DOCSLIB.ORG

Haynes Expo Final Report 12-5-Rev

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Haynes Expo Final Report 12-5-Rev The Exposition Light Rail Line Study A Before-and-After Study of the Impact of New Light Rail Transit Service Prepared for: The Haynes Foundation Prepared by: Marlon G. Boarnet (Principal Investigator), Andy Hong, Jeongwoo Lee, Xize Wang, Weijie Wang University of Southern California With Doug Houston, Steven Spears University of California, Irvine Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................................... v I. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 1 1. Background and research objectives ................................................................................................................................... 1 2. The policy context ................................................................................................................................................................ 2 3. Travel behavior variables .................................................................................................................................................... 3 4. Structure of this report ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 II. Methods and data collection ......................................................................................................................................... 4 1. Expo line background .......................................................................................................................................................... 4 2. Study area selection ............................................................................................................................................................ 5 3. Participant recruitment and data collection ........................................................................................................................ 7 3.1. Before-opening data collection (9/2011-2/2012) ........................................................................................................ 7 3.2. After-opening data collection (9/2012-11/2012) ........................................................................................................ 9 4. Data processing and preparation ........................................................................................................................................ 9 III. Travel impact of Expo line ........................................................................................................................................... 10 1. Sample comparisons – Descriptive statistics ..................................................................................................................... 10 1.1. Socio-demographics ................................................................................................................................................... 10 1.2. Travel outcomes ......................................................................................................................................................... 11 2. Impacts on VMT and other travel variables ...................................................................................................................... 13 2.1. Before-opening differences, experimental versus control groups ............................................................................ 13 2.2. After-opening differences, experimental versus control group ................................................................................. 14 2.3. Changes after opening compared to before opening ................................................................................................ 15 2.4. Robustness check of the VMT analysis ...................................................................................................................... 19 2.5. Comparison of GPS and travel diary .......................................................................................................................... 21 3. Impacts on physical activity ............................................................................................................................................... 23 3.1. Data and research hypotheses ................................................................................................................................... 23 3.2. Descriptive statistics of the physical activity data ..................................................................................................... 24 3.3. Results of the physical activity analysis ..................................................................................................................... 25 3.4. Robustness check of the physical activity analysis .................................................................................................... 29 4. Impacts on emissions ......................................................................................................................................................... 32 4.1. Assumptions and calculation ..................................................................................................................................... 32 4.2. Descriptive statistics of the emissions data ............................................................................................................... 33 4.3. Results of the emissions analysis ............................................................................................................................... 34 4.4. Summary of findings in CO2 emission patterns .......................................................................................................... 39 IV. Land use characteristics of the Expo corridor .............................................................................................................. 40 1. Land use characteristics around the Expo light rail corridor ............................................................................................. 40 1.1. Employment patterns ................................................................................................................................................ 40 1.2. Land use patterns along the Expo line ....................................................................................................................... 