USF Libraries
USF Digital Collections

Tri-rail on-board survey analysis

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Tri-rail on-board survey analysis
Physical Description:
Book
Language:
English
Creator:
Tri-County Commuter Rail Authority
University of South Florida. Center for Urban Transportation Research
Publisher:
Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR)
Place of Publication:
Tampa, Fla
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Railroads--Florida--Commuting traffic--Evaluation   ( lcsh )
Railroads--Florida--Miami Region--Commuting traffic--Evaluation   ( lcsh )
Transportation--Florida--Miami Region--Evaluation   ( lcsh )
Genre:
letter   ( marcgt )

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida Library
Holding Location:
University of South Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
oclc - 41155603
usfldc doi - C01-00112
usfldc handle - c1.112
System ID:
SFS0032225:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader ntm 22 Ka 4500
controlfield tag 008 s flunnn| ||||ineng
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a C01-00112
035
(OCoLC) 41155603
040
FHM
049
FHmm
2 110
Tri-County Commuter Rail Authority.
0 245
Tri-rail on-board survey analysis
260
Tampa, Fla
b Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR)
c 1991 October
650
Railroads--Florida--Commuting traffic--Evaluation
Railroads--Florida--Miami Region--Commuting traffic--Evaluation
Transportation--Florida--Miami Region--Evaluation
710
University of South Florida. Center for Urban Transportation Research.
1 773
t Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF].
4 856
u http://digital.lib.usf.edu/?c1.112



PAGE 1

TRI-RAIL ON-BOARD SURVEY ANALYSIS Prepared for: Tri County Commuter Rail Authority By: Center for Urban Transportation Research College of Engineering University of South Florida October 1991

PAGE 2

FOREWORD Under contract with the Tri-County Commuter Rail Authority, the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) conducted an on-board survey of Tri-Rail patrons on March 28 and March 30 of 1991. A summary presentation of the survey results was made before the Tri-Rail Board of Directors on May 10 and the detailed survey results and analysis are provided in this report. The following CUTR staff assisted in conducting the on-board survey and in the preparation of this report: Project Director: Steven E. Polzin, P.E., Pb.D. Deputy Director for Policy Analysis Project Managers: Survey Implementation, Timothy Lambert, Research Associate Survey Analysis, William L. Ball, Research Associate Staff Support: Eric Hill, Research Associate Stacey Bricka, Research Technician Joel Rey, Graduate Research Assistant It

PAGE 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Il. OVERVIEW OF SYSTEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 m SURVEY OBJECTIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 IV. SURVEY METHODOWGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 V SURVEY ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . U Demographic Information . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 13 Travel Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 User Satisfaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 VI. SUMMARY /CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 VII. fVfURE APPLICATIONS AND SUBSEQUENT SURVEYS . . . . . 105 APPENDIX A Survey Instrument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1 APPENDIX B Sullllll3ry ol Survey Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-1 iii

PAGE 4

this page IS blank iv

PAGE 5

Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 Table 10 Table 11 Table 12 Table 13 Table 14 Table 15 Table 16 Table 17 Table 18 LIST OF TABLES Thursday, 03/28/91, Response Rate By Direction, Time, and Train . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Saturday, 03/30/91, Response Rate By Direction and Train . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Response Rates By Question ............. ............... Comparison of Age Categories .......... ................ Comparison of Gender Pop u lation ..................... ... Demographic Comparisons With Bus Riders in Florida ..... ... Satisfaction With Fare Structure .......................... Origin and Destination Stations, Weighted Tota l 9 10 14 16 26 44 Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 7 Origin and Destination Stations, Thursday Response ..... ..... 48 Origin and Destination Stations, Saturday Response ........... 49 Trip Length Frequencies by Weekday and Weekend .......... 55 Satisfaction With the Availability of Parking by Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Satisfaction With the Availability of Buses by Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Trip Purpose. Origin/Destination, Weighted Total Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Trip Purpose Origin/Destination, Thursday Response ........ Trip Purpose Origin/Destination, Saturday Response . . . . How did you first learn about TriRail? .................... Frequency of Use and Residency Status .................... v 66 67 70 71

PAGE 6

Table 19 Alternative Transportation and Automobile Ownership .. ... . . Table 20 Ridership Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 21 User Satisfaction Ratings ............................... Table 22 The Area Where Improvements Would be Most Helpful . . . Table 23 Ridership Profiles .................................... Table B-1 Question 1. How many months have you been using 72 73 98 100 101 TriRail? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-2 Table B-2 Question 2. Will you be riding Tri-Rail on your remm ? trip. . . .. 0 0 0 0 B-2 Table B-3 Question 3. Where did you come from before you started this trip? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B Table B-4 Question 4. What are the major cross streets nearest this! ? ocation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... B-3 Table B-5 Question 5. Approximately what time did you start your ? trlp. ..... 0 0 .... 0 0 0 0 0 0 Table B-6 Question 6. How did you get to the train stop? . . . . . . B-5 Table B-7 Question 7. Yo u got on this train at which station? . B-6 Table B-8 Question 8. You will get off the train at which ? statlon. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... ..... B-1 Table B-9 Question 9. Where are you going now? . . . . . . . . B-8 Table B-10 Question 10. Approximately what time will you I this.? comp ete trtp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tab! B 1 Qu 11 Wh final d . ? e 1 esuon at IS your esunatton. ............... Table B-12 Question 12. How will you get to your final destination? 0 0 B-10 Table B-13 Question 13. What type of fare did you pay when you first boarded the uain? ........................... B-10 VI

PAGE 7

Table B-14 Question 14. How often do you ride the train? . . . . . . . B-11 Table B-15 Question 15. What is the most important reason you 'd th ? n e e tram . ............. ... ... ........... . Tabl e B-16 Question 16 How would you make thi s trip i f not by ? tratn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-11 B-12 Table B-17 Question 17. Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-12 Table B-18 Question 18. Gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-13 Table B-19 Question 19 Ethnic Origin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-13 Table B-20 Question 20. Total Annual Household Income . . . . . . . B-14 Table B-21 Question 21. How many vehicles are owned by your household? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-14 Table B-22 Question 22. What do you consid e r yourself? . . . . . . . . B-15 Table B-23 Question 23. Were you an experienced public transportation rider before using TriRail? . . . . . . . B-15 Table B-24 Question 24. How did you first learn about Tri-Rail? . . . . . B-15 Table B-25 Question 25a. Tabl e B 26 Question 25b. Availability of parking at station . . . . . . . B-16 Availability of buses to/from the station 0 0 0 B-16 Table B-27 Question 25c Days on which trains run . . . .. . ... B-16 Table B-28 Question 25cl Hours of service. . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-17 Table B-29 Question 25e Frequency of service .... . .... .......... B-17 Table B-30 Question 25f Travel time ..... . .... ...... ..... . . . B-17 Table B-31 Question 25g. On-time performance of the train ... ... ...... B 18 Tabl e B-32 Question 25b Ease of transferring . . . . . . . . . . B-18 Table B-33 Question 25i Cost of riding the train 0 0 0 0 0 B-18 vii

PAGE 8

Table B-34 Question 25j. Availability of train route information and changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-19 Table B-35 Question 25k Vehicle cleanliness and comfort . . . . . . B-19 Table B-36 Question 251. Employee courtesy . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-19 Table B-37 Question 25m. Security (on train and while waiting for train) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-20 Table B-38 Question 25n. How do you feel about Tri-Rail service, aJ? m gener . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-20 Table B-39 Question 26 In question 25, a through m, list the three areas where improvements would be most helpful . . . . B-21 VUl

PAGE 9

Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 F igure 12 Figure 13 F igure 14 Figure 15 Figure 16 Figure 17 Figure 18 Figure 19 Figure 20 Figure 21 LIS T OF FIGURES Brief History of Tri-Ra il ....................... . ...... Tri-Rail System Map .... ....... ......... ............. Average Daily Ridership Trend 0 0 0 Age, Wei ghted Total Respons e Age, Thursday Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Age, Saturday Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Gender, Weighted Total Response ........................ Gender, Thursday Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gender, Saturday Response ....................... .. ... . Ethnic Origin, Weighted Total Response ................... Ethnic Origin, Thursday Response 0 0 0 0 0 Ethnic Origin, Saturday Response 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Annual Household Income, Weighted Total Respons e ......... Annual Household Income, Thursday Response . . . . . . . Annual Household Income, Saturday Response Auto Ownership, Weighted Total Response ....... . ....... Auto Ownership, Thursday Response ...... .. ..... .. .. .. .. Auto Ownership, Saturday Response ............ ......... Residency Status, Weighted Total Response ......... .. .. .. .. Residency Status, Thursday Response . . . . . . . Residency Status, Saturday R esponse . . . . . . . . . . .. ix 2 3 4 15 15 15 17 17 17 19 19 19 21 21 21 23 23 23 25 25 25

PAGE 10

Figure 22 Figure 23 Figure 24 Figure 25 Figure 26 Figure z:7 Figure 28 Figure 29 Figure 30 Figure 31 Figure 32 Figure 33 Figure 34 Figure 35 F igure 36 Figure 37 Figure 38 Figure 39 Figure 40 Figure 41 Figure 42 Figure 43 Length of Use, Weighted Total Response ................... Length of Use, Thursday Response ....................... Length of Use, Saturday Response ........................ Public Transportation Experience, Weighted Total Response ..... Public Transportation Experience, Thursday Response . . . . . Public Transportation Experience, Saturday Response Frequency of Use, Weighted Total Response ................ Frequency of Use, Thursday Response ..................... Frequency of Use, Saturday Response ..................... Trip Purpose, Weighted Total Response ................... Trip Purpose, Thursday Response ........................ Trip Purpose, Saturday Response . . . . . . . . . . . .... Reason for Riding Train, Weighted Total Response .......... Reason for Riding Train, Thursday Response . . . . . . . .. Reason for Riding Train, Saturday Response ............... Alternative Mode of Transportation, Weighted Total Response .. Altemative Mode of Transportation, Thursday Response ....... Altemative Mode of Transportation, Saturday Response ........ Time Trip Began, Thursday Response . . . . . . Time Trip Began, Saturday Response . . . . . . . Round Trip or OneWay, Weighted Total Response ........... Round Trip or OneWay, Thursday Response ............... X 29 29 29 31 31 31 33 33 33 35 35 35 37 37 37 39 39 39 41 41 43 43

PAGE 11

Figure 44 Round Trip or OneWay, Saturday Response . . . . . . . . 43 Figure 45 Fare Type, Weighted Total Response . . . . . . . . . . 45 Figure 46 Fare Type, Thursday Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Figure 47 Fare Type, Saturday Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Figure 48 Station Activity, Weighted Total Response . . . . . . . . 51 Figure 49 Station Activity, Thursday Response . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Figure 50 Station Activity, Saturday Response . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Figure 51 Ridership Volume By Line Segment, Thursday, Northbound . . . 52 Figure 52 Ridership Volume By Line Segment, Thursday, Southbound . . . 53 Figure 53 Figure 54 Ridership Volume By line Segment, Saturday, Northbound Ridership Volume By Line Segment, Saturday, Southbound 53 53 Figure 55 Average Trip Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Figure 56 Modes of Access/Egress By Station . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Figure 57 Figure 58 Figure 59 Driving Distance for Automobile Access Driving Distance for Automobile Access Driving Distance for Automobile Access 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 59 59 Figure 60 Trip Purpose by Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Figure 6 1 Availability of parking at station, Weighted Total Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 84 Figure 62 Figure 63 Availability of parking at station, Thursday Response Availability of parking at station, Saturday Response 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Figure 64 Availability of buses to/from the station, Weighted Total Response ............................. ...... . xi 84 84 85

PAGE 12

Figure 65 Figure 66 Figure 67 Figure 68 Figure 69 Figure 70 Figure 71 Figure 72 Figure 73 Figure 74 Figure 75 Figure 76 Figure 77 Figure 78 Figure 79 Figure 80 Figure 81 Availability of buses to/from the station, Thursday Response Availability of buses to/from the station, Saturday Response Days on which trains run, Weighted Total Response ........... Days on which trains run, Thursday Response ... ............ Days on which trains run, Saturday Response ................ Hours of service, Weighted Total Response ................. Hours of service, Thursday Response .................... . Hours of service, Saturday Response . . . . . . . . . ... Frequency of service, Weighted Total Response ...... ........ Frequency of service, Thursday Response ................... Frequency of service, Saturday Response ................... Travel time, Weighted Total Response ..................... Travel time, Thursday Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . Travel time, Saturday Response ... .................... On-time performance of the train, Weighted Total Response On-time performance of the train, Thursday Response On-time performance of the train, Saturday Response . . . . . 0 85 85 86 86 86 87 87 87 88 88 88 89 89 89 90 90 90 Figure 82 Ease of transferring, Weighted Total Response . . . . . . . 91 Figure 83 Ease of transferring, Thursday Response . . . . . . . . . 91 F igure 84 Ease of transferring, Saturday Response . . . . . . . . 91 Figure 85 Cost of riding the train, Weighted Total Response . . . . . . 92 Figure 86 Cost of riding the train, Thursday Response . . . . . . . . 92 xii

PAGE 13

Figure 87 Cost of riding the train, Saturday Response . . . . . . . . . 92 Figure 88 Availability of train route information and changes, Weighted Total Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 Figure 89 Availability of train route information and changes, Thursday Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 Figure 90 Availability of train route information and changes, Saturday Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 Figure 91 Vehicle cleanliness and comfort, Weighted Total Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 Figure 92 Vehicle c leanliness and comfort, Thursday Response . . . . . 94 Figure 93 Vehicle cleanliness and comfort, Saturday Response . . . . . . 94 Figure 94 Employee courtesy, Weighted Total Response . . . . . . . . 95 F igure 95 Employee courtesy, Thursday Response 0 0 0 Figure 96 Employee courtesy, Saturday Response 0 Figure 97 Security (on train and while waiting for the train), 95 95 Weighted Total Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 Figure 98 Security (on train and while waiting for the train), Thursday Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 Figure 99 Security (on train and while waiting for the train), Saturday Response .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 96 Figure 100 How do you feel abou t Tri-Rail service, in general?, Weighted Total Response . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 Figure 101 How do you feel about Tri-Rail service, in general?, Thursday Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 Figure 102 How do you feel about Tri-Rail service, in general?, Saturday Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 xiii

