research report

Investigating the Influence of Dockless Electric Bike-share on Travel Behavior, Attitudes, Health, and Equity

Abstract

Cities throughout the world have implemented bike-share systems as a strategy for expanding mobility options. While these have attracted substantial ridership, little is known about their influence on travel behavior more broadly. The aim of this study was to examine how shared electric bikes (e-bikes) and e-scooters influence individual travel attitudes and behavior, and related outcomes of physical activity and transportation equity. The study involved a survey in the greater Sacramento area of 1959 households before (Spring 2016) and 988 after (Spring 2019) the Summer 2018 implementation of the e-bike and e-scooter service operated by Jump, Inc., as well as a direct survey of 703 e-bike users (in Fall 2018 & Spring 2019). Among household respondents, 3–13% reported having used the service. Of e-bike share trips, 35% substituted for car travel, 30% substituted for walking, and 5% were used to connect to transit. Before- and after-household surveys indicated a slight decrease in self-reported (not objectively measured) median vehicle miles traveled and slight positive shifts in attitudes towards bicycling. Service implementation was associated with minimal changes in health in terms of physical activity and number of collisions. The percentages of users by self-reported student status, race, and income suggest a fairly equitable service distribution by these parameters, but each survey under-represents racial minorities and people with low incomes. Therefore, the study is inconclusive about how this service impacts those most in need. Furthermore, aggregated socio-demographics of areas where trips started or ended did not correlate with and therefore are not reliable indicators of, the socio-demographics of e-bike-share users. Thus, targeted surveying of racial minorities and people with low incomes is needed to understand bike-share equity.

research report

Balancing Accountability and Flexibility in California’s Local Option Sales Taxes

Abstract

Voter-approved Local Option Transportation Sales Taxes (LOSTs) are a major source of revenue for transportation programs in California. LOSTs list projects and programs for voter approval that are to be implemented over long periods of time, often twenty or more years. To respond to changing conditions, agencies often need to amend voter-approved plans. Implementing agencies must be accountable to voters, balancing the need to fulfill commitments made against needs that change over time. Using the text of ballot measures, public utility codes, periodic agency reports, and case studies that included interviews of public officials, this study examines, provisions regarding accountability in California LOSTs, and procedures for amending proposed expenditures. It also reviews lawsuits brought in relation to accountability and plan amendments. It analyzes the ways in which California counties achieve needed flexibility within a framework that demands accountability to the voters. Requirements and patterns differ among counties, but most measures have been adapted to changing circumstances.

policy brief

Why is Bay Area Transit Ridership Falling?

policy brief

What Can Be Done About Falling Transit Ridership in the Bay Area?

policy brief

The Bay Area is Losing Transit Ridership — But Transit Commuting is Growing

policy brief

Why is Public Transit Falling in the San Francisco Bay Area, and What Might be Done About It?

Abstract

Public transit ridership has been slipping nationally and in California since 2014. The San Francisco Bay Area, with the highest share of transit trips in the state, had until recently resisted those trends, especially compared to Greater Los Angeles. However, in 2017 and 2018 the region lost over 27 million annual transit boardings, over 5 percent of all transit trips, despite a booming economy and service increases. The steepest ridership losses have come on buses, at off-peak times, on weekends, in non-commute directions, on outlying lines, and on operators that do not serve the region’s core employment clusters.Amidst falling Bay Area ridership, transit trips in the region are becoming much more commute-focused. Ridership at peak hours has grown dramatically, especially into and out of downtown San Francisco, resulting in severe overcrowding on Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART). Researchers at the UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies examined recent Bay Area ridership trends for the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in order to identify both possible causes of falling transit use as well as potential policy responses. The key dimensions of shifting Bay Area transit use are summarized below.

research report

What’s Behind Recent Transit Ridership Trends in the Bay Area? Volume II: Trends among Major Transit Operators

Publication Date

February 26, 2020

Author(s)

Jacob Wasserman, Brian D. Taylor, Evelyn Blumenberg, Mark Garrett, Hannah King, Julene Paul, Madeline Ruvolo, Andrew Schouten

Abstract

Transit ridership in the San Francisco Bay Area is falling. Yet some operators, areas, times, directions, routes, modes, and services have fared better than others. These differences help reveal the causes of the Bay Area’s overall ridership slump and inform policy and service decisions that aim to restore Bay Area transit use. To investigate these temporal and spatial trends, the research team analyzes ridership on the eight largest Bay Area transit operators in considerable detail in Volume II of the report. Overall, the team finds a significant level of “peaking.” Ridership losses at off-peak hours, on weekends, on outlying routes, in non-commute directions, and on smaller operators account for a large and disproportionate share of the whole region’s patronage decline. Downtown San Francisco and commute-oriented rail lines like Caltrain have gained ridership as less central, lower-service routes have lost patronage. These patterns match the statistical modeling of BART ridership, on which station-area jobs had the greatest influence, one that has grown over time. The most significant exceptions to the Bay Area’s peaking problem are operators in urban cores, like Muni and AC Transit, where residential and employment density throughout the network have blunted peaking, though not necessarily overall losses. Absolute patronage declines and peaking are intertwined but distinct problems, with cross-cutting divisions. Yet in all agencies, it can be seen that at least some evidence of peaking. The resulting dependence on peak trips both incurs high costs and depresses passenger satisfaction.

research report

What’s Behind Recent Transit Ridership Trends in the Bay Area? Volume I: Overview and Analysis of Underlying Factors

Publication Date

February 26, 2020

Author(s)

Evelyn Blumenberg, Mark Garrett, Hannah King, Julene Paul, Madeline Ruvolo, Andrew Schouten, Brian D. Taylor, Jacob Wasserman

Abstract

Public transit ridership has been falling nationally and in California since 2014. The San Francisco Bay Area, with the state’s highest rates of transit use, had until recently resisted those trends, especially compared to Greater Los Angeles. However, in 2017 and 2018 the region lost over five percent (> 27 million) of its annual riders, despite a booming economy and service increases. This report examines Bay Area transit ridership to understand the dimensions of changing transit use, its possible causes, and potential solutions. The research finds that: 1) the steepest ridership losses have come on buses, at off-peak times, on weekends, in non-commute directions, on outlying lines, and on operators that do not serve the region’s core employment clusters; 2) transit trips in the region are increasingly commute-focused, particularly into and out of downtown San Francisco; 3) transit commuters are increasingly non-traditional transit users, such as those with higher incomes and automobile access; 4) the growing job-housing imbalance in the Bay Area is related to rising housing costs and likely depressing transit ridership as more residents live less transit-friendly parts of the region; and 5) ridehail is substituting for some transit trips, particularly in the off-peak. Arresting falling transit use will likely require action both by transit operators (to address peak capacity constraints; improve off-peak service; ease fare payments; adopt fare structures that attract off-peak riders; and better integrate transit with new mobility options) and public policymakers in other realms (to better meter and manage private vehicle use and to increase the supply and affordability of housing near job centers).

policy brief

Life Cycle Cost Analysis Comparison Spreadsheet

policy brief

The Bay Area is Losing Transit Ridership — But Transit Commuting is Growing