culver citybus fare structure evaluation
TRANSCRIPT
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
Under18
18-24 25-40 41-64 65 andOver
First time
About once a month
About once a week
2 to 4 days a week
5 or more days a week
IIIIIIII
IIIII
I
III III
IIII
IILos Angeles
Long Beach
Glendale
CarsonTorrance
Pasadena
Whittier
Downey
Compton
Norwalk
Cerritos
Lakewood
Inglewood
Wes
Cypress
Alhambra
Gardena
South Gate
Santa Monica
Bellflower
HawthorneLynwood
Monterey Park
El Segundo
Rosemead
Paramount
Santa Fe Springs
Culver City
Beverly Hills
East Los Angeles
Redondo Beach
San Gabriel
Los Alamitos
Rolling Hills
Palos Verdes Estates
Sierra Madre
Manhattan Beach
South Pasadena
Lawndale
Ladera Heights
Bell Gardens
South El Monte
Rolling Hills Estates
Westmont
West Rancho Dominguez
Lennox
Willowbrook
Del Aire
West Hollywood
West Athens
Marina del Rey
Hermosa Beach
View Park-Windsor Hills
Walnut Park
Culver CityBus RoutesLINEPurple Line SubwayRed Line SubwayRed+Purple SubwayBlue Line Light Rail Station
I Expo Line Light Rail Station
I Green Line Light Rail StationGold Line Light Rail Station
Where CCB Riders Begin TripPercentage
0%1%2%3% - 7%8% - 15%
Source: Culver CityBus Passenger On-board Surveys (2011)
Where Culver CityBus Riders Begin Their Trips
Mid City
RAIL
Figure 1
IIIIIIII
II
I
I
III III
III
I
II
Los Angeles
Inglewood
Compton
Santa Monica
Gardena
HawthorneEl Segundo
Culver City
Beverly Hills
Vernon
Manhattan Beach Lawndale
Carson
Lennox
West Athens
Florence-Graham
Ladera Heights
Westmont
West Rancho Dominguez
WillowbrookDel Aire
West Hollywood
Marina del Rey
South Gate
Alondra Park
Huntington Park
TorranceRedondo Beach
View Park-Windsor Hills
Lynwood
Hermosa Beach
Culver CityBus RoutesWhere CCB Riders End TripPercentage
0%1%2% - 4%5% - 11%12% - 22%
Rail LineRed Line SubwayPurple Line SubwayRed+Purple Line SubwayBlue Line Light Rail Station
I Expo Line Light Rail Station
I Green Line Light Rail Station
Source: Culver CityBus Passenger On-board Survey (2011)
Where Culver CityBus Riders End Their Trips
LAX
UCLA
Downtown LA
Mid City
KoreatownCentury City
Figure 2
Culver CityBus RoutesLINEPurple Line SubwayRed Line SubwayRed+Purple SubwayBlue Line Light Rail Station
I Expo Line Light Rail Station
I Green Line Light Rail Station
Where CCB Riders Percentage
0%1%2%5% - 11%12% - 22%
End Trip
4%-
RAIL
SETTING THE RIGHT PRICE FOR BUS TRANSITCulver CityBus Fare Structure EvaluationFare policy is always complicated and difficult for transit operators to deal with, taking into account
funding for capital investments and operations, equity and operational issues including dwell time, network design and accessibility for new users. Two major operators sharing Culver CityBus’ service area have recently made major changes to fare policy to reduce operating deficit, moving in opposite directions. Santa Monica’s Big Blue Bus eliminated discounted local transfers and proposed to increase single ride cash fare to offset the increased cost in service associated with their response to Expo Line expansion in 2016. Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LA Metro) raised its cash fare to $1.75, raised the price of prepaid transit passes, and offered 2-hour free transfers to smart card users.
Culver CityBus’ fare structure is relatively complex, with a low cash fare, discounted fares for various groups, transfers discounted at different rates for intra- and interagency transfers, participation in the regional EZ pass monthly pass and the BruinGo program, under which UCLA students may ride at a steeply discounted rate using a flash pass. In addition, the expansion of the Metro Rail Expo Line Phase 2 in 2016 and Metro Rail Crenshaw Line in 2019 will affect transfer patterns and lead to redesigning Culver CiyBus feeder services and a review of Culver CityBus’ fare policy.
How should Culver CityBus change its fare structure to better serve its riders and maximize its ridership and revenue?