PAGE 14

this page IS blank xiv

PAGE 15

TRI-RAIL ON-BOARD SURVEY ANALYSIS I. INTRODUCTION An onboard survey of TriRail passengers was conducted to determine demographic information travel behavior and user satisfaction. The survey was conducted on Thursday, March 28, and Saturday, March 30 of 1991. This technical report compiles and analyzes the results of this survey The report begins with a brief overview of the system including a system map. The overview is followed by a list of the survey objectives. Survey methodology is reviewed along with response rates for Thursday and Saturday by direction and by train. Samp l e response rates are also provided for each question on the survey. The preliminary discussion of the survey is then followed by the survey analysis which includes three major sections that review and discuss the survey fmdings. These sections include demographic information, travel behavior, and user satisfaction. The findings summarized in these sections will be useful to Tri-Rail in future planning efforts undertaken by the system. The report concludes with a brief summary and a discussion of the conclusions drawn from the survey and how they relate to the identified survey objectives. Future research applications are suggested along with recommenda t ions concerning subsequent passenger surveys. A copy of the survey instrument is provided in Appendix A while detailed results by question are provided in table format in Appendix B. 1

PAGE 16

II. OVERVIEW OF SYSTEM The Tri-County Commuter Rail Organization, originally created locally, was replaced by the legislatively created Tri-County Commuter Rail Authority. The Authority was created for the purpose of owning, operating, and maintaining a commuter rail system in the tri-<:Ounty area of Broward, Dade, and Palm Beach Counties. One of the original objectives for the establishment of the commuter rail system was to offer some relief from the congestion that was expected to result from the construction taking place on Interstate 95. Consisting of 67 route miles nmning from Palm Beach County, through Broward County, to Dade County, Tri-Rail is the first commuter rail operation in the Sunbelt and the first new commuter rail system in North America since 1967. A brief histmy of Tri-Rail is provided in Figure 1. SepL1989 Jq.t, 1990 FIGURE 1 Brld History or Tri Rall ...... U,l$. 1WIt.il'l two7H' Comprised of fifteen stations, Tri Rai l runs twenty trains each weekday (ten northbound and ten southbound) and eighteen trains on Saturday (nine northbound and nine southbound) which results in 118 trips offered during a normal week of operation. Additional trips are occasionally provided for special events. A system map is provided in Figure 2 on the following page. 2

PAGE 17

FIGURE% TriR.oll System Map 3 w .. t Palm Beacb Station Palm Bcacb Airport Stadon Lake Worth Station Boynton Beach Station Delray Beach Station Boca Raton Station Deutleld Beach Stallon PompaDo Beach Station Cypreu Creek Stallon Fl. Lauderdale Station Fl. Lauderdale Airport Station Hollywood Station Golden Glad .. Station Metrorall Station Miami Airport Station

PAGE 18

Tri-Rail ridership bas increased approximately 140 percent since the service began operating in January 1989. D uring the first year of operation, the system consistently carried 3,000 passengers each weekday while ridership in early 1991 was nearly 8,000 passengers per weekday. In addition, Saturday ridership was nearly 6,000 per day. Recent months have shown some declines in ridership which was one of the motivat ions for the implementation of this on-board survey. Figure 3 illustrates the average daily ridership for each month over the past two and one-half years (includes both weekdays and Saturdays). Improvements in service levels, on-time performance, and ridership levels over the past eighteen months suggest that the commuter rail service to the corridor is improving. However, continued research such as this on-board survey will further contribute to improvements in the provision of commuter rail services to the region. FIGURE3 Average Dally Rlckrship Tread JAN FEB NAil APR IIAY JON JUL AlJG SEP ocr NOV DEC 1 .,., -l!fijl.,. 1 4

PAGE 19

III. SURVEY OBJECI1VES Prior to this on-board survey, there had not been a single comprehensive survey of ridership Recognizing the potential benefits, Tri-Rai l approached CUTR for support in this survey effort. The survey was scheduled as soon as possible in order to capture seasonal residents in the survey. The on-board survey was undertaken in order to achieve a number of objectives. The primary objectives include the following: to determine the relationship of tourism and seasonal travel on Tri-Rail ridership to collect data useful in effective station planning. to identify perceptions and attitudes toward parking availability at stations. to provide information for the bidding of new feeder services. to identify consumer preferences toward specific characteristics of Tri-Rail to establish demograph i c information on users. to define travel characteristics and information on patrons to gather relevant information necessary to bette r serve the market in general. The survey was des i gned to obtain three major types of information: demographics, travel behavior, and user satisfaction. These three topics provide the information and data necessary to fulfill the stated objectives and will contribute to improved planning for commuter rail services in the Tri-Rail service area. 5

PAGE 20

IV. SURVEY METIIODOLOGY Based on a review of on-board transit surveys conducted around the country, a survey instrument was designed to distinguish demographic informatio n, travel behavior, and user satisfaction. A copy of the survey instrument is provided in Appendix A. Under an extremely tight time frame, the survey instrument was prepared with significant input from Tri-Rail staff. Temporary help was used to administer the surveys under the direction of CUTR personneL The methodology for the impl ementation of the on-board survey was relatively simple. The survey was conducted on Thursday, March 28, and Saturday, March 30, with Thursday selected as a representative weekday. The intent was to provide all patrons riding Tri-Rail on these two days with the opportunity to complete a written survey form. Both northbound and southbound trains were surveyed on Thursday for morning and mid day trips; afternoon and evening trips were not surveyed However, the vast majority of afternoon and evening riders would have had an opportunity to complete a survey earlier in the day. All trains both northbound and southbound were surveyed on Saturday. The survey resulted in a sample size of 1,752 on Thursday and 1,544 on Saturday which calculates to response rates of 52 percent and 26 percent, respectively, when the population is assumed to be all ridership on the surveyed trips. Based on our estimates of the number of individuals who use Tri-Rail each day (those indicating they would be taking a return trip on TriRail were removed), it was estimated that 43 percent of the Thursday passengers and 40 percent of the Saturday passengers were surveyed. The resulting response rates are provided by direction and train in Tables 1 and 2. A complete questionnaire was not a requirement to be included in the survey results. All completed questions were included in the analysis regardless of whether the entire questionnaire was fi.lled out As a result, sample response rates differ by question. The sampl e response rate refers to the number of survey respondents answering a particular question as a percentage of the total DDDJber of questionnaires received The sample response rates on Thursday were systematically higher than those observed on Saturday. The average sample response rate on Thursday was 90 percent while the average observed on Saturday was 80 percent Sample response rates by question are provided in Table 3. Responses were subjected to we i ghting and factoring as necessary. Thursday responses were factored-up and weighted to adjust for directional response rate variations and afternoon/evening ridership. Saturday responses were also factored to adjust for directional 6

PAGE 21

response rate vanat1ons. I n addition, in order to calculate a weighted total response, both Thursday and Saturday responses we r e factored-up to actual total ridership for each day. Thursday was factored further to account for five weekdays. As a result, the weighted total response is adjusted to account for five weekdays and a single Saturday For this reason, the reader wj!l observe that the weiehted total resJ)Onse puts a much il"eater weiilht on the weekday than on Saturday. In general, i t is believed that sample b i as is limited. Given the large sample of 1,752 respondents on Thursday and 1,544 respondents on Saturday and a total of 3,296 respondents, the potential for significant sample bias is limited. Based on observations made during survey implementation, factors such as language and literacy were not believed to be a problem. However, afte r careful review of the data, respondents appea r ed to have some trouble understanding a few of the questions. Many respondents misunderstood questions #10, #11, and #12. These questions related to final destination, bow will you get to your final destination and approximately what time will you reach your final destination As is often the case in this type of survey, many respondents interpreted these questions to be referring to the final destination at the end of the day as opposed to the final destination at the end of the trip As a result, some of the data compiled for these three questions need to be interpreted with caution. Generally, the response rate was excellent, with the vast majority of respondents taking the time to provide useful information. Many also answered the open-ended questions. I t was not surprising that the regular weekday riders had a higher response rate than the weekend riders nor that the questions with lower response rates involved those about which patrons are typically more sensitive, i.e., income and residential location. The response rate by question remained relatively stable throughout the questionnaire indicating that respondents had a sufficient amount of time to complete the survey. 7

PAGE 22

TABLE 1 'lbunday, 03/%3/91, Respoaoe Rate By lllrec:tloo, Time, aad Tl'ala NORTHBOUND (NB) SOln'HBOUND (SB) nme TraiD Riden Rapoadeara Respoase nme Trala Riden llespoadeata Respoase Rate Rate AM P200 106 71 73% AM P201 1:37 82 35% P202 434 175 40% P203 SOl 333 66% P204 484 225 46% P20S 425 361 85% P206 287 178 62% P207 588 171 29% MD P208 303 a/a n/a MD P209 335 150 45% PM P2l0 486 a/a a/a PM P211 454 a/a a/a P2l2 617 a/a a fa P213 791 nfa nfa P214 575 a/a n/a P215 320 a/a a fa P216 214 a/a nfa P217 lZ3 n/a a fa P218 165 a/a a/a P21 9 92 a/a nfa NBToW 3,671 nfa n/a SBTocal 3,871 n/a n/a Sampled NB Sampled SB Trip Totals 1,311 655 SO% Trip Totals 2,086 1,097 53% All Tl'alaa Riden Respondeata Respoaoe (NB & SB) Rate System Total 7,542 n/a n/a Thursday Sample 3)97 1,752 52% lloanday Sample (oxdadJnt 4,054 1,752 43% mum tripa) 8

PAGE 23

TABL E% Saturday, 03/3()/91, lltspollse Race By Dlroctlo a and Trala NORTH B OUND (Nll) SOUTHBOUND (SB ) Trala Ri ders Respoadeats Respoase Tral a Riden Respoackato Respoa .. Rate Ra le P220 126 65 52% P221 64 28 44% P222 295 105 36% P223 405 166 41% P224 196 58 30% P22S 783 303 39% P226 sss 80 14% P'1ZI 4if7 139 29% l'Z28 790 76 10% P2:29 225 99 44% P230 547 74 14% 1'231 863 167 19% 1'232 262 67 26% P23:) l6S 60 36% P234 644 nfa n/a 1'235 83 13 16% P236 29 u 41% 1'237 85 32 38% NBToW 3,444 n/a n/a S BToral 3,163 n/a n/a Sampled NB Samplccl SB ToW 2,800 537 19% Total 3,163 1,00'7 32% All Trains Rldus Rapoadeats Response (N1I & SB) Rate Syste m Total 6,607 n/a n/a Saturday Sample 5,963 1,544 26% So tardily Sompk (exclu.Uag 3,888 1,544 40% ntum lrips) 9

PAGE 24

0.: $ Wb,.. "')<> ,,. ., .. F .. ,._ .... >-<0' ... --. :-. ... W' '''9tiESTION t '"''1" ........ .._ 4. ... .(.._: .. 1. How mADy mouths baOJe you bceu usiDg TriRail? 91% 76% 2. WUI you be ridiDg Tri-Rail on your return trip? 99% 96% 3. Where did you (()me from before you started thil trip? 97% 94% 4 What are lbc major cross streets Dearest thillocatlon7 86% 68% 5. ApptCillimately what tlme did you start your trip? 94% 85% 6 How did you get to lbc traiD stop? 95% 92% 7. YOU got OD thiJ traiD at statiou. 94% 86% 8. Y ou will get off lbc traiD at statioa. 94% 83% 9. Where are you gomg llOW? 96% 92% 10. Approximately what tlme will you (()mplete thil trip? 85% 79% 11. What is your fiDal destinatlon? (nearest iutcrsecti on) 88% 68% 12. How will you get to you fiDal destloation? 91% 88% 13. Which type of Care did you pay wbeu you lint boarded the traiu ? 94% 87% 1 4 How ofieu do you ride the traiu? 90% 64% 15. What is lbc most importalll reason you ride the traiu? 87% 83% 16. H ow would you make thil trip if DOl by !raiD? 94% 89% 17. A&e 97% 92% 18. Gender 96% 92% 19. Etbule oriP 94% 91% 20. Alu>uai household iucome 84% 15% 2 1. How mADY vehicles are owned by your household ? 95% 89% 22. Ruidea.cy Status 96% 90% 23. Were you an experienced public tr811Sp0fUtioo rider before usiDg Tri94% 86% Rail ? 10

PAGE 25

. ,, < ....... "... :' .. .... :, .. .,. ,, ' :.imuRSDAY; U> '< :t <-.i'Q .... ,. .. ,.. ,;. "' SAnJRDAY i ,,,...' ;'..; H .""'.l:'!S"\0< ,: ':', _,,>tr .< ._.,,,, .. ... -' ', ;..-s_>;.f>.- '" '> .t"' s.t'.$,/ ,,. . ". :; ' ;, h 'v ... _.... -' :M How did you firs t Jearn about Tri-Rail? 88% 78% 2Sa. Availability of parklog at statiou 89% 82% 2Sb. Availability of bu.se. to/fro m Sllllion 78% 65% 2Sc:. D ays on which trains run 9 1 % 78% 2Sd. Hours of service trains run 91% 79% 25e. Frequency of service 91% 79% 2Sf. Travel time 92% 80% 2Sg. On time performance o f the train 92% 81% 2Sb. Eas e o f tr ansferring 85% 74% 2Si Cost o f riding the train 93% 82% 2Sj. Availability of train route iDformation and changes 90% 7 8% 2Sk. V ehicle cleaDiincss and comfon 94% 83% 251. Employee councsy 93% 80% 25m. S e curity (on train and while waiting for train) 91% 78% 2Sn. How do you feel about T ri-Rail service in general? 93% 83% 26 In que stion 25, a through m list the lhree areas wher e improvements 68% 41% would be most helpful to you? 7:1. Commeats or suggestions? 58% 42% .. ;_ ;-Y1 A .. .. < iW Yeratt p *i!tft f .,,..;} _.,>, . :,:'%, { ; &<;, ;. f-<1!', -\,.. {$ .. 11