41 1.3. Land use characteristics around the station area ...................................................................................................... 45 2. Street environment based on the built environment audit ................................................................................................ 48 2.1. The Irvine Minnesota Inventory ................................................................................................................................. 48 2.2. Characteristics of the built environments .................................................................................................................. 49 i 2.3. Comparison between stations ................................................................................................................................... 50 2.4. Findings of the IMI analysis ........................................................................................................................................ 51 3. Station-area built environment impact on travel outcomes .............................................................................................. 52 3.1. Descriptive statistics of the land use variables .......................................................................................................... 52 3.2. Results of the land use regression analysis ................................................................................................................ 54 3.3. Findings of the built environment analysis ................................................................................................................ 58 V. Summary of the results ................................................................................................................................................ 59 1. Changes and impacts on travel ......................................................................................................................................... 59 2. Land use and street environment along the Expo light rail corridor ................................................................................. 59 3. Future Research Directions ................................................................................................................................................ 60 References ....................................................................................................................................................................... 62 Appendix A: List of households that changed vehicle holdings ......................................................................................... 63 Appendix B: Analysis of the street environments of EXPO line stations ............................................................................ 65 List of Tables Table 1: Census data for Expo line experimental and control areas ..........................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Metro Public Hearing Pamphlet
    Proposed Service Changes Metro will hold a series of six virtual on proposed major service changes to public hearings beginning Wednesday, Metro’s bus service. Approved changes August 19 through Thursday, August 27, will become effective December 2020 2020 to receive community input or later. How to Participate By Phone: Other Ways to Comment: Members of the public can call Comments sent via U.S Mail should be addressed to: 877.422.8614 Metro Service Planning & Development and enter the corresponding extension to listen Attn: NextGen Bus Plan Proposed to the proceedings or to submit comments by phone in their preferred language (from the time Service Changes each hearing starts until it concludes). Audio and 1 Gateway Plaza, 99-7-1 comment lines with live translations in Mandarin, Los Angeles, CA 90012-2932 Spanish, and Russian will be available as listed. Callers to the comment line will be able to listen Comments must be postmarked by midnight, to the proceedings while they wait for their turn Thursday, August 27, 2020. Only comments to submit comments via phone. Audio lines received via the comment links in the agendas are available to listen to the hearings without will be read during each hearing. being called on to provide live public comment Comments via e-mail should be addressed to: via phone. [email protected] Online: Attn: “NextGen Bus Plan Submit your comments online via the Public Proposed Service Changes” Hearing Agendas. Agendas will be posted at metro.net/about/board/agenda Facsimiles should be addressed as above and sent to: at least 72 hours in advance of each hearing.
    [Show full text]
  • LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY BID TABULATION Bid No: OP33673069 Landscape and Irrigation Maintenance Services
    LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY BID TABULATION Bid No: OP33673069 Landscape and Irrigation Maintenance Services Bids Out: 02/14/13 Total 15 Bids Opened: 03/21/13 Total 6 Lincoln Training Center Diversified Landscape Co. Woods Maintenance Service, Inc. Advertisement Date(s): 02/14/13 Newspaper: LA Daily News FACILITY/LOCATION 36 MONTH BASE A. BUS DIVISIONS, TERMAINALS AND LAYOVER LOTS MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY SAN FERNANDO $535.25 $444.00 $1,506.00 SAN GABRIEL VAL $540.50 $888.00 $1,506.00 DIVISION 1 $1,635.75 $1,110.00 $4,438.00 DIVISION 2 $420.79 $444.00 $1,163.00 DIVISION 3 $357.27 $333.00 $986.00 DIVISION 4 $325.95 $888.00 $889.00 DIVISION 5 $335.35 $1,332.00 $1,035.00 DIVISION 6 $219.36 $444.00 $617.00 DIVISION 7 $239.36 $444.00 $655.00 DIVISION 8 $375.98 $1,332.00 $1,026.00 DIVISION 9 $170.25 $888.00 $479.00 DIVISION 10 $646.50 $2,664.00 $1,751.00 DIVISION 12 $175.80 $666.00 $493.00 DIVISION 15 $1,300.00 $2,220.00 $3,558.00 TERMINAL 17 $197.25 $222.00 $547.00 DIVISION 18 $645.85 $1,554.00 $1,751.00 TERMINAL 19 $1,235.55 $222.00 $3,354.00 TERMINAL 26 $180.00 $222.00 $506.00 TERMINAL 27 $190.00 $222.00 $533.00 LOCATION 30 $2,479.59 $444.00 $6,735.00 LOCATION 31 $170.95 $222.00 $479.00 TERMINAL 37 $105.27 $222.00 $288.00 TERMINAL 38 $257.39 $222.00 $711.00 TERMINAL 39 $174.95 $222.00 $479.00 TERMINAL 40 $629.36 $222.00 $1,711.00 TERMINAL 42 $238.07 $222.00 $657.00 TERMINAL 44 $340.75 $222.00 $932.00 TERMINAL 45 $192.75 $222.00 $531.00 TERMINAL 47 $388.29 $222.00 $1,058.00 LOCATION 53 $335.36 $222.00 $889.00 LAYOVER LOT $270.40 $222.00 $751.00 BUS DIVISIONS MONTHLY SUBTOTAL $15,309.89 (A) $19,425.00 (A) $42,014.00 (A) FACILITY/LOCATION MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY B.
