Public

Transporta0on: Methods to Maintain Resilience in the Worst of Times

A study in alterna.ves to funding failure

Kristen Cowell
March 19, 2012

The Study
Problem: California needs compact development and employment density to support public transporta<on systems as a feasible and ecient mode of transit. These inadequacies are seen during recessions through loss of ridership due to rising unemployment, ridership that personal trips alone cannot adequately oset. Hypothesis: Bus stops in areas with mixed use and higher employment opportuni<es are less eected and more resilient to economic condi<ons. Study Focus: Ridership changes before and aGer the 2008 Recession in Los Angeles County

Background People are signicantly less likely to use public transit unless miles of transit from employment Employment is more important than residen<al in transit mode choices Mixed use compact development decreases costs of providing public transit 7 dwelling units per acre are needed to support local bus service

Methods Focused on most frequented areas of bus transit by querying stops with 200+ riders Graphs compare ridership on these stops in 2005 (pre-recession) versus 2009 (post- recession) Focused on eects of employment in Downtown Los Angles, Route 20, and mixed- use areas through Hollywoods Route 761. Parcels include a mile buer around stops

High Employment and Residen0al- Work Balance: 2005-2009

Changes in Public Transit Ridership: 2005-2009 Ridership Data

Legend
660 Stop Boardings in 2009 Stop Boardings in 2005 Sep2009Metro

Employment by Parcel
2009
0 - 1800 1801 - 4600 4601 - 9600 9601 - 20400 20401 - 55000

Pop_2005
0.000000 - 1800.000000 1800.000001 - 3896.000000 3896.000001 - 5468.000000 5468.000001 - 7429.000000 7429.000001 - 11967.000000 Sep2008Metro

Source: SCAG, LA Metro

Key Findings
Less likely to use public transit: Data gathered supported studies that indicate ci<zens will be signicantly less likely to use public transit unless they work mile from public transit

No change in ridership near downtown: Stops in parcels with >20,0000 jobs saw almost no changes in ridership

Signicant ridership changes farther from downtown: Stops 2-3 miles from Downtown Los Angeles saw signicant changes, poten<ally related to the residen<al popula<on that no longer demanded ridership due to unemployment

Mixed-Use Commercial and Residen0al Density: 2005- 2009

Ridership Data
Metro Stops in the parcel with commercial land use

Key Findings
Highest varia0on in ridership: Commercial parcels experienced the highest varia<on in ridership before and aGer the Recession of 2008 Cost of unemployment on public transporta0on funds: Mixed- use leverages the cost of unemployment for public transporta<on systems against the eects of lost ridership due to fewer employee riders

Source: SCAG, LA Metro

Es<mated minimum density of seven dwelling units per acre is needed to make local bus service feasible with an intermediate level of service. Light rail needs a minimum density of nine dwelling units per acre to be feasible. Haughey, Richard M. Higher-Density Development: Myth and Fact

Median Household Income: 2005-2009

Ridership Data Key Findings
Ridership greater on lower income route: Stops in lower income areas further East from Downtown Los Angeles experienced an increase in ridership between 2005 and 2009, versus lower ridership across both periods on routes through wealthier parcels Ridership decrease in downtown: The stops in downtown, however, experienced a decrease. The correla<on can be due to the decrease in income and thus poorer popula<ons switching to public transit

Legend
2009 Metro Stops 1,100 Stop Boarding 2009 Stop Boarding 2005

Block Groups
2010 Median Household Income
$84,001 to $375,000 $70,001 to $84,000 $41,001 to $70,000 (Mean: $55,265) $27,001 to $41,000 $0 to $27,000 Zero Population

3,700

7,400

Feet 14,800

Source: 2010 US Census, LA Metro Ridership

Conclusions
Compact development provides a market for public transit, by servicing personal and employment trips U<lizing public transporta<on saves spending on roads and the infrastructure to support Urban Sprawl Transit stop proximity to employment is more important for sustained resilience than residen<al proximity, yet in economic downturns and high unemployment both are needed to support transit This study is in no way conclusive, however it presents opportuni<es in Geographic Mapping to analyze transit ridership trends to make informed development policies

Ques0ons?