PAGE 26

V. SURVEY ANALYSIS The sutvey analysis is comprised of three major sections including demographic information, travel behavior, and user satisfaction. Each of the sections provides information which will be useful in improving the performance and service of the Tri-Rail system. Demographic data collected in this sutvey include age, gender, ethnic origin, household income, auto ownership, and residency status. The demographic information is useful in planning existing and future service. Tri-Rail will be more aware of market characteristics historically conducive to commuter rail use in the South Florida area. The information can help determine the need for patron facilities such as parking and feeder service requirements Travel behavior is established through the collection of information such as station origins/destinations, frequency of boardings and alightings, ridership volume by line segment, trip length frequencies, average trip length. modes of access/egress, access time/egress time, parking at stations, feeder services, trip purpose, marketing media, seasonal/tourist use, and transit dependency. Other information reviewed includes length of time respondent bas used Tri-Rail, public transportation experience, frequency of use reason for riding, alternative transportation, time trip began, return trip trans i t use, and fai'e type. This information contributes to effective scheduling, station planning, feeder service planning and service lev els, and policy decisions in general. From the demographics and travel behavior characteristics, a ridership profile can be determined for weekdays and for Saturday. Establishing such a profile enables one to distinguish market characteristics and segments which are useful for the implementation of sound marketing strategies. User satisfaction is determined in questions 25 and 26. Question 25 lists thirteen characteristics and asks the respondent to rate Tri-Rail's performance in each of these characteristics. Strengths and weaknesses are identified as perce ived by the patrons. The identified weaknesses can potentially be addressed through changes in the system. By distinguishing patron sensitivities toward specific characteristics of the system, Tri-Rail is better able to set priorities for system improvements. 12

PAGE 27

DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION A number of questions were asked of patrons in order to establish a demographic profile of Tri-Rail users. Demographic-related questions include age (qu estion 17), ge nder (question 18), ethnic origin (question 19), annual household income (question 20), auto ownership (question 21), and residency status (question 22). Each of these questions are briefly discussed and accompanied by graphics for the weighted total response, Thursday response, and Saturday response. 13

PAGE 28

Seventy four percent of the survey respondents are between the ages of 23 and 59 indicating that most Tri-Rail patrons are middle-aged. However while a majority of the respondents were between the ages of 23 and 59, Saturday ridership is much more likely to be comprised of younger riders under the age of 22 as well as elderly riders over the age of 65. Over 18 percent of the respondents were under the age of 22 on Saturday while only 8 percent were in this age group on Thursday. Likewise, over 13 percent of Saturday respondents were over the age of 65 while only 6 percent were in this age group on Thursday. The age profile for the weighted total response, Thursday response, and Saturday response are provided in Figures 4 through 6. The age distribution of survey respondents was compared to the age distnbution for the entire population of the TriCounty area. The population data for the age categories were taken from the 1990 Aorida Statistical Abstract. The age distnbution for the service area is similar to that of the Saturday respondents. However, the Thursday age distribution varies significantly. In particular, 60 percent of the Thursday respondents are between the ages of 23 and 45 while only 30 percent of the population in the Tri-County area are within this age category. The Thursday age data indicates the significant use of Tri Rai l for weekday commuting. Correspondingly, the Saturday data shows more children and seniors using the system. The age comparisons are provided in Table 4. ().14 19% 12% 30% 21% 18% TABLE 4 Comparisoa ol Age Categories ().18 19-22 23-45 65 aad """' 14 3% 11% 5% 7% 60% 43% 23% 17% 6% 13%

PAGE 29

!Sat aDder 1'to2Z .... 46tD'9 60to64 1074 11 or more nl FIGURE4 Age. Total Response alt. !alt. 18oraDclcr 19 CD 22 V10J.I "10 ., -4610, 60to64 71 Ol'ax:ft "" FIGURE 5 Age. Thursday Response 0% lalt. 18orcmdcr lho22 23.,,. ,10., 60to64 "1074 ,01 __ "" 15

PAGE 30

Gender More nien use Tri-Rail on a typical weekday while a greater proportion of women ride Tri Rail on Saturday. This results from a greater labor force participation rate for men. Over 56 percent of those using Tri-Rail in their trip to work on Thursday are male while only 44 percent are female. No significant differences in trip purposes by gender are apparent for Saturday ridership with the exception of shopping trips. Of all shopping trips made on Saturday, 65 percent are made by females while 35 percent are made by males Figures 7 through 9 illustrate the survey results for the gender of survey respondents. The gender distribution observed in the Thursday response differed somewhat when compared to the gender distribution for the three county area as a whole. The general population is comprised of 52 percent female and 48 percent male. In contrast, Tri-Rail ridership is characterized by 45 percent female and 51 percent male on Thursday. The Saturday response is much more consistent with the gender of the general population as 49 percent of the respondents were females and 42 percent were males. The gender comparisons are provided in Table 5. Male 48% Female 52% Dot IIIISWUed 0% TABLES Comparison or Populo!IOD Male Female 16 51% 42% 45% 49% 4% 9%

PAGE 31

FI GUR Gmdtt, WeJpltd Total Rcspo-F I GURE 8 Gcador Rcspoase 17

PAGE 32

Ethnic Origin Approximately 60 percent of the survey respondents were White/Caucasian while 16 percent were Afro-American. In addition, approximately 11 percent indicated their ethnic origin to be Hispanic. A greater response may have been received from Hispanics bad a Spanish version of the survey been provided. Figures 10 through 12 represent the ethnic origin statistics for those surveyed 18

PAGE 33

FIGURE 10 Ethulc Orisla, WeJchtecl Tolal Respoase FIGURE 11 Etlmlc OrigjD, lbursday Respoase FIGUREU Ethnic OrigjD, Saturdar Rupoase 19

PAGE 34

Total Annual Household Income Approximately 65 percent ofTri-Rail survey respondents reported an income of greater than $20,000. Nearly 26 percent reported incomes greater than $50,000. This is particularly significant when one considers that, according to the 1990 Florida Statistical Abstract, the per capita income is $12,401 in Dade County, $14,914 in Broward County, and $15,964 in Palm Beach County. Saturday ridership tended to have lower income levels and a greater tendency to not complete the income question. Unlike the typical public transportation system, Tri-Rail ridership is characterized by middle to upper levels of income. The proportions by income category are provided in Figures 13 through 15. 20

PAGE 35

FIGVRE 13 AnDual Household lo>me, Weipted Total Respouse U. ... ll,OOO I) ,tOO .. """ $ll>,lJO) $1l,(IJ) .. ao.ooo .. -IZI,Q.,SI',m VO,OOOIOSl,, $40,@ II)'""" vo,ooo .. .,,m $60,000 .. "'"" $10,00010171, ---,. FIGURE14 AnDual Household IDcome, Thursday RespoDse l.ca ... $),000 l),ti)00>$9, $10,000 .. $1l,OOO "11',m tlO,@t0$24$9 IZI,tOO.,SI',m SIO,OOO"Sl'.m 540,000 .. "'"" 1)0,000 .. "'"" $60,00010$69, $10,000 .. "'"" .... ,. FIGURE 15 AnDual HoiiSthold IDcoaoe, Saturday Respouse lao ... $),000 I) ,tOO"""" 110,000" U4.m $20,0001>!Zl,OOO .. SI',m SIO,OOO""'"" 540,000"*''"" VO,tOO" .,, $60,000""'"" $10,000 "'"'"" aG,tOO...t-,. 21

PAGE 36

Auto Ownership Nearly 56 percent of the survey respondents indicated ownership of two or more vehicles while only 4 percent reported not owning a single vehicle. This reinforces the finding that a vast majority of Tri-Rail patrons are choice riders. This differs greatly from the conventional bus transit market where a majority of bus riders typically are transit dependents and, therefore, have no choice but to use public transportation. However, the surveys conducted on Saturday indicated a s ignificantly larger portion of patrons having no automobile. Figures 16 through 18 illustrate the auto ownership survey results. 22

PAGE 37

FIGURE 16 Auto OwDenhlp, Weighted Total Response FIGURE 17 Auto OwDersblp, Tbunday Response FIGURE 18 Auto Olmonblp, Salurll.v Respoaae Ncoc r .. Tlao .. w... 10!1. 23

PAGE 38

Residency Status Nearly 85 percent of the survey respondents were permanent residents. This question was of particular interest as it provided an indication of the extent of ridership by non-residents and, correspondingly, the extent to whlc:h ridership may fluctuate seasonally. While the timing of the survey may have missed the peak winter visitor /seasonal resident season, the pre-Easter date should have reflected a fairly typical winter season condition. This finding is consistent with the work trip dominance of ridership. However, as expected, seasonal residents and tourists/visitors represented a much greater proportion of ridership on Saturday. Residency status is provided in Figures 19 through 21. 24

PAGE 39

FIGURE19 Status, We!pted Total RospODSe Puwltelldalc FIGURElO RoslcleDcy scatus, 1barsclly Rospoase FIGURE.Zl Residmcy Status, Saturda7 Respoase 25

PAGE 40

De m ogra phi c Com p arison of 1ii Rail Users a n d Co nven tional Bus Transit Users It is interesting to compare the demographics of TriRail ridership with those of o t her systems in the state of Florida. Table 6 provides data for TriRail Metro-D a de Transit Authority (regular bus riders only), Sarasota County Area Transit, and Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority i n three demographic categories including gender, ethnic origin, and household income. It is apparent that the user profile for the Tri Rail commuter rail system is significantly different than the bus systems operating throughout the state. In general, a majority of bus riders are female and within the lower income groups There is also a tendency for a greater proponion of minorities to ride on bus transit TABlE 6 DemotP"Bph k Comparisoos Wilh Bu s Riden in Florida Gender male SO% 27% 41% 42% female 45% 73% S9% 58% Etlnllc Origin wbite 62% 23% 72% 72% black 16% 29% 24% 22% bispauic 11% 44% 3% n/a o ther 4% 4% 1% 6% Rousebold lacome' less than $10,000 8% 3 5 % a/a n/a less than $15,000 n/a n/a 4 9% SS% $10,000 to $14,999 S% 30% n/a nfa $15,000 to $25,000 17% 20% 31% 24% $25,000 or IJI'ealer 51% 14% 19% 21% 1Metto-Dade Transit Authority Rider Retention and S e rvice P erformance Evaluation Srudy, July 1989. N ote: Data includes only those r"'pondcnts cla.ssilied as regular users. 'Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority, On-board Surw:y, 1986 'Sarasota CoWlty Area Transit On-board Ridership Sun>ey, February 1991. Income da t a wer e recat e gorized to enable comparisons with Olber on board $llr'le)'S. 26

PAGE 41

TRAVEL BEHAVIOR A number of questions were asked of respondents which identify travel behavior characteristics of Tri-Rail patrons. Information included in this section includes how long patrons have been using the system (question 1), public transportation experience (question 23), frequency of use (question 14), trip purpose (question 9), reason for riding (question 15), alternative means of transportation (question 16), time of day that trip started (question 5), round trip or one-way (question 2), and fare type (question 13). Other travel behavior characteristics were identified in the survey results including those related to station origins/destinations, station activity ridership volumes by line segment, trip length frequencies, average trip length, modes of access/egress, access time/egress time, driving distance for automobile access, parking issues, feeder services, trip purpose, marketing media, seasonal/tourist use, and transit dependency. 27

PAGE 42

How Long Have They Been Using the System? Twenty six percent of Tri-Rail patrons began riding Tri-Rail within the past three months while nearly 50 percent of the users have been riding Tri-Rail for l ess than seven months. The increase in new riders on Tri-Rail appears to be rising at an increasing rate as the system grows older and individuals become more aware of the availability of a commuter rail system. Saturday respondents, who indicated using Tri-Rail for more than four months, presumably were weekday riders prior to the beginning of Saturday service (Saturday service began in December of 1990). Figures 22 through 24 show how long patrons have been using the Tri-Rail system. To have attained the ridership growth that Tri-Rail has experienced requires that there be substantial increases in new riders. However, the data cannot definitively answer questions about rider retention. Repeated surveys over time will enable an assessment of ridership retention. 28

PAGE 43

FIGURE22 Lmgth of Use, Wtiabted Total Respoose u .. u-a. 160>19-a. l01DV-a. 24ton IDCllld. "'' FIGURE23 Lmgth or Use, ThUJ'Sday Response OO>J-a. 40>7-1!. a., u 2D:XIIf. u .. u-a. 1611>19-a. 240>%7....1!. "' FIGUREl4 Loogth of Use, Saturday Respoase 00> J lDOIIIbo 4 71D0111bo lllDOIIIbo u., u lDOIIIbo l61019aal. l011>VIDOIJibo 241D%71D0111bo "" 29

PAGE 44

Public Transportation Experience Given that Tri-Rail is a new type of transit service for Southeast Florida, it was desirable to gather information on whether the system was attracting users other than individuals who had experience using transit prior to Tri-Rail (i.e., Metro-Dade Transit, Broward County Transit, Palm Beach County Transit, or systems in other states). The wording of the question required the respondent to make a judgement as to whether they consider themselves to be an experienced transit user. Only 33 percent of the survey respondents considered themselves experienced public transportation riders prior to using TriRail. This result is consistent for weekdays and Saturdays as indicated in Figures 25 through 27. This indicates that Tri-Rail bas penetrated the non-transit-dependent market in the Southeast Florida area. 30

PAGE 45

FIGURElS Public Traosportatioa ExperieDce, Weighted Tollll Respoase FIGURE26 Public Traasportadoa E:rpaiau:e, Thursday Jlespoose FIGVRE%7 Public Traasportatioa E:rpaieaee, Saturday Respoose 31

PAGE 46

Frequency of Use The majority of Tri-Rail users (65 percent) on the weekday ride four or more days per week. In contrast, no frequency of use category stood out for those riding on Saturday as the largest proportion (16 percent) indicated riding once every rwo to four weeks followed by 13 percent riding approximately once a week. A significant proponion of Saturday respondents did not answer the frequency of use question (42 percent). These may be new riders who have no history of riding frequency. Figures 28 through 30 illustrate frequency of use for the weighted total response, Thursday response, and Saturday response. 32