• Literature review tounderstand role of farepolicy in public transitsystems and find commonpractices public transitagencies generally use forchanging fare structures
• Selected case studiesto study impacts onrevenues and ridershipafter introduction ofvarious fare strategies
1. Findings fromCulver CityBusonboard surveys:
Figures 1 and 2 can help Culver CityBus staff better understand where their riders start/end their trips and to discover untapped markets outside their
Recommendations are made regarding fare structure and an evaluation is done on how the recommendation would affect ridership and revenue on Culver CityBus. The recommended fare structure raises cash fare trips and eliminates local transfers within the Culver CityBus network. Meanwhile, several fare media, such as monthly passes and day passes, are introduced to soften the impacts of fare increase and potential ridership decrease. The recommendation includes two new fare programs for participants at West LA College and Playa Vista that help to maximize ridership and revenue for Culver CityBus. A detailed recommended structure is illustrated in Table 2.
Based on my forecast, ridership would increase by 2% to 4% and revenue would rise by 16% to 17% if the recommendations were adopted, compared to the baseline fare structure. Farebox recovery ratio would increase from 20.9% to as high as 24.6%. Nevertheless, impacts on Fare Allocation Procedure could not be determined because there are some uncertainties accounted in the revenue forecast. The uncertainties include riders’ actual response to fare changes and deep discounted pass program.
RESEARCH QUESTIONSHow does the recommended fare structure affect ridership and revenue, as well as its funding opportunities from Formula Allocation Procedure?
1 2
METHODOLOGY
FINDINGS
FIGURE 1 -- WHERE CULVER CITY RIDERS BEGIN THEIR TRIPS
FIGURE 2 -- WHERE CULVER CITY RIDERS END THEIR TRIPS
• Evaluated Culver CityBus’ ridership statistics andonboard surveys to document ridership patternsand potential for innovative fare strategies
• Cross tabulations of onboard surveys andresearch into Culver CityBus ridershipdistribution by fare media and type of riders(adult, senior/disabled, students) to understandriders’ demographics and travel behavior
• Compared Culver CityBus’ existing fare structureto other fare structures used by selected agenciesin LA County to help Culver CityBus set pricing
programs that better align with fare policies of neighboring agencies
• Addressed how recommendedfare structure affects ridershipand revenue on Culver CityBus,and whether the recommendationwill greatly affect future fundingopportunities from FormulaAllocation Procedure
FIGURE 4 -- CULVER CITYBUS SERVICE NETWORK AM TRIPS DISTRIBUTION FIGURE 5 -- CULVER CITYBUS SERVICE NETWORK PM TRIPS DISTRIBUTION
CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS
Supplemental Table 1Culver CityBus Riders Characteristics
Frequency of Use Percentage First Time 2%About once a month 4%About once a week 4%2 to 4 days a week 29%5 or more days a week(Frequent Riders)
61%
Trip Purpose Percentage Going Work 33%Going Home 39%School/ College 16%Recreation or Social Activity 4%Shopping Center or Store 5%Medical/Dental Facility 3%Childcare 1%Other 4%Transit Dependency (Riders’ responses if Culver CityBusservices were not available)
Percentage
Use another bus agency 52%Drive alone 8%Walk 13%Driven by someone else 12%Would not make trip 12%Bicycle 8%Carpool/Vanpool 3%Taxi 3%Other/ I don’t know 3%Mobile Phone Ownership Percentage Smartphone with internet access
34%
Mobile phone with text messaging
30%
Mobile phone 23%None of the above 13%
Source: 2012 Line by Line Onboard Survey
existing service network. Moreover, they can provide insight into possible service expansion in response to the opening of the Expo Light Rail Phase 2 in 2016. However, cross tabulations from onboard survey data provide a more in-depth analysis in understanding riders’ travel behavior, which can help staff estimate riders’ response to fare changes. One of the analyses showed that 61% of riders on Culver CityBus were frequent riders (Table 1). Since fare elasticities are different among various age groups, I classified bus ride frequency by age groups to predict responses to a fare change from each age group of riders (Figure 3). For instance, price elasticities for riders under 18 are higher than riders over 64 years in general, indicating younger riders are more sensitive than elderly riders to fare changes (Cervero 1990, Deleuw, Cather & Company 1979). Culver CityBus could apply this analysis in deciding the right pricing scheme that potentially meets the needs of different rider segments.
