Analysis of Modernization Scenarios for SEPTA Route 34 MAY 2016 The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission is dedicated to uniting the region’s elected officials, planning professionals, and the public with a common vision of making a great region even greater. Shaping the way we live, work, and play, DVRPC builds consensus on improving transportation, promoting smart growth, protecting the environment, and enhancing the economy. We serve a diverse region of nine counties: Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery, and Philadelphia in Pennsylvania; and Burlington, Camden, Gloucester, and Mercer in New Jersey. DVRPC is the federally designated Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Greater Philadelphia Region — leading the way to a better future. The symbol in our logo is adapted from the official DVRPC seal and is designed as a stylized image of the Delaware Valley. The outer ring symbolizes the region as a whole while the diagonal bar signifies the Delaware River. The two adjoining crescents represent the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the State of New Jersey. DVRPC is funded by a variety of funding sources including federal grants from the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the Pennsylvania and New Jersey departments of transportation, as well as by DVRPC’s state and local member governments. The authors, however, are solely responsible for the findings and conclusions herein, which may not represent the official views or policies of the funding agencies. The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) fully complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987, Executive Order 12898 on Environmental Justice, and related nondiscrimination statutes and regulations in all programs and activities. DVRPC’s website, www.dvrpc.org, may be translated into multiple languages. Publications and other public documents can be made available in alternative languages and formats, if requested. DVRPC public meetings are always held in ADA-accessible facilities and in transit-accessible locations when possible. Auxiliary services can be provided to individuals who submit a request at least seven days prior to a meeting. Requests made within seven days will be accommodated to the greatest extent possible. Any person who believes they have been aggrieved by an unlawful discriminatory practice by DVRPC under Title VI has a right to file a formal complaint. Any such complaint may be in writing and filed with DVRPC’s Title VI Compliance Manager and/or the appropriate state or federal agency within 180 days of the alleged discriminatory occurrence. For more information on DVRPC’s Title VI program, or to obtain a Title VI Complaint Form, please call (215) 592-1800 or email [email protected]. Cover image adapted from: Flickr user Jarrett Stewart (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 1: Background and Initial Analysis .............................................................................................. 3 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3 Prior DVRPC Analysis of Route 34 ............................................................................................................ 3 Route 34 in Comparison to Other Subway-Surface Routes .................................................................... 4 New Element 1: Low-Friction Fare Payment with Multidoor Boarding .................................................. 5 New Element 2: ADA Accessibility and Ramp Deployment .................................................................... 6 CHAPTER 2: Simulation of Modernization Scenarios .................................................................................. 7 Overview of Approach and Tools .............................................................................................................. 7 Scenario Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 9 What is VISSIM/Why Microsimulation? ..................................................................................................... 9 Results of Scenario Testing ..................................................................................................................... 10 CHAPTER 3: Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 13 Figures • Figure 1: Route 34 Context Map ............................................................................................................ 3 • Figure 2: Average Route 34 Eastbound Travel Time .......................................................................... 10 • Figure 3: Percentage Change in Route 34 Eastbound Travel Time .................................................... 10 • Figure 4: Percentage Change in Average Delay (All Vehicles on Baltimore Avenue) ........................ 11 • Figure 5: Average Total Trolley Intersection Delay (Seconds) ............................................................ 11 Tables • Table ES1: Summary of Simulated Route 34 Time Savings by Scenario and Direction ....................... 1 • Table 1: Select Comparative Metrics for Subway-Surface Trolley Routes ............................................ 4 • Table 2: Summary of Simulated Route 34 Time Savings by Scenario and Direction .......................... 13 i Appendices Appendix A: August 2014 memorandum on running time savings, as transmitted .............................. A-1 Appendix B: April 2015 memorandum on ADA ramp deployments, as transmitted .............................. B-1 Appendix C: Details on model calibration and scenario coding .............................................................. C-1 Base Version (Prior Study) ..................................................................................................................... C-1 Calibration Updates ................................................................................................................................ C-2 Coding Alternatives ................................................................................................................................ C-3 ii Executive Summary The Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) is engaged in a multiyear effort to modernize its roughly 35-year-old Kawasaki trolley fleet with new wheelchair-accessible trolleys and stops, potentially supplemented with other operational changes. The purpose of this study was to use VISSIM microsimulation software to test the travel time and delay outcomes of various trolley modernization scenarios for the street-running portions of SEPTA Route 34. The microsimulation analysis was built on a prior Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) Transit First Analysis of Route 34 (pub. 09040, March 2010), updated to reflect new 2014 baseline traffic and transit conditions. This effort also included an initial analysis of some of the modernization elements under consideration, drawing on SEPTA data and industry peer experience, as well as sketch projections of likely wheelchair boarding rates for accessible trolleys based on SEPTA’s experience with other accessible routes. Table ES1 summarizes the scenarios that were simulated, as well as the end-to-end trolley travel time projections that resulted. More explanation of these scenarios and findings can be found in Chapter 2. Table ES1: Summary of Simulated Route 34 Time Savings by Scenario and Direction Eastbound* surface travel Westbound surface travel Scenario (AM Peak) time change from base time change from base Existing Kawasaki fleet N/A N/A Vehicle option A: Front-door boarding with operator-assist ADA New vehicles +0.4% +1.2% New vehicles + TSP –1.9% –8.0% New vehicles + TSP + Stop consolidation –9.8% –11.6% Vehicle option B: 2-door boarding/low-friction fare payment, automated ADA ramp New vehicles –12.9% –7.8% New vehicles + TSP –15.1% –12.8% New vehicles + TSP + Stop consolidation –19.8% –14.8% * Peak direction for the AM peak (higher trolley passenger boardings and auto traffic volumes). Source: DVRPC, 2015 In general, the results of the simulation revealed that higher levels of intervention resulted in higher levels of projected cumulative travel time benefit. Most notably: Projected time savings were significantly greater in simulations of vehicle option B than in simulations of vehicle option A. Projected time savings for scenario B1 (lower-friction boarding, without transit signal priority [TSP] or stop consolidation) are comparable to those of scenario A3 (higher-friction boarding with both TSP and stop consolidation). TSP and stop consolidation were found to be most impactful in combination (as in scenarios A3 and B3), illuminating their complementary relationship. ANALYSIS OF MODERNIZATION SCENARIOS FOR SEPTA ROUTE 34 1 2 TITLE OF REPORT CHAPTER 1: Background and Initial Analysis Introduction SEPTA is engaged in a multiyear effort to modernize its roughly 35-year-old Kawasaki trolley fleet with new wheelchair-accessible trolleys and stops, potentially supplemented with other operational changes. The purpose of this study was to use VISSIM