PAGE 47

FIGUREZS Frequeacy ot Use, Wef&:bced Total Respoase cr 181ft d.,. per wck 2 Ol )U,. per-.:& O...mrr 2.4..U. 0rlat C9aJ I u IDCIIt wttb FIGURE29 Frequency ol Use, Tbursday Response ....... O...mrrl.a..U. o........,, .. ..a.
PAGE 48

Trip Purpose In general, patrons using Tri-Rail in their trip to work would be expected to use the system four or more days per week. Given the large proportion of Thursday respondents riding four or more days per week, it is expected that a majority of weekday riders are commuting to work. In contrast, the distribution of trip purposes on Saturday is spread among numerous trips including home, visiting/recreation, shopping/errands, special event, and others. This information is supported by Figures 31 through 33, which represent trip purpose for the Thursday response, Saturday response, and weighted total response. 34

PAGE 49

FIGURE 31 Trip Purpose, 'Ibursday Resp011se Home Wool< Scbool Doc:loriDclllil Spec;.! It-Od><:r FIGURE3Z Trip Purpose, Thursday Response !fane W.O: Scbool Spec;.!E-Od><:r FIGURE33 Trip Purpose, Saturday Response !fane Wool< School Doc:oor/Doodot Spoda!Evem Od><:r 35

PAGE 50

Most Important Reason for Riding the Train The reasons indicated most frequently for using the Tri-Rail system include: more convenient (28 percent), more economical (25 percent), and dislike driving (11 percent). The resu lt that convenience is cited most frequently as the reason for using Tri-Rail is a compliment to the services provided by Tri-Rail. Traditionally, answers like "I don't drive" and "Car is not available" dominate the responses to this question for public transportation systems. Clearly, TriRail riders are not transit "captives but are choice riders. Figures 34 through 36 illustrate the selected reasons provided by Thursday and Saturday respondents as well as the weighted total. 36

PAGE 51

FIGURE34 Reason for RidiDC TraiD, Welgbt.ed Total Response I docl't l&c: 10di:M 'laiD it oat ClliMLiit:at FIGURE3S Reasou ror Riding TralD, Thursday Response TGilaau + t1 FIGURE36 Reason Cor RldJDC TraiD, Saturdll1 Rapoose l.bo'tliblDdoiot 37

PAGE 52

Alternative Mode of Transportation Respondents were asked how they would have made their trip without the use of Tri-Rail. A significant majority of Thursday (70 percent) and Saturday (53 percent) respondents, as w ell as the resulting weighted total response (67 percent), indicated that they would have driven a vehicle had Tri-Rail not been available. This suggests that Tri-Rail is successfully getting people to give up their automobiles in favor of using the commuter rail system Figures 37 through 39 provide the responses graphically. 38

PAGE 53

FIGURE37 Altematlve Mode or TraDSportltloD, Weighted Tolal Response FIGURE38 Allei'Datlve Mode or 'inu.sportltloo, Thursday RespoDSe 39

PAGE 54

Approximate Time When Trip Began A consideration of when trips began on Thursday and Saturday permits the determination of ridership peaks and valleys by time of day. Since the survey on Thursday was limited to the morning and midday, no data was collected for the afternoon and evening. However, the survey was implemented all day on Saturday. The Thursday response clearly indicated a peak period from 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m., when 65 percent of the respondents began their trip. An additional 16 percent began their trip between 4:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. Beyond this, no shoulders of the peak are observed. The time that trips began according to military time are provided in Figures 40 and 41. No weighted total response was calculated due to not surveying Thursday afternoon and evening. 40

PAGE 55

F1GVRE40 Time Trip Bepn, Thunday Rapoase 601.$)0 801.1000 1001 1200 1201 1400 "' F1GVRE41 Time Trip IIepa, Saturday Rapoase Ml!;ra,y 1"-201.400 401-'00 601.800 801.1000 1001 1200 l201 1401 1600 1601 1801.2000 2001-2200 2201 2400 n/a 41

PAGE 56

Round Trip or One-Way Approximately 90 percent ofTri-Rail patrons indicated plans to use Tri-Rail on their return trip. An extremely small proportion of respondents indicated that other transportation arrangements had been made for the return trip Figures 42 through 44 represent the return trip responses fo r the weighted total response, Thursday response, and Saturday response. 42

PAGE 57

FIGURE42 Roaod Trip or Ooe-Way, WeJpted Total Respoose FIGURE43 Rouod Trip or Ooe-Way, Thursday Respoo.se FIGURE44 Roood Trip or ODe-Way, Saturday Respoase IIIWO 43

PAGE 58

Fare 'JYpe The weighted total response indicates that over 31 percent of the respondents were using a round trip fare when surveyed while over 25 percent were using a monthly pass. Monthly passes are almost exclusively used on weekdays while round trip fares and one-way fares are more commonly used on Saturday. Responses concerning the use of fare types are provided in Figures 45 through 47. Table 7 indicates each fare type, the cost of each, and the percent of respondents satisfied or very satisfied with the respective fare types. The vast majority of respondents indicated they were satisfied or very satisfied with the fare type that they use. TABLE? SaUsfactloa With Fare Structure One-Way Fare $2.00 88% Round Trip Fare $4.00 90% Weekly PaM $17 .00 86% Monthly Pass $60.00 86% Senior/Handieap/Studeut Fare $1.00 94% It is interesting to note that a significant portion of the frequent users (four or more days per week) continue to use the one-way fare or round trip fare. Cost savings can be realized with a weekly pass if nine or more trips are taken while savings can be reali:red with a monthly pass if more than 30 trips (15 round trips) are taken within the month Approximately 37 percent of the respondents who ride four or more days per week do not take advantage of the weekly or monthly pass. However, the $2.00 trip is attractively priced to begin with and patrons appear to be aware of this given their reported satisfaction with the fare structure. 44

PAGE 59

f1GURE45 Fare Type, WeJsbted Tolal llespoD!e FIGURE46 Fare Type, 1bu.rsday llespoDSe FIGURE47 Fare Type, Saturday llespoDSe 0..9/q!'ft 'lf
PAGE 60

Station Origins/Destinations According to the weighted total response the busiest stations are West Palm Beach and Metrorail for both Thursday and Saturday. Approximately 19 percent of all trips originate and end at the Metrorail station while 13 percent originate and end at the West Palm Beach station. The percent of all trips originating or ending at all other stations ranges from three to nine percent. The indicated station activity suggests that the most common trip pair would he West Palm Beach/Metrorail. Three and one-half percent of all trips are from the West Palm Beach station to the Metrorail station. The percent is virtually the same for trips from the Metrorail station to the Palm Beach station. The crosstab for Thursday respondents indicates similar travel patterns to those described for the weighted total response. However, the crosstab for Saturday respondents indicates even greater station activity at the West Palm Beach and Metrorail Stations. Twenty-five percent of all trips originate (end) at the Metrorail station while twenty percent originate (end) at the West Palm Beach station. In addition, the Lake Worth and Ft. Lauderdale stations show increases in station activity while all other stations indicate a decrease or no change in station activity. Tables 8 through 10 identify the percent of trips taken for each station origin/destination pair. 46

PAGE 61

H Jj h h 1 ! 5 0 $ 5 0 s 0 47 c 0 ! ! s "' -< ::; 0 "' - l 0 c "' 01 "' 01 "' :;; "' ; s 0 0 0 5 "' 0 .. .. ::; 0 -

PAGE 62

! s ;; :l 0 s 0 ! ! d ! ! II 0 0 5 Jl s s ;; ;JJ 5 5 5 ! $ ;! ! ! 5 c 0 J I ;! ! ! ;;; 48 5 s s $ ! ;; 5 5 0 ! I r:

PAGE 63

49

PAGE 64

Station Activity On Thursday, the Metrorail and West Palm Beach Stations have the greatest volume of activity on the system as 18 percent of all boardings and alightings take place a t Meuorail and 11 percent take place at West Palm Beach. These two stations have even greater station activity on Saturday as 26 percent of all hoardings and alightings take place at Metrorail and 20 percent take place at West Palm Beach. The data provide useful information concerning the utiliza tion of stations throughout the system. Figures 48 through 50 represent the volume of activity at each station for Thursday and Saturday (measured in terms of the proportion of hoardings and alightings at each station). so

PAGE 65

FIGURE49 StaUOD AcU>'Ity, Thunc!Jiy RespoDSe w .. PolmBadt p,),. Badt Ailpcot Loh'lri n..m.I!Badt 1\ao-Badt ft. I......., Airport -_....,. 51

PAGE 66

Ridership Volume by Line Segment The ridership volumes observed between stations on Thursday and Saturday are provided by direction in Figures 51 through 54. The horizontal lines in the graphs indicate the all-day seated capacity of TriRail trains (10 trips times 645 seats per trip = 6,450 on Thursday--9 trips times 645 seats per trip 5,805 on Saturday). In both cases, the distribution of utilized capacity is relatively smooth in that the volume gradually s lopes upward to a maximum at the Cypress Creek station and then begins sloping downward. The one segment that appears to be underutilized is the segment to the Miami Airport station. The graphics indicate that adequate capacity remains for increased ridership At peak volume, the figures indicate an average utilized capacity of less than 50 percent. Station abbreviations used in the figures are defined below. WPB West Palm Beach Station CYP Cypress Creel< Station PBA Palm Beach Airport Station FrL Ft. Lauderdale Station LWS Lake Worth Station FlA Ft. Lauderdale Airport Station BOY Boynton Beach Station HOL HoUywood Station DEL Delray Beach Station GOL Golden Glades Station BOC Boca !Won Station MET Metrorail Station DFB Deerfield Beach Station MIA Miami Airport Station POM Pompa11o Beach Station FlGURESl Rldenhlp Volume bJ IJDe S..,..ODt, Tbursclay, NorthbouDd ......... IDC .. IOMC.n.IU.a.oe&a 52

PAGE 67

FIGURESZ Ridership Volume by Uot Segmt!lt, Tbunday, Southbound 8,000 6,000 Southbound Volume 4,000 -1----l-Syu ... C.podty 1----1 ------.IDC-IQIICIPMA6-.-.-FIGURE 53 Ridership Volume by Une SegJDtnl, Saturday, Northbou n d 8.000 N..V.booNi Volume .coo+----< S)'S*nn Ctpacity 1------< FIGURE 54 Ridership Volume by UDt Segment, Saturday Sonlbbouod Southbound Voh.uM 4,000 -1---1 Syu ... C.podty 1---1 --&aiDfr..MIC--C:. ... IU.:II.L-53

PAGE 68

Trip Length Frequencies and Average Trip Length Table 11 identifies the frequency o f trips that fall with i n established trip length intervals Thursday trips tend to be much shorter than Saturday trips Nearly 50 percent of all Saturday trips are greater than 50 miles in length while 69 percent of al l trips are greater than 40 miles. Alternatively, 48 percent of Thursday trips are between 10 and 30 mi l es in length while 65 percent of the trips are between 10 and 40 miles. As a result, the average trip lengths differ considerably as indicated in Figure 55. The average trip length is nearly 34 miles on Thursday and 47 miles on Saturday. The disparity can be attributed to the large proportion of work-oriented trips taken on the weekdays which are typically a shorter distance, Likewise, Saturday trips are generally longer as people are travelling further to spend the day for recreational purposes. 54

PAGE 69

0 10 9.9 miles 10 10 19.9 miles 20 10 29. 9 miles 30 10 39.9 miles 40 to 49. 9 miles SO lo 59.9 miles 60 10 67 miles TABLEll Trip Ltngtb Fftquendes by Weekday and Weeund 2% 18% 30% 17% 14% 9% 9% FIGURE 55 Average Trip Ltngtb 55 2% 4% 12% 15% 19% 23% 26% 2% 16% 28% 17% 15% 11% 12% 60

PAGE 70

Modes of Access/Egress By Station and System Total The modes of access and egress are provided for the system total as well as for each individual station in Figure 56. The access/egress modes have been grouped into three major categories: walk, transit, automobile. A pie chart is provided for each station and indicates the proportion of access and egress trips that are taken using each of these summary categories. The walk category includes walking 0-4 blocks and walking over 4 blocks. The transit category includes the use of Metromover /rail, Tri-Rail shuttle, other buses, and jitneys. The automobile category includes driving and parking at a station or being dropped off/picked up at a station. For the system as a whole, 53 percent of access/egress trips are made by automobile, 34 percent by transit, and 13 percent by walking. This information i$ particularly useful in establishing the modes of access/egress that are typically used at each station. A review of the information indicates that all but two stations are accessed/egressed primarily by the automobile. However, a majority of trips to or from the Boca Raton and Metrorail Stations are by the various forms of transit available in that station area. 56

PAGE 71

FIGURE 56 Mode ol Accas/Epus by Statloo MID"CC"'lD S&adoa ""' ,,.. .. ... --System Total 57

PAGE 72

Driving Distance for Access by Automobile The primary mode of access in the trip to work is driving to a station and parking. Respondents who accessed a Tri-Rail station through this mode were asked how far they drove to get to the station. Figures 57 through 59 provide this information. 58

PAGE 73

FIGURE 57 Drlvlog Distance for AlltomobUe Acass, Welgbled Total Response .. ..... 6-to..a.. 11.20..a.. 21-SOmila li-60a1a "' FIGURE 58 Driving Dis!auce for AlltomobUe Aecess, 'lbursday Response 6-IOoala ll-20oala 21JOmila ll-<10. .,., .... Sl-6011ilos >60 ..... "' FIGURE 59 Driving Distance for Automobile Acass, Satunla:y Respoaae . .... 6-IOmila 11-lO .... 21-lOmila ll-<10. Sl-60. >60miloo "' 011 59