    [Show full text]
  • Portraits of Metro Artists Whose Work Enriches the Rider's Journey
    The Makers Portraits of Metro artists whose work enriches the rider’s journey The Makers Portraits of Metro artists whose work enriches the rider’s journey Summer 2016 to Winter 2017 Union Station Passageway This exhibition is presented by Metro Art in collaboration with artist Todd Gray. Cover: Portrait of Michael Massenburg by Todd Gray. Opposite: Detail of MacArthur Park, Urban Oasis (2010) by Sonia Romero, Westlake/MacArthur Park Station. Metro Art is Artworks at Stations Art and artists transform the public transit experience. & Facilities Artworks animate the transitional moments between destinations, elevating the mood, punctuating the Photography Installations transit landscape and transporting the imagination Art Posters of Metro riders. They express the texture, little known narratives and aspirations of our region. Poetry Cards & Readings By integrating artworks into Metro’s myriad transit Music & Dance environments, we enrich the journeys of millions of Participatory Art people each day. & Performance metro.net/art Film Screenings Art Banners Community Engagement Meet-the-Artist Events Artist Workshops Art Tours Creative Placemaking Cultural Partnerships Metro Art is Detail of Long Beach poster (2013) by Christine Nguyen, Through the Eyes of Artists series. The Makers The Makers is an ongoing series of photographic portraits by Todd Gray, featuring the artists behind the artworks in the Metro system. In this initial installation at Union Station, the 30 featured artists span multiple generations, come from a variety of backgrounds, and work in a remarkable range of mediums and styles. Some are emerging artists, while others are more established. The breadth of the group is a testament to the high concentration of creative talent living and working in the Los Angeles region.
    [Show full text]
  • Incentivizing Zero-Emission Vehicle Ride-Hail/Public Transit Commutes in Los Angeles
    Incentivizing Zero-Emission Vehicle Ride-Hail/Public Transit Commutes in Los Angeles April 2018 By Juan M. Matute Herbie Huff Riley O’Brien Brian D. Taylor 1 Acknowledgements The research team received funding from the UCLA ​ ​ Sustainable Los Angeles Grand Challenge. From ​ ​ understanding future climate patterns and maximizing the region's solar potential, to understanding how gender plays a role in reducing our daily water use and revolutionizing plant and animal conservation management, we are spearheading the research necessary to define the region's pathway to sustainability. The research team also received support from the UCLA ​ Institute of Transportation Studies. The mission of the ​ UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies, one of the leading transportation policy research centers in the United States, is to support and advance cutting-edge research, the highest-quality education, and meaningful and influential civic engagement on the many pressing transportation issues facing our cities, state, nation, and world today. 2 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 2 Introduction 6 Project Research Objectives 6 Prior Research and Background 7 Transportation Network Companies 7 Overview 7 TNC-Transit Integration 10 Zero Emission Vehicles (ZEVs) Adoption 11 Clean Vehicle Adoption Overview 11 Plug-in hybrids and fully electric vehicles 11 Hydrogen fuel cell incentives 13 TNCs and ZEVs 13 Employee Commutes 13 Policy Setting and Background 14 State Policy Setting 14 Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 and 2016 Update 14 Governor’s Zero
    [Show full text]
  • Information Item
