Investigation of the Relationship Between Transit Network Structure and the Network Effect – the Toronto & Melbourne Experience
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
INVESTIGATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRANSIT NETWORK STRUCTURE AND THE NETWORK EFFECT – THE TORONTO & MELBOURNE EXPERIENCE By Karen Frances Woo A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Applied Science Department of Civil Engineering University of Toronto © Copyright by Karen Frances Woo 2009 Investigation of the Relationship between Transit Network Structure and the Network Effect – The Toronto & Melbourne Experience Karen Frances Woo Master of Applied Science Department of Civil Engineering University of Toronto 2009 Abstract The main objective of this study was to quantitatively explore the connection between network structure and network effect and its impact on transit usage as seen through the real-world experience of the Toronto and Melbourne transit systems. In this study, the comparison of ridership/capita and mode split data showed that Toronto’s TTC has better performance for the annual data of 1999/2001 and 2006. After systematically investigating travel behaviour, mode choice factors and the various evidence of the network effect, it was found that certain socio-economic, demographic, trip and other design factors in combination with the network effect influence the better transit patronage in Toronto over Melbourne. Overall, this comparative study identified differences that are possible explanatory variables for Toronto’s better transit usage as well as areas where these two cities and their transit systems could learn from one another for both short and long term transit planning and design. ii Acknowledgments This thesis and research would not have been possible without the help and assistance of many people for which much thanks is due. First, I would like to take this opportunity to express my heartfelt gratitude to my thesis supervisor, Dr. Amer S. Shalaby for his continuous guidance, encouragement and support. Dr. Shalaby motivated me to seek excellence and was always there to provide constructive feedback, wisdom, insight and reassurance when needed on all aspects of this research project. Also, I would like to extend my sincere appreciation to my adjunct research advisor, Professor Graham Currie, for his additional guidance and support. By asking me the tough questions and assisting me through the thought process, Professor Currie’s expertise and knowledge was of great value to me. I am truly thankful for the collaborative effort between Dr. Shalaby and Professor Currie for allowing me the opportunity to research abroad. The life and learning experience has been invaluable to me. I would also like to extend my appreciation to Metlink and the TTC for their cooperation in facilitating this study by providing data. Many thanks to George Panageotov from Metlink for personally delivering the data in such a timely manner and for being so helpful in answering questions and Mohammed Wahba (Medhat) for providing me with the complete TTC GIS stop and route data as well as the TTC stop sequence data and for taking the time to explain it all to me. A special thanks to Chris Loader for his expertise with Microsoft Access and providing me with the service level quantification data for the Melbourne transit system. I am deeply grateful to Monash University and the friendly and helpful Civil Engineering staff for their warm welcome and providing me with a home away from home. I would especially like to thank Jenny Manson for helping me arrange my trip to Melbourne and helping me get settled once I had arrived. Also, a very special thanks to Alexa Delbosc and Pauline Forbes for their moral support and letting me share their office space with them and for explaining Australian culture to me. Alexa also assisted me with all my additional data requirements particularly the travel survey data and never hesitated in assisting me with my questions and for that I am grateful to her. Also, special thanks to Daniel Borowski for showing me around Melbourne and giving me a local’s insights into Melbourne transit. Special appreciation is also owed to my fellow University of Toronto MASc. friends and classmates, Andrew Wong, Bryce Sharman, Jiang Hao and Josée Dumont, for their constant encouragement and reassurance when things did not seem to go as planned. Lastly, I would also like to thank my family for their continual moral support throughout this endeavour and for showing that support by traveling to Australia during my research abroad so that we could spend the Christmas holidays together as a family. iii Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................................1 1.1. MOTIVATION FOR STUDY ............................................................................................................................1 1.2. BACKGROUND ON THE CASE STUDY CITIES ................................................................................................2 1.2.1. Social Background.................................................................................................................................2 1.2.2. Transit Background ...............................................................................................................................6 1.3. OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF STUDY ...........................................................................................................12 1.4. ORGANIZATION OF THESIS ........................................................................................................................12 2. LITERATURE REVIEW................................................................................................................................14 2.1. PEER COMPARISON LITERATURE...............................................................................................................14 2.2. TRANSIT NETWORK STRUCTURE & NETWORK EFFECT LITERATURE ........................................................16 2.2.1. Transit Network Structure ...................................................................................................................16 2.2.2. Network Effect, Synergy & Externality................................................................................................20 2.3. PREVIOUS MELBOURNE & TORONTO STUDIES ..........................................................................................22 3. STUDY METHODOLOGY & DATA............................................................................................................24 3.1. WHAT IS THE NETWORK EFFECT? ..............................................................................................................24 3.2. METHOD....................................................................................................................................................25 3.3. DATA DESCRIPTION & LIMITATION...........................................................................................................27 3.3.1. Toronto Data .......................................................................................................................................27 3.3.2. Melbourne Data...................................................................................................................................29 3.4. STUDY AREA DEFINITION .........................................................................................................................31 3.4.1. Transit Area Coverage & Zone Fares .................................................................................................32 3.4.2. Data Limitations..................................................................................................................................33 3.4.3. Defined Study Area..............................................................................................................................33 4. RIDERSHIP & MODE SPLIT .......................................................................................................................36 4.1. MARKET SHARE AND MODE ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................36 4.1.1. Connex Train versus TTC Subway.......................................................................................................38 4.1.2. Yarra Tram versus TTC Streetcar .......................................................................................................40 4.1.3. Melbourne Bus versus TTC Bus...........................................................................................................40 4.2. RIDERSHIP COMPARISON...........................................................................................................................40 4.2.1. Reporting Ridership.............................................................................................................................41 4.2.2. Ridership Results .................................................................................................................................41 4.3. MODE SPLIT COMPARISON ........................................................................................................................42 5. SOCIO-ECONOMIC, DEMOGRAPHIC AND TRIP FACTORS THAT AFFECT TRANSIT RIDERSHIP...............................................................................................................................................................45 5.1. POPULATION FACTORS..............................................................................................................................45