01154817

Component

https://doi.org/10.3141/2145-02

http://scholar.google.com...ader&publication_year=2010

Although passengers dislike transferring, efficient transit systems should facilitate transfers to provide auto-competitive citywide access. This paper reviews bus transfer behavior in Melbourne, Australia, to understand causal factors. It also explores network effects: high ridership associated with frequent services or simple (grid) networks or both. Half of bus users make transfers, mostly to rail. The number of tram and bus transfers is generally low; however, in inner and central business district areas where trams run, they dominate. The young, students, males, commuters, and riders with periodical or full-fare tickets have high bus transfer rates. Middle-aged and older groups, off-peak riders, riders on shopping trips, and concession ticket holders have lower rates. Weekday peak hour commuters have high transfer rates. Frequent or longer-distance bus route types, simpler or straight route alignments, commuter services, and routes that require transfers have high transfer rates. Schedule coordination with rail increases transfer rates, but only a little. A modest but significant relationship (R² = .25) between the volume of transfer trips and average service frequency was shown. High transfer volumes occur where at least one route has a frequency of 10 min or better. Current bus plans propose a 15-min–based grid route network. These findings suggest that major routes need at least 10-min headways to generate high transfer rates. A high bus transfer subnetwork was identified with features consistent with the network effect; however, conclusive proof of the network effect remains elusive. In simple terms the network effect, though intriguing, remains an unsubstantiated theory that informs good practice but should be treated with caution when applied in the real world.

01164463

10-0372

English

pp 8-17

2010

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board

9780309142786

Print

Figures; Maps; References (21) ; Tables (4)

Accessibility; Bus transit operations; Central business districts; Headways; Network analysis (Planning); Transfers

Causal factors; Service frequency

Melbourne (Australia)

Planning and Forecasting; Public Transportation; I72: Traffic and Transport Planning

TRIS, TRB, ATRI

Jan 25 2010 10:13AM

• An Assessment of Demand for Rural Intercity Transportation Services in a Changing Environment
• Classifying Rural and Small Urban Transit Agencies
• Developing a Bus Rapid Transit Strategic Plan for San Jose and Silicon Valley, California
• Developing an Information Management System for Public and Specialized Transportation Providers of Illinois: A Web-Based, Interactive System
• Development and Evaluation of a Coordinated and Conditional Bus Priority Approach
• Direct Ridership Model of Bus Rapid Transit in Los Angeles County, California
• Effects of Basic Rural Paratransit Characteristics on Organizational Culture
• Inclusive Planning Process for Citywide Bus Network Restructuring: Experience and Impacts
• Iterative Proportional Fitting Procedure to Determine Bus Route Passenger Origin–Destination Flows
• Safety of Public Transportation Occupational Drivers: Risk Perception, Attitudes, and Driving Behavior
• Select Bus Service on Bx12 in New York City: Bus Rapid Transit Partnership of New York City DOT and Metropolitan Transit Authority New York City Transit
• Space Requirements for Wheeled Mobility Devices in Public Transportation: Analysis of Clear Floor Space Requirements