PAGE 74

Parking One of the identified survey objectives was to evaluate the availability of parking at Tri-Rail stations. Table 12 provides the crosstab of the origin station (question 7) on satisfaction with the availability of parking (question 2Sb). Although 73 percent of the respondents are satisfied or very satisfied with the availability of parking in general at Tri-Rail stations, a close inspection of the table indicates three stations where the availability of parking should be evaluated and perhaps improved. The response to the availability of parking for those who accessed the Tri-Rail system at the Palm Beach Airport, Boca Raton, and Hollywood stations indicated some concerns with respect to parking availability. Of those parking at the Palm Beach Airpon station, 42 percent indicated they were somewhat or very dissatisfied with the availability of parking. At the Boca Raton station, 35 percent were somewhat or very dissatisfied with parking availability while 30 percent were somewhat or very dissatisfied with parking availability at the Hollywood station. Concern for parking availability is much more prevalent on the weekday since those taking work-oriented trips are much more concerned with travel time and convenience. In general, those persons arriving for an early train may be very satisfied even though those using the station for later trains may face chronic parking shonages. Parking lot occupancy studies can verify the schedule for parking lot fill-up by station. 60

PAGE 75

TABLE I.Z SaiWac1ioD With the AvallabUity of Parklag by StatiOD West Palm Beach 46% 34% 11% S% 4 % 100% Palm Beach Airport ll% 24% 22% 22% 20% 100% Lake Worth 37% 31% 13% 9% 10% 100% BOfDIOD Beach 35% 26% 14% 13% 12% 100% Delray Beach 47% 33% 9% 7% 4% 100% Boca RaiOD 30% 23% 12% 14% 21% 100% Dee rfield Beach 48% 39% 9% 3% 1% 100% Pompano Beach 4 7% 38% 9% 3% 3% 100% CypTess Creek 38% 27% 14% 7% 14% 100% Fl. Lauderdale 49% 38% 4% 0% 100% Fl. Lauderclale Airport SS% 36% S% 3% 1% 100% Hollywood 29% 25% 16% 13% 17% 100% GoideD Glades 69% 22% S% 1 % 3% 100% Metro rail 39% 33% 13% 3% 12% 100% Miami Airport 54% 30% 6% 5% S% 100% 61

PAGE 76

Feeder Service An important objective of the on board survey was to detennine whether feeder services to and from Tri-Rail stations were adequate and whether current patrons were satisfied with the feeder services. Tri-Rail patrons are generally satisfied with availability of buses to and from stations for the SYStem as a whole. However, it is useful to consider satisfaction with the availability of buses by station in order to determine which stations are being served better or worse along the Tri-Rail system. Since feeder services are more frequently used in the egress portion of the trip, Table 13 represents satisfaction with the availability of buses by destination station. Sixty to 70 percent of the respondents are satisfied or very satisfied with the availability of buses to/from the station that they use in the course of their trip. An additional 10 to 20 percent of respondents are somewhat satisfied with feeder service As a result, it appears that the feeder services currently provided to and from Tri-Rail stations are effective in their purpose. H owever, persons who are not satisfied and subsequently have not chosen to use Tri-Rail (and be surveyed) are not represented in the sample. Several stations can be identified where a relatively high proportion of r espon dents indicated being somewhat dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with feeder service relative to the other stations. Approximately 26 percent of respondents completing their trip at the Ft. lauderdale Airport Station were somewhat or very dissatisfied with feeder services while 24 percent of respondents completing their trip at the Hollywood Station were somewhat or very dissatisfied with feeder services. The feeder services for these two stations should be evaluated to determine how improvements can be made. Other stations with a relatively high perception of dissatisfaction with feeder service include the Palm Beach Airport Station (21 percent), Lake Worth Station (21 percent), and Pompano Beach Station (20 percent). The feeder services to and from these stations should be evaluated as well. Recognize that this does not mean that the feeder services to these stations are poor. As stated previously, the majority of respondents reacted positively to feeder bus service at all stations. 62

PAGE 77

TABLE 13 SaUsractloo With tho AvailabUity or Buocs by StaUOD WO$t Palm Beach 37% 32% 14% 6 % 11% 100% Palm Beach Airport 33% 25% 21% 9% 12% 100% Lake Worth 34% 31% 14% 12% 9% 100% Boynton !leach 30% 39% 16% 11% 4% 100% Delray Beach 28% 39% 17% 8% 8% 100% Boca Raton 28% 38% 18% 9% 7% 100% Deerfield Beach 39% 33% 19% 8% 1% 100% Pompano Beach 35% 39% 7% 9% 10% 100% Cypress Creek 42% 34% 9% 8% 7% 100% Ft. Lauderdale 40% 3 1 % 15% 7% 7% 100% Ft. Lauderdale Airport 19% 40% 14% 19% 7% 100% HoUywood 37% 10% 13% 11% 100% G o lden Glade$ 33% 26% 25% 6% 10% 100% M etrorail 31% 37% 15% 9% 8% 100% Miami Airport 26% 40% 18% 7% 100% 63

PAGE 78

Trip Purpose Weekday responses were dominated by home/work trip pairs Approximately 37 percent of all trips taken on Thursday originated at home and were completed at work. likewise, nearly 36 percent of all trips originated at. work and were completed at home. These two origin/ destination trip pairs comprise nearly 73 percent of all trip pairs on Thursday. The Saturday responses were quite different from the weekday response. Trip purposes were spread among many alternatives. Approximately 12 percent of all Saturday trips originated at home and ended in some form of visit or recreational activity. An additional 12 percent of the trips invo l ved the return trip from the recreational activity back to home. Other common origin/destination pairs on Saturday include: home to shopping/errands (7 percent), shopping/errands to home (7 percent), home to special event (6 percent), and special event to home (6 percent) 1n addition, a significant portion of the respondents indicated from home to other types of trips (lO percent) as well as from other typeS of trips back to home ( 12 percent). In the cases where respondents indicated the origin to be the same as the destination, there was apparently a misunderstanding about the question. In most cases, this percentage was very small. However, nearly 8 percent of the Saturday respondents indicated their origin and destination to be the home. It is likely that these respondents interpreted the question to mean the destination at the end of the day as opposed to the end of the trip. Despite the misunderstandings, the sample size is still sufficient to maintain a high degree of confidence with the survey results. Tables 14 through 16 illustrate trip purposes (origins/destinations) for the weighted total response, Thursday response, and Saturday response. 64

PAGE 79

Home 1.7% Work 30.9% School 2.8% Doctor /Deatlst 0.9% "' Vt I Sbopplnii/Errands 1.6% VlsltiDCfRecreatloa 4.0% Special El'tDI 1.4% Other 3 0% 32.2% 1.8% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% I 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% TABLE14 Welgbttd Tolal P
PAGE 80

Home I 0.6% 37.0% Worlt I 3S.5% 2. 1 % Sdlool 3 1 % 0.1 % Dodor/0..1111 1...0% 0. 1 % 8: I SHpplt'C/Enuds 0.7% O.o% Vblt1118.1Recnall .. 2.7% 0.1 % SpectatE-0.7% 0.0% 00... 1.8% 0.1% TABLE 15 ,.....,._, Paceat Rcspoese Trip Pllrposc 3.1% 1.1% 0.7% 0.1% 0.1% O.o% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0 1 % 0.0% O.o% O.o% 0. 1% 0.0% O.o% O.o% 0.0% 0.0% O.o% 0.0% 0.0% O.o% 2.6% 0.8% 2.2% 48.2% 0.0% O.o% 0.1% 31.9% 0 0% O.o% 0.1% 3.6% 0 .0% O.D% O.o% 1.2% O.o% 0 0% O.o% 0.8% 1.5% 0.0% 0.4% 4.7% O.o% 0.0% 0.1% 0.8% 0.4% 0 .1% 0.4% 2.8%

PAGE 81

Home 8 7% Work 3.7% School 0. 7% Doctor /Dtndsl 0. 2% I S h o p pl ng/Enam ds I 7 0% I Vl o lllng/Recreallon 1 2.0% 5 5% Otbtr I 1 0.1% I 3.8% 0 5% 0. 0% 0. 0% 0.0% I 0.0% 0. 1 % 03% I TABLE 1 6 Sat urda y Ptrunt Responst Trip Purpose Ori3Jo/Dtslloallon 0.5% 0. 1 % 7.1 % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 0.0% 0. 0% 0. 0% 0.0% 0.1% 0. 0% I 0.1% I 0.5% 0. 0% 0. 1% I 0.4% 0.0% 0. 0% I 0.1% 0.0% I 0.0% I 0. 2% 11.6% 5.8% 11. 9% 49.6% 0.0% 0.1% 03% 4.7% 0.1% 0.0% 0. 0% 1.1 % 0.1% 0. 1% 0.0% 0.5% I 0.4 % I 0.1% I 0.2% I 83% I 1.8% I 0.5% I 0.8% I 15.7% I 0.4% I 03% I 0.4% I 6 8% I 0.7% I 0.4% I 1.7% I 133%

PAGE 82

1iip Purpose by Station The trip purposes are provided for the system total as well as for each individual station in Figure 60. The trip purposes have been grouped into three major categories: home-based trips, work based trips, and other trips. A pie chan is provided for each station and indicates the proponion of the various trip purposes in each of the st1mm81)' categories The home-based trip provides the proponion of trips that are between that station and home while the work-based trip provides the proponion of trips that are between that station and work. The combined total for all other trip purposes is relatively small. As a result, an "other" category is provided which includes school, doctor/dentist, shopping/errands, visiting/recreation, spedal event, and other. For the system as a whole, 47 percent of all hoardings and aligbtings are home-based, 38 percent are work-based, and 15 percent are other types of trip purposes. The trip purpose by station is panicularly useful in the determination of which stations are used primarily by residential areas and which are used primarily by employment centers. For example, the Lake Worth Station clearly serves a residential area since 80 percent of the trips are home based. In contrast, the Metrorail Station clear l y serves an employment center since over 51 percent of all trips are work-based. 68

PAGE 83

FIGURE60 Trip Purpose by Stalloa ... ft. L&u4riolc-... -... .......a &1a11CIIl -_.,,. System Total 69

PAGE 84

Marketing Media In question 24, respondents were asked to indicate where they first learned about Tri Rail. Because the question was open-ended, the responses were reviewed and categories were established to allow the data to be summarized as provided in Table 17. Over 40 percent of the respondents learned about Tri-Rail through some form of advertising whether it be through radio, television. newspaper, or some other type of marketing media These results indicate that marketing efforts have been successful in attracting current users. Approximately 25 percent of the respondents indicated learning about Tri-Rail through a friend (19 percent) or relative (5 percent). This reinforces the user satisfaction results in that, because patrons have been satisfied with the service, they have been telling their friends and relatives about the service. TABL adid you Rrst Jam about Trt-RaU? Advutisiitg (radio, telerisioa, DeWSpaper, othu) Friend Family Employer system operating Other NotliiiSWerCd 70 41% 19% S% 6% S% 8% 17%

PAGE 85

Seasonal/Tourist Use Of particular significance is the effect that seasonal/tourist ridership has on Tri-Rail ridership. As indicated previously, nearly 11 percent of the survey respondents indica ted that they were a tourist, visitor, or seasonal resident. This 11 percent could perhaps cause ridership to decline in the non-tourist season. In order to determine if the affects are significant, it is useful to consider the frequency of ridership on Tri-Rail for the seasonal/tourist patrons. Table 18 provides the frequency of use according to residency status. It is apparent that permanent residents dominate every category since they comprise 89 percent of the respondents. However, the remaining 11 percent is comprised of seasonal residents, tourists, and visitors. The table clearly indicates that seasonal riders limit their use of Tri-Rail to once every few weeks. The 11 percent ridership may have contributed to recent declines in ridership but this hypothesis cannot be substantiated without surveying in the off-season for tourists and visitors. TABLE 18 Frequency of Use and IWideDC)' Status 4 or more uys/ Wftk 48% 1% 51% 2or3cU.ys/Wftk 8% 1% 1% 10% About 1 day/week 11% 1% 0% 12% 22% 3% 2% 27% 71

PAGE 86

Transit Dependents and Choice Riders One of the major goals of Tri-Rail is to encourage individuals to get out of the single occupant automobile and on to the commuter rail system. Data collected in the survey can be analyzed to determine bow successful Tri-Rail is in attaining this objective. Table 19 provides two pieces of information: (1) alternative mode of transportation that would have been used bad they not made their trip on Tri-Rail, and (2) the number of automobiles owned by each individual according to the alternative mode categories. Nearly 70 percent of the respondents would have driven bad they not taken Tri-Rail on this trip. Another 12 percent would have ridden with someone else to make the trip. It is clear that the vast majority of Tri-Rai l users are choice transit riders and clearly do not depend on transit as their sole source of transportation. Only 6 percent of the respondents indicate not owning an automobile As a result, it appears that Tri-Rail is doing an excellent job of attracting people out of their cars and on to the train. TABLE 19 Alleruatle Trausportatloo aad Automobile O....ershlp 1% 24% 34% 11% Bus 2% 2% 1% 1% 6% Ride wttb someoae 2% S% 3% 2% 12% Would aot make trip 2% 5% 4% 2% 13% 0% 0% 0% 72

PAGE 87

Ridership Profile The characteristics provided in Table 20 describe the typical patron of Tri-Rail on a normal Thursday and a normal Saturday. < Clilirii:terlstic; ,. .. . " Age Gender Housebold Income Length of Use Transit Experience Frequency of Use Reason for Riding Alternative Transportation Auto Ownership Residency Status Time Trip Began Ronnd Trip or QueWay Fare Type TABLE20 Rldusblp ProOies ''$'>?<> hV '_' ( .. ,.. ,, ":. \>, -t-,n;- ... _., ... -. -,> '1" Y.,.w.,...,._ 23 to 34 male white $20,000 to $40,000 0 to 7 montbs inexperienced 4 or more days per week conveuient/coooomical drive 2 autoo permanent resident 6:00-8:00 a.m. round trip monthly fare pass ,.:;;;(. .. > ,_. --.<>:\ SiiiDiUYl'lltron_,<: ... _;';["' ... ' 23 to 34 female white $20,000 to $40,000 0 to 3 monlbs inexperienced once cYery 1 to 4 weeks convenient driYe 2 autos permanent resident 6:00.12:00 a.m. round trip round trip fare With respect to the questions discussed, there are several differences that are apparent when the ridership profile is compared for Thursday patrons and Saturday patrons. The majority of Thursday trips are oriented to or from work while trip purpose on Saturday includes recreation, shopping, errands, and others. Men have a tendency to ride more often on the weekday while women tend to ride more frequently on Saturday. Weekday riders have been using Tri-Rail for a longer time period (0-7 months) than Saturday riders (0-3 months). Frequency of use is much greater on Thursday as compared to Saturday as a result of the work-oriented trips. 73

