Capacity-based cost modeling for light rail and bus rapid transit systems

Choosing between Light Rail Transit (LRT) and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) systems is often controversial and not an easy task for transportation planners who are contemplating the upgrade of their public transportation services. These two transit systems provide comparable services for medium-sized cities from the suburban neighborhood to the Central Business District (CBD) and utilize similar right-of-way (ROW) categories. The research is aimed at developing a method to assist transportation planners and decision makers in determining the most feasible system between LRT and BRT. ^ Cost estimation is a major factor when evaluating a transit system. Typically, LRT is more expensive to build and implement than BRT, but has significantly lower Operating and Maintenance (OM) costs than BRT. This dissertation examines the factors impacting capacity and costs, and develops cost models, which are a capacity-based cost estimate for the LRT and BRT systems. Various ROW categories and alignment configurations of the systems are also considered in the developed cost models. Kikuchi's fleet size model (1985) and cost allocation method are used to develop the cost models to estimate the capacity and costs. ^ The comparison between LRT and BRT are complicated due to many possible transportation planning and operation scenarios. In the end, a user-friendly computer interface integrated with the established capacity-based cost models, the LRT and BRT Cost Estimator (LBCostor), was developed by using Microsoft Visual Basic language to facilitate the process and will guide the users throughout the comparison operations. The cost models and the LBCostor can be used to analyze transit volumes, alignments, ROW configurations, number of stops and stations, headway, size of vehicle, and traffic signal timing at the intersections. The planners can make the necessary changes and adjustments depending on their operating practices. ^

Development of a medium-capacity guideway transit planning guide

Rapid population increase and booming economic growth have caused a significant escalation in car ownership in many cities, leading to additional or, multiple traffic problems on congested roadways. The increase of automobiles is generating a significant amount of congestion and pollution in many cities. It has become necessary to find a solution to the ever worsening traffic problems in our cities. Building more roadways is nearly impossible due to the limitations of right-of-way in cities. Studies have shown that guideway transit could provide effective transportation and could stimulate land development. The Medium-Capacity Guideway Transit (MCGT) is one of the alternatives to solve this problem. The objective of this research was to better understand the characteristics of MCGT systems, to investigate the existing MCGT systems around the world and determine the main factors behind the planning of successful systems, and to develop a MCGT planning guide. The factors utilized in this study were determined and were analyzed using Excel. A MCGT Planning Guide was developed using Microsoft Visual Basic. ^ A MCGT was defined as a transit system whose capacity can carry up to 20,000 passengers per hour per direction (pphpd). The results shown that Light Rail Transit (LRT) is favored when peak hour demand is less than 13,000 pphpd. Automated People Mover (APM) is favored when the peak hour demand is more than 18,000 pphpd. APM systems could save up to three times the waiting time cost compared to that of the LRT. If comfort and convenience are important, then using an APM does make sense. However, if cost is the critical factor, then LRT will make more sense because it is reasonable service at a reasonable price. If travel time and safety (accident/crush) costs were included in calculating life-cycle “total” costs, the capital cost advantage of LRT disappeared and APM could become very competitive. The results also included a range of cost-performance criteria for MCGT systems that help planners, engineers, and decision-makers to select the most feasible system for their respective areas. ^

Optimization models for selecting bus stops for accessibility improvements for people with disabilities

Bus stops are key links in the journeys of transit patrons with disabilities. Inaccessible bus stops prevent people with disabilities from using fixed-route bus services, thus limiting their mobility. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 prescribes the minimum requirements for bus stop accessibility by riders with disabilities. Due to limited budgets, transit agencies can only select a limited number of bus stop locations for ADA improvements annually. These locations should preferably be selected such that they maximize the overall benefits to patrons with disabilities. In addition, transit agencies may also choose to implement the universal design paradigm, which involves higher design standards than current ADA requirements and can provide amenities that are useful for all riders, like shelters and lighting. Many factors can affect the decision to improve a bus stop, including rider-based aspects like the number of riders with disabilities, total ridership, customer complaints, accidents, deployment costs, as well as locational aspects like the location of employment centers, schools, shopping areas, and so on. These interlacing factors make it difficult to identify optimum improvement locations without the aid of an optimization model. This dissertation proposes two integer programming models to help identify a priority list of bus stops for accessibility improvements. The first is a binary integer programming model designed to identify bus stops that need improvements to meet the minimum ADA requirements. The second involves a multi-objective nonlinear mixed integer programming model that attempts to achieve an optimal compromise among the two accessibility design standards. Geographic Information System (GIS) techniques were used extensively to both prepare the model input and examine the model output. An analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was applied to combine all of the factors affecting the benefits to patrons with disabilities. An extensive sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the reasonableness of the model outputs in response to changes in model constraints. Based on a case study using data from Broward County Transit (BCT) in Florida, the models were found to produce a list of bus stops that upon close examination were determined to be highly logical. Compared to traditional approaches using staff experience, requests from elected officials, customer complaints, etc., these optimization models offer a more objective and efficient platform on which to make bus stop improvement suggestions.

Optimization of transit transfer times: A system-wide approach

This dissertation presents a system-wide approach, based on genetic algorithms, for the optimization of transfer times for an entire bus transit system. Optimization of transfer times in a transit system is a complicated problem because of the large set of binary and discrete values involved. The combinatorial nature of the problem imposes a computational burden and makes it difficult to solve by classical mathematical programming methods. ^ The genetic algorithm proposed in this research attempts to find an optimal solution for the transfer time optimization problem by searching for a combination of adjustments to the timetable for all the routes in the system. It makes use of existing scheduled timetables, ridership demand at all transfer locations, and takes into consideration the randomness of bus arrivals. ^ Data from Broward County Transit are used to compute total transfer times. The proposed genetic algorithm-based approach proves to be capable of producing substantial time savings compared to the existing transfer times in a reasonable amount of time. ^ The dissertation also addresses the issues related to spatial and temporal modeling, variability in bus arrival and departure times, walking time, as well as the integration of scheduling and ridership data. ^