Commuter Rail Extension Alternatives Analysis - Transportation ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUNTYALTERNATIVES ANALYSISTwo additional forecasting efforts,undertaken for the preparation ofthe PSR were also used for thisAlternatives Analysis.The VTA methodology of utilizingmode shares based on travel distanceswas applied to the censusestimates of county-to-county commutersand the proportion of SantaClara County’s employment baseserved by the Caltrain stations.Table 4-7 reports VTA’s assumptionsregarding transit mode sharesbased on travel distances, whileTable 4-8 reports trip distances andtravel times between MontereyCounty and select Santa Claradestinations. VTA’s assumptionsare similar to those used in 1997 toestablish the feasibility of theWasatch Front (Salt Lake City)commuter rail service.Estimates of Year 2000 commuterstraveling from Monterey Countyand Watsonville to the Bay Areapeninsula counties served by Caltrainare reported in Table 4-9. Thistable indicates that the number ofcommuters assumed to be serviceableby Caltrans is 50 percent ofthe total, based on the tabulation ofcommuter rail access to employmentreported in Table 4-2.Table 4-7Transit Patronage Based onTrip DistanceTransit PercentDistance in Miles Share30 9.0%40 14.0%50 16.5%60 18.6%>70 20.0%Source:645188AA-042Santa Clara Valley Transportation AuthorityWasatch Front Commuter Rail Feasibility StudyRidership Estimation MethodologyThe approach used to develop the ridership estimates for the Wasatch Frontcommuter rail corridor was based on an origin-destination methodology developedby Schiermeyer Consulting Services (SCS), in Orange, California.The methodology focused on identifying commuter travel patterns to majoremployers (employers with more than 100 employees) within a given corridorand applying a “commuter rail mode split” based on rail miles traveled.To begin, major employers located within an approximate 2-mile radius of aproposed destination station were plotted on a regional map. The 2-mileradius was selected as it represents the distance, a surrogate for traveltime, that most commuters are willing to ride a shuttle to reach their finalemployment destination.Origin zip codes were next identified and assigned to specific boardingstations. The origin zip codes represent the “catchment” area of a specificboarding station and may extend much farther than the city or community inwhich the station is located.All major employers were then contacted by letter with telephone follow-up.They were asked to provide a zip code listing of their employees’ homedestinations. After this data was collected and tabulated, mode split factors(based on rail miles traveled) were applied to the total. This subtotal wasthen factored to account for the lack of small employer data.The mode split factors are based on distances (in rail miles) between theboarding and the destination stations. For trips of 15 to 19 miles, a fivepercent mode split was used, 10 percent for trips greater than 20 miles ormore, 15 percent for trips 30 miles or more, 20 percent for trips 40 miles ormore, 25 percent for trips greater than 50 miles, and 30 percent for tripsgreater than 80 miles.One of the critical assumptions in the SCS methodology is the expectationthat at least three round trips trains will be operated during the peak commutingperiods. Experience in Southern California indicates that for commuterrail to be attractive and to meet the varied number of work shiftswithin a given corridor, at least three operating schedules must be provided.If service is started with less than three operating schedules, ridership canbe expected to be reduced by a minimum of 33 percent.Another critical assumption in the ridership estimation process is that adequatesupporting bus service will be in place. In the best case, the commuterrail ticket, whether single ride, multiple ride, or monthly, should alsoinclude the supporting bus service at both the origin and destination end ofthe trip. For predominantly origin stations, such as those where commutersare boarding the train in the morning for travel to work, supporting busservice is relatively unimportant since experience has shown that most railcommuters are automobile owners and typically drove to work prior to theinauguration of rail passenger service. At destination stations, supportingbus service to ensure a quick trip from the station to the final destination,normally the place of work, is essential. Typical commuters will not sacrificemore than 10 minutes from arrival of the train at the destination station toarrival at their final destination.645188AA-080parsons CHAPTER 4: TRAVEL DEMAND FORECASTS 109
CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUNTYALTERNATIVES ANALYSISTable 4-8Trip Distance and Travel Times from Monterey CountyDistance in MilesEgress Stations Rail HighwayHighway Minutes(2000)San JoseFrom Pajaro 50.0 47.4 81From Castroville 61.0 56.5 93From Salinas 68.0 60.1 98Average 59.7 54.7 91Sunnyvale/Santa ClaraFrom Pajaro 61.0 51.0 87From Castroville 72.0 60.8 101From Salinas 79.0 68.3 107Average 70.7 60.0 98Source: Parsons645188AA-043Table 4-9Year 2000 Commuters to Caltrain MarketsOriginDestination County Monterey County Watsonville 1 Total Served by Caltrain Transit MarketSanta Clara 5,799 3,662 9,461 50% 4,730San Mateo 378 342 720 50% 360San Francisco 220 106 326 50% 163Total 6,397 4,109 10,506 5,2531Assumes 17% of Santa Cruz County commuters based on population share 645188AA-044Source: 2000 Census, ParsonsTable 4-10 reports that this methodology yields an estimate of 1,028 riders boarding at MontereyCounty stations (AM northbound). In the afternoon, an equal number of riders would board at SanFrancisco Bay Area station and ride south to Monterey County. These riders would be expected toboard from the stations indicated in Table 4-11.Table 4-10Calculation of Potential Rail Ridership (VTA Method)Destination County Travel Distance (miles) Mode Share Transit Market Potential RidersSanta Clara—Central 54.7 0.19 1,570 291Santa Clara—North 60.0 0.20 3,161 632San Mateo 80.0 0.20 360 72San Francisco 100.0 0.20 163 33Peninsula Total 5,254 1,028Source: Parsons645188AA-045parsons CHAPTER 4: TRAVEL DEMAND FORECASTS 110
Page 4 and 5:
DRAFTCALTRAIN EXTENSIONTO MONTEREY
Page 6 and 7:
CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUN
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93: CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUN
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
show all

Commuter Rail Extension Alternatives Analysis - Transportation ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?