    Information Item Date: October 25, 2016 To: Mayor and City Council From: Edward F. King, Director of Transit Services Subject: Fiscal Year 2015-16 Big Blue Bus Year End Performance Report Introduction Fiscal Year 2015-16 was marked by momentous adaptation of our service to meet the needs of a changing transportation marketplace within the City of Santa Monica and throughout the Big Blue Bus (BBB) service area. The most visible change in the public transportation landscape was, of course, the extension of the Expo Line to downtown Santa Monica, which has had a direct and very visible impact on mobility patterns in the City and regionally. In addition, growth in active transportation, introduction of bike share, first and last mile focus, the growth and acceptance of Uber and Lyft, advancements in autonomous vehicle technology, and other disruptive forces all contributed to dynamic shifts in how people think about their mobility needs here in Santa Monica and throughout the region. The following summary and attached report provide details on Big Blue Bus (BBB) service performance for FY2015-16 within the framework of a rapidly changing physical and cultural environment. Background In September 2013, City Council approved the Big Blue Bus service evaluation guidelines, titled “Big Blue Bus Service, Design, Performance and Evaluation Guidelines” that provided detailed recommendations for bus route and service performance metrics, a reporting calendar, and standardized methods for evaluating bus service and bus service proposals to ensure that all services are evaluated regularly for efficiency, cost effectiveness, and overall viability. Pursuant to the September 24, 2013 staff report and 1 subsequent action by Council, the following summarizes the performance for all BBB routes during Fiscal Year 2015-16.
    [Show full text]
  • The Exposition Light Rail Line Study “Before-Opening” Data Collection and Preliminary Analysis Report
    The Exposition Light Rail Line Study “Before-Opening” Data Collection and Preliminary Analysis Report prepared for: The Lincoln Institute of Land Use Policy Cambridge, Massachusetts prepared by: Marlon Boarnet Price School of Public Policy University of Southern California Doug Houston Steven Spears Department of Planning, Policy & Design University of California, Irvine Table of Contents Executive Summary iii Objective 1 Research Context – California SB 375 and transportation- related greenhouse gas emission reduction 1 Expo Line Background 3 Study Area Selection 4 Participant Recruitment 7 Participant Selection and Data Collection 8 Before Opening Expo Line Sample 9 Data Processing and Preparation 11 Descriptive Statistics 11 Basic Regression Analyses for Travel Outcome Variables 25 Regression Results 26 Discussion and Future Steps 31 After-Opening Data Collection and Analysis 31 Advantages of the Research Design 32 After-Opening Analysis Methods 33 References 36 Appendix A – Expo Line Study Survey Materials 37 List of Figures Figure 1: Exposition Line Vicinity Map 3 Figure 2: Expo Line Study Project Areas 5 Figure 3: LA Metro Transit System Route Map and Project Limits 7 Figure 4: Approximate Expo Line Study Response Locations 10 List of Tables Table 1: Expo Study Neighborhoods - Basic Demographic and Land Use Characteristics 6 i List of Tables (cont.) Table 2: Expo Line Response Summary 10 Table 3: Descriptive Statistics for the Complete Expo Line Before-Opening Sample 12 Table 4: Comparison of Expo Line Study and NHTS Travel Variables
    [Show full text]
  • Westside Cities Report
    SUBREGIONAL MOBILITY MATRIX WESTSIDE CITIES Project No. PS-4010-3041-U-01 Final Report Prepared for: Prepared by: Fehr & Peers 600 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 1050 Los Angeles, CA 90017 March 2015 Final Report Westside Cities Final Report Subregional Mobility Matrix Westside Cities PS-4010-3041-U-01 Prepared for: Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Prepared by: Fehr & Peers In Association With: Iteris, Inc. Arellano Associates, LLC Civic Projects, Inc. Quality Review Tracking Version # Date Reviewer Signature Description/Comments Internal Review Draft 2/9/15 FP Reviewer: Rachel Neumann RMN Draft 2/11/15 FP Reviewer: Sarah Brandenberg Submit Draft to Metro SUBREGIONAL MOBILITY MATRIX – WESTSIDE CITIES March 2015 Page i Final Report Westside Cities Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................................................... ES-1 Mobility Matrix Overview ........................................................................................................................................................................... ES-1 Project Purpose ........................................................................................................................................................................................... ES-1 Process 3 Subregional Overview ...............................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • General Information About the Contents of This File
    GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE CONTENTS OF THIS FILE Submissions by the public in compliance with the Commission Rules and Operating Procedures (ROPs), Rule 4.3, are distributed to the Commission and uploaded online. Please note that “compliance” means that the submission complies with deadline, delivery method (hard copy and/or electronic) AND the number of copies. Please review the Commission ROPs to ensure that you meet the submission requirements. The ROPs can be accessed at http://planning.lacity.org, by selecting “Commissions & Hearings” and selecting the specific Commission. All compliant submissions may be accessed as follows: • “Initial Submissions”: Compliant submissions received no later than by end of day Monday of the week prior to the meeting, which are not integrated by reference or exhibit in the Staff Report, will be appended at the end of the Staff Report. The Staff Report is linked to the case number on the specific meeting agenda. • “Secondary Submissions”: Compliant submissions received after the Initial Submission deadline up to 3:00 p.m. Thursday of the week prior to the Commission meeting are contained in this file and bookmarked by the case number. • “Day of Hearing Submissions”: Compliant submissions after the Secondary Submission deadline up to and including the day of the Commission meeting will be uploaded to this file within two business days after the Commission meeting. Material which does not comply with the submission rules is not distributed to the Commission. ENABLE BOOKMARKS ONLINE: **If you are using Explorer, you need will need to enable the Acrobat toolbar to see the bookmarks on the left side of the screen.
    [Show full text]
  • Culver City Palms West Los Angeles Mar Vista Westwood
    PALMS – VA MEDICAL CENTER – UCLA 17 UCLA Macgowan Hall E Terminal Wyton Dickson Westholme Charles E Young Le Conte Weyburn WESTWOOD Veteran Gayley Wilshire Bonsall Hammer Museum n D e l VA West Los Angeles w o D Medical Center Santa Monica Blvd WEST Olympic LOS Westwood Blvd Westside ANGELES Pavilion Pico Sepulveda Station C - E Line Exposition National Sawtelle MAR Palms Station PALMS -E Line Hamilton VISTA High School Sepulveda Palms Blvd B National Windward School Robertson Overland Motor Exposition Venice Blvd A Washington CULVER A Timepoint Punto de Tiempo CITY National Metro Rail Station Culver City Station - E Line Estación de Metro Rail - Metro Bus not to scale - Culver City Bus EFFECTIVE DATE: AUGUST 15, 2021 CULVER CITY STATION E LINE TO UCLA Robertson & Venice City (Culver Station) Overland & Palms Sepulveda & Exposition (Sepulveda Station) Medical VA Center UCLA Macgowan Hall Terminal A B C D E 5:50 5:56 6:04 6:12 6:25 6:20 6:27 6:35 6:43 6:56 6:40 6:47 6:56 7:05 7:19 6:58 7:05 7:15 7:25 7:40 7:14 7:23 7:35 7:46 8:03 7:30 7:40 7:52 8:04 8:22 WEEKDAY 7:45 7:55 8:08 8:20 8:38 8:00 8:10 8:23 8:35 8:53 8:15 8:25 8:38 8:50 9:08 8:30 8:40 8:53 9:05 9:23 8:45 8:55 9:08 9:20 9:38 9:00 9:08 9:20 9:32 9:49 9:15 9:23 9:35 9:47 10:04 9:30 9:38 9:49 10:00 10:17 9:45 9:52 10:02 10:13 10:29 10:00 10:07 10:17 10:28 10:44 DURANTE LA SEMANA 10:15 10:22 10:32 10:43 10:59 10:30 10:37 10:47 10:58 11:14 10:50 10:57 11:07 11:18 11:34 11:10 11:17 11:27 11:38 11:54 11:30 11:37 11:47 11:58 12:14 11:50 11:57 12:07 12:18 12:34 12:10 12:17 12:28 12:40
    [Show full text]
  • Expo Line Scavenger Hunt
