatt 46 Hamilton Mill 201 West Douglas 45 Sugarloaf Mills 198 Union City 36 Newnan 196 Busbee 35 McDonough 195 Mableton 33 Panola 158 Canton 24 Cumming 146 Doraville 3 Mall of Georgia 146 Buford 2 Dacula 141 Indian Trail 1 East Conyers 125 Kennesaw 1 Powder Springs 125 Midtown 1 Acworth 117 Woodstock 112 Riverdale 111 BrandsMart 108 Snellville 104 Hiram 102 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 92

93 VANPOOL SERVICES AND RIDER PATTERNS The GRTA Vanpool program provides commute transit service to commuters with similar origins and destinations through the use of private sector vendors, vride and Express Rideshare. GRTA s vanpool vendors operate approximately 300 vans per day that have a capacity of 7-15 passengers as well as providing GPS navigation and in-vehicle WiFi. The GRTA vanpools make approximately 4,150 passenger trips daily and 1 million trips annually. Figure 99 and Figure 100 show the origins and destination patterns of GRTA vanpools. There is a wide variety of travel patterns across a large region, making it somewhat difficult to discern distinct patterns. In order to get a better sense of travel patterns that may indicate the existence of a market to support Xpress bus service, the latter figure shows just vanpool patterns that occur three or more times per day. Emory and Marietta are major destinations for vanpools. The I-75 South and I-85 North corridors both suggest demand for commuter service, with seven vanpools per day each traveling on common corridors. Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 93

94 Figure 99: Vanpool Travel Patterns Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 94

95 Figure 100: Vanpool Patterns with Three or More Trips Daily Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. 95