PAGE 88

Thursday respondents choose to ride Tri Rail because it is convenient and economical while the typical Saturday patron rides primarily for the convenience. The typical Thursday patron begins his/her trip between 6:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. while the Saturday patron typically begins his/her trip between 6:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon. Weekday riders are more likely to use the monthly fare pass while weekend patrons tend to use the round trip fare. 74

PAGE 89

Crosstabulations Seventy-six crosstabulations were performed in the process of analyzing data. This includes many of the same crosstabulations being performed for the survey total, Thursday response, and Saturday response. Many of the crosstabulations were reviewed and determined to not be useful enough to include in the report. A list of crosstabulatioos that were compiled is provided below. 1. Mode of access (06) by origin station (01)Total, Thursday, Saturday. 2. Mode of egress (012) by destination station (08) Total, Thursday, Saturday. 3. Trip purpose (09) by gender (018) Total, Thursday, Saturday. 4. Trip purpose (09) by frequency of use (014)Total. 5. Mode of egress (012) by satisfaction with availability of buses to/from stations (025b)Total. 6. Mode of access (06) by satisfaction with availability of buses to/from stations (025b) -Total. 7. Origin station (07) by satisfaction with availability of parking at stations (025a) Total, Thursday, Saturday. 8. Frequency of use (014) by residency status (022)Total. 9. Alternative transportation (016) by auto ownership (021) Total, Thursday, Saturday. 10. Frequency of use (014) by fare type (013)Total 11. Fare type (013) by satisfaction with cost of riding the train (025i) Total, Thursday, Saturday. 12 Frequency of use (014) by destination station (08) Total. 13. Frequency of use (014) by origin station (01)Total. 14. Reason for riding train (015) by satisfaction with availability of parking at stations (025a) Total. 15. Mode of access (06) by satisfaction with availability of parking at stations (025a) -Total. 16. Mode of egress (012) by satisfaction with availability of parking at stations (025a) Total. 17. Satisfaction with availability of buses to/from stations (025b) by destination station (08) Total. 18. Satisfaction with availability of buses to/from stations (025b) by origin station (07) Total 75

PAGE 90

19. Reason for riding train (015) by auto ownership (021) Total, Thursday, Saturday. 20. Satisfaction with security (025m) by gender (018) Total, Thursday, Saturday. 21. Income (020) by all satisfaction questions (025a 025n) -Total. 22 Reason for riding train (015) by ethnic origin (019) Total. 23. Mode of aecess (06) by auto ownership (021) Total, Thursday, Saturday. 24. Mode of access (06) by gender (018) by auto ownership (021) Total. 25. Mode of access (06) by gender (018) Total. 26. How long using Tri-Rail (01) by all satisfaction questions (025a-025n) -Total. 27. Income (020) by origin station (07) Total. 28. Reason for riding train (015) by satisfaction with avaJlability of parking at stations ( 025a) Total. 29. Origin purpose (03) by origin station Thursday. 30. Trip purpose (09) by destination station Thursday. 31. Origin purpose (03) by trip purpose (09) by origin station (07) Total. 32. Mode of aecess (06) by mode of egress (012) by origin station (07) Total. 76

PAGE 91

Comments/Suggestions At the conclusion of the survey, respondents were given the opportunity to provide comments and/or suggestions. Over 57 percent of the Thursday respondents provided a comment or suggestion ( 1,009 comments/suggestions). Likewise, approximately 43 percent of the Saturday respondents provided a comment or suggestion (645 comments/ suggestions). Selected comments for the Thursday and Saturday response are provided below. Some of the comments have been edited for clarification. Comments From Thursday Patrons 'The Palm Beach Aiiport station has no parking and just recently they posted ''NO PARKING" signs everywhere which made it more difficult to park altogether. Also, t)le feeder buses were not very cooperative in my case. 1 work at the ATC Tower in Palm Beach and I could not get service to that loca tion. As a result, 1 had to purchase an old vehicle to get me bac k and forth from the station to work and I worry about leaving the car overnight. Some of your other stations have vans in service and they seem more flexible than the buses I have talked so highly of the T ri-Rail system to my co-workers that two of them have joined me in commuting. They also agree that the Palm Beach Station needs a parking lot and van service." "Run trains more often (every 1/2 hour), more trains at noon, and. Saturday service the same as daily. I work every Saturday for 1/2 day (till noon)." "Train schedule should be hourly all day and possibly run on Sundays. Not all commuters are MonFri. day shifts." "Service on Sundays; earlier (a.m.) northbound service on Saturdays." "During the week, there's a gap between 12:00 and 3:20 something? I have to wait 1/2 hours before boarding a train home; many other people that I know will not ride for this reason. Also, on special event days the train is way overcrowded. Add on another car or something! "Same schedule for Saturday and maybe Sunday as for other days, accommodating Metrorail to fit with Tri-Rail (Metro not early enough)." 77

PAGE 92

"Conductor on afternoon train is very rude and discourteous. Could use a little more etiquette training. Be more considerate of shuttle bus riders when bus is running late." "The 4:29 leaving West Palm in afternoon. those Tri-Rail employees are inconsiderate. Twice we have been left, and they see you. One time they made an announcement that we will have to be on time because they have a schedule to keep. A$ if our fault." "Make senior citizen fare at $0.60 instead of $0.65. Thank you!" "More communication with passengers about delays. Appreciate radio reports on Tri-Rail schedule." "Try to schedule Friday nights and Saturday nights for evening service till midnight for dinner crowds and theater groups; also concert service for Miami crowd." "' get off work at 3:00 and I have to wait in Boca 1 hour before the next train." "I would like to have service on Sundays." "The Tri-Rail couldn't have come at a better time for most of us who travel on the Tri-Rail." "There is no bus to this station in a.m. I have a car only for the purpose of getting to the train." "Your own dedicated tracks, more frequent trains and later trains. "Better shelter at Boca Raton because of rain. rve gotten soaked a couple of times even with raincoat and umbrella." "Shuttle buses to west Broward. Better train signal coordination. "Excellent service and dependability. Every employee for Tri-Rail should be commended!" "When it's raining out, the train is always late because the signals don't function correctly. Why not fix them?" 78

PAGE 93

"' wish the trains would run later on weekdays. Can't take any night classes. It would be nice to have an extra train in the mornings between 10 and 11 and afternoon between 1 and 2:30.'' "Palm Beach Airport parking is disgraceful. Also the large feeder buses that ride virtually empty are a shame and very wasteful. Well-written survey. Overall I am grateful for the service." "I believe the trains should run every 1/2 hour during peak times. This is the reason a lot of commuters do not ride. The times are not convenient for a lot of people Pve spoken to." "Run trains more frequently." "Run trains all day and more frequently." "My job depends on this train. I love Tri-Rail!" "Provide a Tri-Rail shuttle bus to Oakland Park Blvd. (West) at the Cypress Creek Station. Currently there is not means of transportation, this would enhance the availability of buses, and improve Tri-Rail service, as many individuals would utilize the Tri-Rail." "Metrorail and Tri-Rail connections should be more closely coordinated especially for noon train north. Metro pulls in five minutes after Tri-Rail leaves station." "Associates tell me they would ride if the schedule would fit their work hours which means arrive at Metrorail by 8:00-8:15 and depart from Metrorail at 5:45-6:00. Maybe an extra train in the a.m. and one in p.m. would help this." Comments From Saturd;ay Patrons "The posted schedule for the tri-rail shuttle bus from the Miami Airport to Tri-Rail does not show Saturday service. The weekday schedule that is posted on the conerete pillar is worn out and cannot be read; please repaint the signs and include the Saturday bus schedule. Thanks!" 79

PAGE 94

"Connect Metrobus to/from station rather than one free bus. Use environmental protection in advertisements to increase use." "We need at least two routes north and two south on Sundays. Please. "I feel the train is convenient and adequate for me, and I am grateful." "Great." "Extend service south past airport (Miami) -would serve a large population that now has a difficult route getting to Miami Airport station. "Public transportation buses should be directly (linked) to Tri-Rail, including Saturday." "Feeder buses should run on Saturdays. Also Sunday service provided. "Elctended service." "Elctended service." "More feeder buses and lower the cost for the working poor of America." "One thing I have to suggest (is that) I would be 100% happier if Tri-Rail ran on Sundays." "More trains -more often and on Sundays." "I wish you had service on Sunday." "Run on Sunday." "I would like to suggest more ease in knowing and seeing security and of course Sunday service and how about going further north. "You are not listed in the phone book under Tri-Rail. How frustrating! Also, bicycle racks would be greatfd much appreciate it" "Open on Sundays." 80

PAGE 95

"More infonnation. I got Tri-Rail and Amtrak confused." "More seats. We had standing room only. Glad to see it is well used." "'bis is a very necessary service. Not only for local population, but also for tourists! N eeds to expand." "Would use train far more often if hours of service were better timed. Need 2 p.m. northbound." "Shuttle to airport is not suitable for luggage. Need better bus." "There should be a shuttle bus to Miami Airport that is a little more convenient for luggage a regular city bus is not adequate I doubt we will use it again to the airport until this is changed." ''Run on the hour all day." "' feel that Tri-Rail is a great way to travel!" "Where is smoking section?!" "Keep up the good work." "Extend service further north. Provide express trains at rush hours. "Windows could be cleaner. "I've really enjoyed riding the TriRail. I think it's a great service for t his area 81

PAGE 96

this page IS blank 82

PAGE 97

USER SATISFAcriON Respondents were asked to rate Tri-Rail in founeen different areas of performance. These ratings provide measures of user satisfaction with various characteristics of the system. The results indicate areas of strengths and weaknesses in service delivezy. Based on these observations, decisions can be made to direct efforts for future improvements in the system based on patron perception. Patron Perceotion of S)'slem Characterislies The following system characteristics were rated by survey respondents: (a) Availability of parking at station (b) Availability of buses to/from the station (c) Days on which trains run (d) Hours of service (e) Frequency of service (f) Travel time (g) On-time performance of the train (h) Ease of transferring (i) Cost of riding the train G) Availability of train route information and changes (k) Vehicle cleanliness and comfort (I) Employee courtesy (m) Security (on train and while waiting for the train) (n) How do you feel about Tri-Rail service, in general? Figures 61 through 102 indicate user satisfaction ratings for each of the above system characteristics. Approximately 80 percent of survey respondents are satisfied or vezy satisfied with Tri-Rail service in general. Such a positive rating indicates that the majority of respondents feel generally positive about each of the characteristics identified. 83

PAGE 98

FIGURE61 AvallabUII)' ol parldDa at atadoa, WeJpled Tocal Respollse -: .... s.lil&cd lOll FIGURE 6Z AvallabUII)' of paridq at stadoa, Tbanday RapoDIO JI'IGURE63 A .. llab!JJI)' ol JlllltiDiat stadoa, Sallll'da1 Rapoaae V..,Sodo&od Sodo6od s..a...a..Sodo&od v..,n 'Pod .,. 84

PAGE 99

FIGURE64 A\'llllabiUty or buses Ill/from lbe station, Wdsbted Total Response FIGURE65 AnllobiUty or buses Ill/from lbe staUon, Tbursda1 Response FIGURE66 A\'llllabWty or buses Ill/from lbe llaUou, Satunb11 Response v..,s.ww Scanialtl)iwftl v..,n ihl 85

PAGE 100

FIGURE67 Days oa wblda llalos nm, Welgloled Total ltespoDH FIGUREQI Days OD wbJcb lrabla nm, 'Ibanda)' l!apoaN 86

PAGE 101

FIGVRE70 Hours of service, Weigllled Total .. Std FIGURE71 HoW"S of scnlcc, '11utrsday Respouse FIGURE72 Houn oflei'Yice, SaturdQ Jl.espouse

PAGE 102

FIGURE73 Frequeacy of service, WelaiJted Total Respo1150 YarD' 5 d FIGURE74 Fft
PAGE 103

FIGURE76 'Iraffi lime, WdpWd Total Respoase FIGURE77 'Iram limo, 1bursdaJ' Respoase FIGURE78 'Iraffi lime, Saturday Respoase 89

PAGE 104

FIGVRE79 Oatlme porformaDct! of tbe lniD, WeJshled Total ltfspoose FIGURE80 Oe-tlmo perfOf'IIUIIKlt ol tbe lrala, 'J1nmdor RespoDse FIGURE It Oa-time perforw..,. ol tbe lraiD, Salarllay ._poase Vcq n r.Ae.t 90

PAGE 105

FIGURES: EaM of lraDsfei'I'IDc. Wdabled Total Rapoase v..ro; 'oiisfei'I'IDc. Salarda)' Response VayDi ilW 91

PAGE 106

FIGURE IS Cost ol rldlDJ lbe tra1D, Wefablecl Total Response VayD r-.1 FIGURE86 Cost ol rldlDJ !be tra1D, T&aroda1 RespollK s-e.t.D' (fed VayN 'ilwl Sc..r..'X 'Mel 92

PAGE 107

FIGURE88 Availability of train route laformatlon aad chnv$, Wtlgbled Total Response FIGURE89 Al'ailabilll)' of lraln route IDformaUoa and chaQgeS, Thursday Respuuse FIGURE90 A\'llllablllty ollraln roale laformatloD aad chnga, Salllrda7 Response 93

PAGE 108

FIGURE91 Vehicle cleanliDOSS aad comfort, Weilbted Tolal Respoase VayD' !Ad FIGURE !I% Veblcle deaDIIDess ud comfort, Thursday Respouse ScaeW.tt)!ee. f.M "" FIGURE93 Veblde cJaa!!-ud .-tort, Salanla,r Respoase VCIJN I "" 94