    Just like following water through a watershed, Metro’s Expo Line takes us 7th Street/Metro Center from the headwaters to the sea. With The City each passing station, you’ll receive a clue Over the next 46 minutes you will travel 15.2 miles or question. You will be travelling through through 19 station stops, ending up 3 blocks from the Pacific Ocean. Which came first in Downtown the Ballona Creek Watershed and LA – the buildings above or the train below? Why embarking on a journey through time, is this station underground? so be observant and enjoy the ride. Jefferson/USC station PICO STATION LID You are approaching the University of Southern California. Some of the 43,000 students that attend Los Angeles is constantly changing study Urban Design & Low Impact Development Over time the landscape of LA has changed (LID)– a way of designing buildings to conserve and to suit a growing population (12 million in use natural features to protect the environment. Can Greater LA est. 2016). As the train pulls out of you name two ways a building could have a lower this station, look to find murals covering the impact on the surrounding environment? Los Angeles Technical Trade College. Can you find 3 trades featured in the murals that were used to build LA? Fun Fact: Heal the Bay works with the City of LA to protect the watershed by including LID in city plans. Fun Fact: Kanye West once taught a fashion and design class at LATTC. Vermont station Carbon Footprint Calculation Expo Park/USC station Estimate how many people are in your train car.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning Commission Agenda Item Report
    City of Culver City, California Planning Commission Agenda Item Report Meeting Date: February 17, 2016 Item Number: PH-1 AGENDA ITEM: Proposed Comprehensive Plan, Height Exception and Tentative Tract Map (P2015-0141-CP, HTEX, and TTM) to allow a mixed use development consisting of a 148 room hotel, approximately 57,700 gross square feet of retail and restaurant uses, 196,300 gross square feet of office use and 200 residential dwelling units located at 8824 National Boulevard. Contact.: Susan Yun, Senior Planner Phone Number: (310) 253-5755; Thomas Gorham, Planning Manager (310) 253-5727 Public Hearing: [X] Action Item: [] Attachments: [X] Public Notification: On January 26, 2016 a notice was posted on the site and was mailed to all the property owners and occupants within a 1,000 foot radius of the Culver City’s Transit Oriented Development area (approximately 1,900 recipients) and emailed to the Master Notification List. The notice was also published in the Culver City News on January 28 and February 4, 2016. Planning Approval: Department Approval: Thomas Gorham, Planning Manager Sol Blumenfeld, Director of Community Development RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission: 1. Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) based on the Initial Study finding that the Project, with mitigation measures incorporated, will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment (Attachment No. 2); and 2. Recommend to the City Council Approval of Comprehensive Plan, P2015- 0141-CP, Height Exception, P2015-0141-HTEX, and Tentative Tract Map, P2015-0141-TTM subject to the Conditions of Approval as stated in Resolution No. 2016-P002 (Attachment No.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX L Market Study
    APPENDIX L Market Study Report: Expo and Crenshaw LRT Transit Neighborhood Plans Market Analysis Los Angeles, CA Prepared for: City of Los Angeles, Department of City Planning (DCP) Prepared by: Pro Forma Advisors LLC re+ep February 2013 (with minor revisions April 2014) PFAID: 10-377.02 Pro Forma Advisors LLC Los Angeles Hartford Hong Kong www.ProFormaAdvisors.com Table of Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................................... v Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Organization of the Report .......................................................................................................................................... 1 Project ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Regional Demographic and Socio-Economic Context ............................................................................................. 3 Analysis Geographies ................................................................................................................................................. 3 Population and Households .........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]