2. Findings from LA Metro TAP Card Data:Figures 4 and 5 reflect weekday peak-hour ridership patterns in the morning and afternoon. Data extracted from the Metro TAP card database display average daily boardings in a “google-traffic” color scheme. Red represents higher boardings and green means fewer boardings. The graphs help to identify ridership patterns, the significance of interagency transfers and deep discount group pass programs in Culver CityBus service network. Currently, Culver CityBus has a deep discount group pass program with UCLA (6% of the ridership). Interagency agency transfers typically occur at major street intersections (15% of ridership). West LA College is also identified as a high-ridership area, and yet the college does not currently have a discounted bus fare program similar to UCLA BruinGo! that encourage students to use public transit.
FIGURE 3AGE VS.
BUS RIDE FREQUENCY
TABLE 1CULVER CITYBUS RIDER CHARACTERISTICS
CULVER CITYBUS RECOMMENDED FARE STRUCTURE
Source:
References: Culver CityBus Onboard Surveys, Metro TAP Card Data
Lewis Center Award Winner for Innovative use of Spatial Analysis and GIS in Policy Analysis
by Ching Yan Chan (Jane)Master’s of Urban & Regional Planning
:
Supplemental Table 2 Culver CityBus Recommended Fare Structure Rider
CategoryType Baseline Fare Recommended Fare % Fare
ChangeAdult Cash Fare $1.00 $1.25 25%
Local Transfer $0.25 - - Inter -Agency transfer $0.40 $0.50 25%Day Pass - $4.00 - Monthly Pass - $50.00 -
Senior/ Disabled
Cash Fare $0.35 $0.50 43%Local Transfer $0.10 - - Inter -Agency transfer $0.20 $0.25 25%Day Pass - $2.00 - Monthly Pass - $25.00 -
Student(K -12)
Cash Fare $0.75 $1.25 67%Monthly Pass - $30.00 -
ProgramBruinGo!
$33/quarter; or $0.50 copay
$33/quarter; or $0.50 copay -
Playa Vista Agreement with Developer -
2400 monthly pass each year at $20.83 -
West LA College - Free -
TABLE 2
"X"X
"X
"X
!6
!1
!7
!5
!3
! 4!2
!5
VENICE BLVD
W PICO BLVD
WILSHIRE BLVD
LINCOLN BLVD
S SEPULVEDA BLVD
OVERLAND AV
CULV
ER B
LVD
SANTA MONICA BLVD
PALMS BLVD
S BUNDY DR
W IMPERIAL HWY
VETERAN AV
W 3RD ST
ROSE AV
W MANCHESTER AV
W OLYMPIC BLVD
SAWTELLE BLVD
MOTOR AV
S LA
CIE
NEG
A BL
VD
INGLEWOOD BLVD
S BARRINGTON AV
OLYMPIC BLVD
S CENTINELA AV
S FA
IRFA
X AV
W 80TH ST
AVIA
TION
BLV
D
S RO
BERT
SON
BLV
D
W S
UNSE
T BL
VD
LA TI
JERA BLVD
W SLAUSON AV
BEVE
RWIL
DR
WESTWOOD BLVD
AIRP
ORT
BLVD
23RD ST
VIS DEL MAR
ALLA RD
NATIONAL BLVD
JEFF
ERSO
N BL
VD
MANNING AV
WASHINGTON PL
26TH ST
OCEAN PARK BLVD
SLAUSON AV
MCLAUGHLIN AV
W JEFFERSON BLVD
OHIO AV
W 18TH ST
S D
OHEN
Y D
R
S BEVERLY GLEN BLVD
PERSHING DR
W CENTINELA AV
ADMIRALTY WY
VIA MARINA
IDAHO AV
PACIFIC AV
WALGROVE AV
WASHINGTON BLVD
N VENICE BLVD
RODEO RD
BEETHOVEN ST
PENMAR AV
SHORT AV
N BEVERLY DR
BROOKS AV
LA BLVD
PICO BLVD