PAGE 109

FIGURE94 Emplo)'
PAGE 110

FIGURE97 Securtl)' (on tnln and while walllug ror lhe tnln), WeJelated Total Response V.r,N ftlfrd FIGURE 911 Securll)' (OD lnlla and willie walllug ror lbe tnln), Tlnusday Response s.-.bll o .-, VayD' ieAed FIGURE !19 Securtl)' (OD tnln and while waldD& ror the tnln), SaturdJI.Y Response 96

PAGE 111

FIGURE 100 How do you feel about Tri-Rall senice, I.D geuual?, WelabWI Total Response FIGURE 101 How do you feel about TriRall senlce, I.D geuual?, 'Ibarsday Response FIGURE 10% How do yoa feel aboal TriRall senlce, I.D geuual?, Saturday RespoDSe SomubotWcd VCIJD' 1W 97

PAGE 112

Summao of Performance Aspects User satisfaction ratings were calculated for each system characteristic by applying numerical measures to each possible response. An average score was then calculated for each characteristic for Thursday, Saturday, and the weighted total, al l of which are provided i n Table 21. The numerical assignments are as f o ll ows: Very Satisfied = 5 Satisfied = 4 Somewhat Dissatisfied = 2 Very Dissatisfied = 1 Somewhat Satisfied = 3 TABLEll User SatlsfiOdloa RaUags A...U.bWty ot parking 3.8S 4.10 AvaUabUlty o( buses 3 .70 3.93 DaJ51niDsrun 4.20 3.99 Hours or service 3 .65 3.89 Frequeocy ot serrice 3.30 3 .77 Trawl Ume 4.00 4.28 OaUme ptrfonii.OIICe 3.90 4.42 Ease o( lrallsferrlllg 4.23 4.33 cost or rlcllag traJa 4.29 4.49 Amlablllty or route IDtonaalloa 4.12 4.22 Vellide claniiDess/COIIIIort 4.50 4.56 Emplo,.,e courtesy 4.45 4 .44 Secarll)' 4.30 4.26 ado :rna ree1 about TriRaU? 4.31 4.47 98 3.88 3 .73 4.17 3.68 3.36 4.03 3.97 425 4.32 4.13 4.51 4.45 4.29 4.33

PAGE 113

The table clearly indicates that Tri-Rail patrons are generally satisfied with every aspect of the system since the scores range from a low of 3.30 (Thursday, frequency of service) to a high of 4.56 (Saturday, vehicle cleanliness/comfort). I n fact, the only aspects that have scores below four in the weighted total category include frequency of service (3 36), hours of service (3.68), availability of buses (3.73), availability of parking (3.88), and on-time performance (3 97). Although respondents rated Tri-Rail high in every category, patrons were questioned regarding which aspects of performance they would most like to see improved. Question 26 asked respondents to review all of the listed aspects of Tri-Rail service provided in question 25. They were then asked to list the three areas where improvements would be most helpful Table 22 indicates the characteristics identified by respondents for Thursday, Saturday, and system total. The order of importance provided by the table assumes that every aspect listed received equal weighting. That is, when a respondent indicated three aspects in question 26, all three aspects were included and weighted equally H a respondent only provided one aspect, then that aspect was included accordingly. As a result, those indicating three aspects have significantly more input than those who indicated none, one, or two aspects. There was no particular reason to believe that respondents would necessarily indicate the aspects in order of importance since they were not asked to do so In all cases, frequency of service and hours of service were identified as the aspects of performance where improvements would be most helpfuL Beyond the first two identified aspects, Thursday and Saturday respondents differed somewhat in their perception of where Tri-Rail needs to improve its performance The italicized aspects represent significant differences between the responses on Thursday and those on Saturday Thursday respond e nts were much more concerned with on-time performance than Saturday respondents. Alternatively, Saturday respondents desired improvements in the days of operation (presumably wanting Sunday service) much more than Thursday respondents Both of these findings are logical given the trip purposes typical for each day. 99

PAGE 114

TABLE22 The area wbere lmJII'OftiDOIIU would be moot bdpful L Fr'tqueaey of IOI'Vioe l. Houro of eenic:e 3. Availability of buses 4. Days of operation S. Availability of parking 6. Oulimc perform&llg 12. Vehicle deanlineiSS & comfort 13. Employee courtesy L Fr'tqiHDC)I ofiOI'Vioe 2. Hours of ..moe 3. A\'8iJability of buses 4. On-time peifonnance S. Availability of parking 6. Travel time 7. D'!)'S of opcalion 8. Security 9. Cost of riding the train 10. Availability of information 11. Ease of transferriug 12. Vebide delieiSS & comfort 13. Employee courtesy 100 1. Frequenq or ..moe l. Houn or ..moe 3. D'!)'S of operation 4. Availability of parking S. Availability of buses 6. Security 7. Availability of ioformalioc 8. Travel lime 9. Cost of riding the train 10. On-time peifonnance 11. Ease of transferriug 12. Employee courtesy 13. Vebide deanliness & comfort

PAGE 115

VI. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS In summary, a comprehensive on-board survey of Tri-Rail patrons was conducted on Thursday, March 28 and Saturday, March 30 of 1991. The purpose of this survey was to collect demographic information, travel behavior characteristics, and user satisf a ction. Ridership profiles were developed through the compilation of responses to demographic and travel behavior questions. The ridership profiles for Thursday and Saturday are provided again in Table 23. Age Gender Ethnic Origin Household locome Lengtb of Use TraD.
PAGE 116

Thursday patrons are using Tri-Rail in their trip to work. The concern expressed by Saturday respondents regarding the days of operation may be a reflection of interest in Sunday service. Travel characteristics were also identifie d and discussed in the report. The busiest stations in the system are the West Palm Beach Station and the Metrorail Station. As a result, the most common trip pair involves these two stations in both the northbound and southbound directions. The average trip length for all trips taken on Tri-Rail is 36 miles. However, the average trip length on Thursday (34 nules) is shoner than on Saturday (47 miles). This is likely due to the fact that recreational trips tend to be longer as users are often traveling down to Miami for the day (Saturday) or the weekend. Modes of access and egress were also reviewed. The mo s t common mode of access for Tri Rail users is the automobile. A majori( of users drive to a station and park. Other frequent modes of access include being dropped off at the station, a Tri-Rail shuttle bus and Metrorail/mover. The primary modes of egress include being picked up at the station or using the Metrorailfmover. A majori( of Tri-Rail respondents are satisfied with the availabilit of parking at Tri-Rail stations. However, three stations were identified that should be monitored including Palm Beach Airport, Boca Raton, and Hollywood Stations. These three stations had the highest proportion of respondents indicating they were somewhat or very dissatisfied with the availabilit of parking. A significant majori( of Tri-Rail respondents are satisfied or very satisfied with the availabilit ofbuses to/from the stations, i.e., feeder bus service. The data indicate that the feeder bus services currently provided by Tri-Rail are effective in the provision of service to the commuter rail line. H owever, stations with the least positive response were identified. The feeder services to the Ft. Lauderdale Airpon Station, Hollywood Station, Palm Beach Airpon Station, Lake Worth Station, and Pompano Beach Station should be monitored closely. These stations had the highest proportion of respo ndents indicating they were somewhat or very dissatisfied with feeder service. A majori( of trips on Thursday were oriented between home and work while trip purposes on Saturday were spread among several different purposes including recreational activities, 102

PAGE 117

shopping/ errands, and special events. A majority of Tri -Rail users found out about the system through some form of advertising including television, radio, newspaper, and others. The second most common response was learning about Tri-Rail from a friend. The response suggests that Tri-Rail's marketing efforts are responsibl e for a significant share of the ridership. Approximately 11 percent of the respondents were seasonal residents, tourists, or visitors. As a result, modest seasonal declines in ridership may be expected at the end of the tourist season. A significant majority of Tri-Rail users are choice transit riders. That is, most riders are within households that own one or more automobiles and would be making their trip by automobile if the train were not available. Very few transit dependent individuals are using TriRail In conclusion, the survey results suggest that Tri-Rail is offering a convenient and efficient transportation alternative to the community. However, information gathered as a result of this effort will undoubtedly contribute to further improvements in the system. 103

PAGE 118

this page IS blank 104

PAGE 119

VII. FUTURE APPLICATIONS AND SUBSEQUENT SURVEYS This survey report provides a wealth of information and the survey results contain additional information that may be of value to Tri-Rail in subsequent planning and analysis exercises. Numerous crosstabulations beyond those reported here have been prepared and additional quantitative and narrative data can be compiled from the survey results. Other analyses of the data are possible to support specific planning needs but were beyond the scope and budget for this report. Origin Destination Information Question 4 asked each respondent the major cross streets nearest where they came from prior to beginning their trip. Alternatively, question 11 asked each respondent the major cross streets nearest their final destination. Approximately 85 percent of Thursday respondents and 66 percent of Saturday respondents answered question 4 and 11. As a result, a good data base exists for detailed origin-destination infonnation. This data may be useful to TriRail in addressing a variety of station planning and marketing efforts. Travel Time Travel time information can be calculated from the information collected in questions 5 and 10. This reported travel time includes the access and egress portions of the trip which can then be compared to the scheduled time for the Tri-Rail portion of the trip. The actual access and egress time can then be calculated. Since some respondents interpreted trip end time to be the p.m. return trip, a survey-by-survey review of the information would be required to utilize the data. Narrative Responses In addition to the compilation of open-ended comments pulled from the surveys and reported in this document, there were other open-ended questions and additional comments reported in the surveys. A detailed review of the individual questionnaires may be helpful to support specific planning or analysis activities. 105

PAGE 120

Future Surveys This sUJvey provided a good detailed database on Tri-Rail ridership and useful information for a variety of planning purposes. Such a survey should be conducted every two to three years. However, many considerations may result in a desire to do more frequent or additional surveys. If, for example, Sunday service is added or service extended int o the evening, it may be valuable to survey that new market once it has matured. Similarly, if ridership changes significantly or there is a major change in service quality, characteristics, or other policies, it may be useful to conduct a new survey. Targeted surveys might be directed at a given station or for a given issue (e.g. adequacy of parking for a selected station). If Tri-Rail wants to more explicitly quantify the share of riders who are seasonal residents or tourists at different times of the year, a much smaller survey aimed specifically at that issue could be used to provide the information at a lower cost 106

PAGE 121

APPENDIX A Survey Instrument A-1

PAGE 122

TRIRAIL RIDER SURVEY DEAR TRIRAIL RIDER: TriRail wou l d like your opinion to belp improve its commuter rail semc:e. PLEASE complete tbe follov.ing '"""'Y Check( .f) tbe correct box or write out your ....-wcrs. Return tbe survey to tbe coUection box as you exit tbe train, or hand it to tbc survey taker. I F YOU f14VE COMPLE'IED TillS SURVEY EARLIER TODAY, IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO COMPLETE ANOTHER. RETURN TilE SURVEY TO 11IE TRIRAIL REPRESENTATIVE ON BOARD. 1. How many months have you been 111ing TriRail ? 2. Will you be riding TriRail on your return trip? _Yes No 3. Where did you come from bef ore you started this trip? Home _Doctor/ Dentist _Special Event Work _Shopping/Errands Other School VISiting/Recreation --;-(rpco--:.,.,:-:,-4 What are tbe major cross streets nearest this location? _______________ & ______________ __ S Approximately wbat lime did you s.tart your trip? _:_ am / pm 6. How did you get to th e train stop? (Cheek one) Walked 04 blocks Was dropped off : Walked over 4 blocks : Drove miles and parked By MetroMover /Rail By jitney -By Tri-Rail shuttle bus Other -By other bus -------(route &: aatM) 7. Y o u got on this train at __ :;--..,...,-:--:-----ot SUilon) 8. You will get off th e train at -T.:=;:;-:;::;.:::::;-----(M.me or 'tatioft) 9. Where are you going to now? Work _Doctor/Dentist Spe
    aldcstillation? & (t:truu tbat i nkrf:: oeam\::::)OI>:::::r;:fi::n,:;:!clc>:;:;;l;:l .. :::.,..c= -=>) 12 How will you get to your final destinalion? (Cheek one) Walked 04 blocks Gee pidced up Walked over 4 blocks -Drive miles _By M etroMover/Rail :By jitney By TriRail shutt le bus Other _________ By other bus -(route# & name) 13. What type o f fare did you pay when you first boarded the train? _On e-Way Far e _Round Trip Fare Weekly Pass Monthly Pass :Senior/Handicapped/Student Fare 14. How often do you ride tbe train? 4 or more days per week 2 or 3 days per week About 1 per week once every_ weeks IS. What is tbe mOSI important reasoo you ride tbe train? (.f only ooe) I doa't drive Parkiag is diffieult /cxpeosive Don't like to drive -Car is aot available Traio is mOt"e oweo.icut Otber Train is mote economical -------16. How would you make this trip if not by train ? Drive Ride with someone Taxi Bus Wouldn't make trip 17. Your age is? 23 t O 34 60 to 64 18. You are: Mal e 19. Your e t lulie origin is18 or under 35 tO 4$ 6S to 74 Female 19 tO Z2 46to S9 75 or more Wbite Blade Hispanic Otbet(spe
    PAGE 123

    SIDE l: TRI-RAIL ON-BOARD RIDERSHIP SURVEY 20. The total annual income of your ho=hold is .. U.S thaD SS,OOO $5,000 to $9,999 $10,000 to $14,999 $10,000 to $24,999 $15,000 to $29,999 $30,000 to $39,999 : SSO,OOO to $59,999 : $60,000 to $69,999 : $70,000 to $79,999 21. How many vehicles are owned by your household? Noue One Two Three or more $15,000 to $19,999 $40,000 to $49,999 : $80,000 and over :22. What do you coll$ider yourself'l Permanent resident Seasonal resideot _Tourist/visitor 23. Were you an experieoeed public transportation rider befor e usiDg Tri-Rall? Yes No Please explain 14. How ctid you first learn about Tri-Rail ______________ ? 25. In general bow satisfied arc you with each of the following aspe
    PAGE 124