W WASHINGTON BLVD
W MANCHESTER BLVD
W 6TH ST
MONTE MAR DR
EMERSON AV
W FLORENCE AV
W CENTURY BLVD
WESTCHESTER PKWY
MIN
DANA
O W
Y
MARINE ST
MAI
N S
T
GATE
WAY
BLV
D
VIA DOLCE
SAN VICENTE BLVD
W 88TH ST
ARBOR VITAE ST
N JEFFERSON BLVD
W JEFFERSON BLVD
W OLYMPIC BLVD
S LA
CIE
NEG
A BL
VD
CULV
ER B
LVD
PICO BLVD
W WASHINGTON BLVD
WASHINGTON BLVD
S SE
PULV
EDA
BLVD
WASHINGTON BLVD
Los Angeles
Culver City
Beverly Hills
Santa Monica
Ladera Heights
Inglewood
El Segundo
Marina del Rey
Del Aire
UCLA
West LA College
Loyola MarymountUniversity
Santa MonicaCollege
VA Healthcare
LAX
Playa Vista
Century City
Palms
Mar Vista
Venice
Cheviot Hills
Culver CityBus Service Network AM Trips Distribution
Source: TAP Card Trip Data (November 2014)
"X Green Line Light Rail Station
"X Expo Light Rail StationColleges & UniversitiesAirportsExpo Line Phase 2Purple Line Alignment
West LA Transit Center
Culver CityTransit Center
LAXTransit Center
Low High
"X"X
"X
"X
!6
!1
!7
!5
!3
! 4!2
!5
VENICE BLVD
W PICO BLVD
WILSHIRE BLVD
LINCOLN BLVD
S SEPULVEDA BLVD
OVERLAND AV
CULV
ER B
LVD
SANTA MONICA BLVD
PALMS BLVD
S BUNDY DR
W IMPERIAL HWY
VETERAN AV
W 3RD ST
ROSE AV
W MANCHESTER AV
W OLYMPIC BLVD
SAWTELLE BLVD
MOTOR AV
S LA
CIE
NEG
A BL
VD
INGLEWOOD BLVD
S BARRINGTON AV
OLYMPIC BLVD
S CENTINELA AV
S FA
IRFA
X AV
W 80TH ST
AVIA
TION
BLV
D
S RO
BERT
SON
BLV
D
W S
UNSE
T BL
VD
LA TI
JERA BLVD
W SLAUSON AV
BEVE
RWIL
DR
WESTWOOD BLVD
AIRP
ORT
BLVD
23RD ST
VIS DEL MAR
ALLA RD
NATIONAL BLVD
JEFF
ERSO
N BL
VD
MANNING AV
WASHINGTON PL
26TH ST
OCEAN PARK BLVD
SLAUSON AV
MCLAUGHLIN AV
W JEFFERSON BLVD
OHIO AV
W 18TH ST
S D
OHEN
Y D
R
S BEVERLY GLEN BLVD
PERSHING DR
W CENTINELA AV
ADMIRALTY WY
VIA MARINA
IDAHO AV
PACIFIC AV
WALGROVE AV
WASHINGTON BLVD
N VENICE BLVD
RODEO RD
BEETHOVEN ST
PENMAR AV
SHORT AV
N BEVERLY DR
BROOKS AV
LA BLVD
PICO BLVD
W WASHINGTON BLVD
W MANCHESTER BLVD
W 6TH ST
MONTE MAR DR
EMERSON AV
W FLORENCE AV
W CENTURY BLVD
WESTCHESTER PKWY
MIN
DANA
O W
Y
MARINE ST
MAI
N S
T
GATE
WAY
BLV
D
VIA DOLCE
SAN VICENTE BLVD
W 88TH ST
ARBOR VITAE ST
N JEFFERSON BLVD
W JEFFERSON BLVD
W OLYMPIC BLVD
S LA
CIE
NEG
A BL
VD
CULV
ER B
LVD
PICO BLVD
W WASHINGTON BLVD
WASHINGTON BLVD
S SE
PULV
EDA
BLVD
WASHINGTON BLVD
Los Angeles
Culver City
Beverly Hills
Santa Monica
Ladera Heights
Inglewood
El Segundo
Marina del Rey
Del Aire
UCLA
West LA College
Loyola MarymountUniversity
Santa MonicaCollege
VA Healthcare
LAX
Playa Vista
Century City
Palms
Mar Vista
Venice
Cheviot Hills
Culver CityBus Service Network PM Trips Distribution
Source: TAP Card Trip Data (November 2014)
"X Green Line Light Rail Station
"X Expo Light Rail StationColleges & UniversitiesAirportsExpo Line Phase 2Purple Line Alignment
West LA Transit Center
Culver CityTransit Center
LAXTransit Center
Low High