    APPENDIX B Summary of Survey Results B-1

    PAGE 125

    TABLE B-1 Questloa 1. How maay mouths have you heea using Tri-Rall? 0 10 3 IDODths 26.21% 41.43% 28.50% 4107 mouths 20.56% 15.91% 19.87% 8 to 11 months 9 .84% 5.45% 9.18% 12. 10 1li mouths 13.73% 7.31 % 12.75% 16 to 19 months 5.88% 2.28% 5.34% 20 10 23 mouths 2.71% 0.33% 2.35% 24 to 27 mouths 1260% 3.65% 11.25% DOt &DSiftl'td 8.47% 23.67% 10.76% TABLE B-2 Question 2. Wall fOD he ridlns Tri-Rall OD your retum trip? Yes 92.51% 82.30% 90.97% No 5.88% 1264% 6.90% not aaswa'ed 1.61% 5.()6% 2.13% B-2

    PAGE 126

    TABLE B-3 Questtoo 3. Where did you coate &om Won: you staned lhls trip? Homt 88.13% 69.86% 85.38% Work 3.47% 3.46% 3.47% SdJool 0.69% 2.08% 0.90% Doctor fDeutist 0.34% 0.43% 0.3S% Sboppiag/Enaads 0.17% 1.59% 0.38% Visltlag/Recreadoo 2.34% 8.90% 3.33% Speclal Eveot 0.00% 0.76% 0.12% Other 1.21% 5.64% 1.88% DOt IUISWtred 3.64% 7.28% 4.19% TABLE Jl.4 Questloa 4. Wbat are lhe ma,jor cross streets nearest this location? 85.00% 66.24% 82.17% 15.00% 33.76% 17.83% B-3

    PAGE 127

    TABLEB-5 Questiou 5. Approldmatdy what tlmt clld ,.. start )'Our trip? 0-200 0.05% 0.00% 201-400 O.U% 0.00% 401-6)0 16.41% 135% 601-fOO 64.74% 16.56% 801 6.75% 20.58% 1001-1200 3.46% 13.38% 1201-1400 2.39% 8.78% 1401-1600 0.00% 5.61% 1601 0.00% 10.26% 18012000 0.00% 3.51% 2001 0.00% 3.14% 2201 0 00% 0.91% ao IIDIMftd 3-06% 15.92%

    PAGE 128

    TABLEU Q ueslloa 6. How dld yoa get to the trala s top ? ''>'141H""ttlV' y ''? Wf' .,_-.t . i '" Salurdaf'" '$0) "' "'$\, ... {tt,--, tw ' ,, To llil p c,,.. Total "'-"' ' Walked D-4 blocks 246% 2.2D% 2.42% Walked O>er 4 b locks 228% :M7% 2.46% By MelroMovu /Rail 3.51% 9.72% 4 45% By 'l'riRall shunle bus 3.95% 4.2D% 3.93% B y other bus 3.43% 3.75% 3 48% Was dropped oa 23.01% 20.58% 2264% Drove aad parlce d 53.52% 4233% 51.83% By 0.26% 0.67% 0.32% Other 2.34% 3.98% 2.59% Dot answered 5.22% 9.10% 5.81% B-5

    PAGE 129

    TABLE B-7 Queslloo 7. Yo u got on thi s trai n at wblcb scatloo? West Palm lleacb 10.57% 19.90% 11.97% Palm lleacb 3.10% 2.71% 3 04% Lab Worth 7.11% 1 0.24% 7.58% Btadl 3.93% 4.40% 4.00% Btadl 3.51% 3.22% 3 47% Boca Ratoa 4.35% 1.77% 3 96% Doorlleld Btadl 2.87% 4.22% Btadl 4.62% 2.21% 4.26% Creek 6.85% 2.31% 6.17% Ft. Laududak 10 18% 5.16% 9.42% Ft. Laududak 4.30% 1 06% 3.81% H ol lywood 10.93% 4.54% 9.97% GolcleD Glades 8.89% 3.34% 8.06% Metronll 6.39% 1491% 7.68% Miami Airport 5.06% 5.38% S.ll% DolaD.....-ed 5.75% 15.99% 7.29%

    PAGE 130

    TABLE 8-8 Questloa 8. You wlll get ott the tnai a a t which s tatlo a ? Palm Beach Airport 3.29% 2.62% 3.19% U.ke Worth 1.64% 3.82% L97% Bo)'DIO D Beach 2.12% 2.66% 2.20% Delray Beach 1.36% 3 .10% L 62 % Boca Raloa 10. 60% 3.33% 9.50% Deerllel d Beach 5.58% 2A6% 5 .11% Pompano Beac b 2.81% 1 .69% 2.64% Cypress Creek 11.20% 2.4 1% 9 88% Ft. u u d erdale 5 71% 10.25% 6.39% Ft. U.uderdale Airpor1 2.90% 0.82% 2.59% H oll ywood 2.55% 3.20% 2.65% Golden Glades 2.79% 5 .10% 3.14 % Melrolail 23.65% 24.81% 23.83% M iami Airport 5.17% 4.33% 555 % D O l 811$Wtl"td 5.79% 18.27% 7.67% B-7

    PAGE 131

    TABLE 8 Questioo 9. WbOft are you golag 10 aow? Home 1.78% 21.75% 4.78% Work 71.85% 6.31% 61.98% Sc:bool 6 42% OS3% SS3% Dodor/DmUsl 1.85% 0.24% 1.61% Shopplag/ErraDds 1.36% 11.76% 2.93% VIBIUag{Recreatloa 5.80% 18.30% 7.69% SpedaiEnlll 1.64% 10.14% 2.92% Otber 5.41% 21.62% 1.85% DOt aa ...... rtd 3.89% 9.36% 4.71%

    PAGE 132

    QuesdOD 11-10 Questloa 10. ApproxlmaUiy what time wiU you compleU tills lrip? 0-200 0.00% 1 20% 201-400 0 0? % 0 .63% 40HOO 2.52% 0 .53% 601-800 40.91% 3.52% 801-1000 33.57% 6.75% 1001UOO 0 83% 9.99% UOl-1400 3 73% 8.96% 1401 1600 1.26% 10.25% 1601-1800 1.40% 1 6.97% 1801-2000 0.92% 7 .40% 2001-2200 0.19% 8 69% 2201-2400 0.00% 3.69% uot aaswered 1 4.60% 21.4 1 % TABLE B-11 QuesiiOD 11. What Is your fioal deslludou? 87 46% 6732% 84.43% Left BlaDit 12.54% 3268% 15.57% B-9

    PAGE 133

    TABLE B-12 Question 12. How will you ld to your llaal destination? Walk 0-4 blocks 15 18% 6.00% Walk o..,. 4 blocks 4.58% 4.09% By MetroMoer/Rall 11 .06% 8.39% By TriRall shuttle bus 33.07% 14.()4% By other bus 6.02% 5.56% Get picked up 1028% 1:2..67% Drin 8.47% 20.71% By Jlmey 0 .70% 1.39% Otber 2.11% 3 .90% DOI8Dswued 8.52% 13.25% TABIEB-13 Quatloa 13. Wbat type of fare did you pay wb011 you llr$t boarded the traiD? Qa....,.yFare 16.0S% 27.78 % Wed
    PAGE 134

    TABLE B-14 Question 14 How oRen do you ride the train? About 1 day per week 4 .10% 12.90% 5.42% 2 or 3 days per week 12.01% 8.18% 11.43% 4 or more days per week 65.07% 10.97% 56.92% On
    PAGE 135

    TABLE B-16 Question 16. How would )"OU malce Ibis trip If not by traia? Drive 69.92% 52.77% Bus 4.84% 1:12% Rlde with someone 9.03% U .67% Wouldn't maJce trip 9.16% U.83% Taxi not &D.S\ftftd 18 or under 19 to 22 23to34 35 to 45 46to 59 60to64 65 to 74 75 or mllft not answued 0.32% 1.35% 6.73% 13.16% TABLE B-17 QuesUon 17. Age 3 17% 1 1.05% 5 12% 7.20% 32.23% 1A.15% 27.89% 18.94% 17.34% 10 .59% 4.79% 5 .66% 5.03% 9.21% 1.05% 3.99% 3.38% 9.21% B-12 67.34% 5.20% 9.58% 9.72% 0.47% 7.69% 4.36% 5.43% 3 1.01% 26.54% 16.32% 4 92% 5.66% 1.49% 4.26%

    PAGE 136

    Male Female not &llS'Wf:rtd Will !A> B l ack Hispanie Other not answered TABLE B-18 Question 18. Gender 51.43% 41.74% 44.69% 48. 97% 3.88% 9 .29% TABLE B-19 QutStion 19. Ethnic Origin 62.05% 58.32% 15.82% 15.69% 11.39% 10.91% 4.03% 3.89% 6.71% 11.19% B-13 49.97% 45.33% 4.70% 61.49% 15 80% 11.32% 4 .01% 7.38%

    PAGE 137

    TABL E B-20 Que$tloo 20. Tolal uaual househ o l d lacOU>e 3 .13% 5.12% 5 .42% 5.62% 4 .64% 4.57% 1Ln% 9 99% 7.61% 652% 10.75% 8.88% 9 : 95% 6.28% 9.62% 5.41% 6.13% 3.88% $ 7 0,000 to $79,999 4 27% 2.97% $80,000 and over aot answered Noue One Two 1b.ree or more ao t auswued 7.64% 7 .09% 15.75% 25.42% TABLE B-21 Question .21. Bow many vebl
    PAGE 138

    TABlE 11-22 Qutstioa 22. What do you coaslder .YOurself? PermaD

    PAGE 139

    TABLE 11-25 Quetdoa lSa. AvaUabllll)' or parldag at stadoa Thursday % Total 35.27% 28.19% 1035% 7.09% 8.17% 10.93% Saturday % Total 39.53% 23.o6% 8.54% 4.11% 4.93% 19.83% 'lO Weighted Total 35.91% 27.41% 10.07% 6.64% 7.69% 12.27% TABLE 11-26 Quetdoa lSb. Avallabllit7 or buses to/from the IUUOD Thursday 'lO Tolal 24.75% 27.29% 1216% 7.09% 7.24% 21.48% Saturda)' % Total 26.65% 21.11% 9.50% 4.63% 4.09% 34.02% 'lO Weighted Tolal 2636% 11.76% 6.72% 6.76% 2337% TABLE B-l7 QuesdOD Z5c. Da,s oa which tralAs nm Thursday 'lO Total 39.1l9% 37.21% 9.25% 3.24% L74% 9.47% Saturday 'lO Tolal 30.84% 27.18% 1206% 4.81% 3.27% 2L83% 'lO Weighted Total 37.85% 35.70% 9.67% 3.47% L97% 11.33% B-16

    PAGE 140

    Thursday 'A? Total 24.02% Saturday 'll> Total 29.05% 'A? Weighted Total 24.78% Thursday 'll> Total 16.97% Saturday 'll> Total 25.88% 'll> Weighted Total 18.31% Thursday 'll> Total 31.31% Saturday 'll> Total 38.43% 'll> Weighted Total 32.38% TABLE Jl..l8 Queslloa 2Scl. Houn of service 31.99% 18.91% 11.24% 26.70% 13.12% 6.16% 31.20% 18.04% 10.47% TABLE Jl..29 Questloa 2Se. Frequeacy or se!"\'1 26.10% 23.34% 26.80% 14.37% 26.20% 21. 99% TABLE Jl..30 Questloa 2Sf. Tra\'d lime 38.61% 14.85% 31.09% 7.01% 37.48% 13.67% B-17 16.69% 7.99% 15.38% 4.97% 2.45% 4.59% 4.90% 8.95% 4 .14% 20.83% 4 78% 10.74% 8.09% 8.81% 4.53% 20.44% 7.56% 10.56% 2.32% 7.93% 1.39% 19.63% 2.18% 9.69%

    PAGE 141

    TABLE B-31 QuesUoo 2Sg. Oo-time pur..,..._ or U.. tralD 'lbUJ'Sday Total 25.66% 4L62% 16.66% 5.33% 263% 8.10% Saturday Tolal 45. 10% 28.05% 5.63% L40% 0.97% 18.86% Welgblecl Tolal 28.59% 39.58% 15.00% 4.74% 2.38% 9.72% TABLEB-32 Questloa 2Sh. Ease or traDsttnilla 'lbundaf Tolal 35.10% 37.35% 9.0S% 1.92% 0.81% 15.77% Saturday Tolal 37.19% 28.54% 6.44% 1.40% Lll% 25.33% Welgblecl Tolal 35.41% 36.02% 8 66% L84% 0.86% 17.21% TABLEB-33 Qatslloo 251. Cost or rldJDc u.. traiD 43.79% 36.44% 9.1)2% 2.78% 0.66% 7.32% Saturday Tolal 50.81% 23.65% 5.28% L30% 0.91% 18.os% Welgbted Tolal 44.84% 34.52% 8.46% 2.55% 0.70% 8.93% B-18

    PAGE 142

    TABlE 11-34 Question ZSJ. Availability of train route IACormalioo aod chaagu Thursday 'k Total 34.20% 38.33% 11.69% 3 63% 1.62% 10.52% Saturday 'k Total 37.08% 28.12% 8.70% 2.83% 1.83% 21.45% 'k Welgbted Total 34.64% 36.79% 11. 24% 3.51% 1.66% 12.17% TABLE B-35 Question ZSk. Vehicle deanllDTotal 44.66% 26.86% 6.29% 0 48% 0.96% 20.75% '-'> Welgbted Total 51.43% 31.09% 5 .64% 1.54% 0.76% 9.54% B-19

    PAGE 143

    TABLE B-37 Qutsllon lSm. S
    PAGE 144

    TABLE 11-39 Question 26. In question 25, a through m, list the 3 areas where improvements wou ld be most belp(ul to you? (table npresents Orst cboice ooly) AnllabiUty of parking at station 9.91% 6.12% Anllablllty or buses 14/from statioo 9.93% 5.48% Days on wblcb tra111s run 5.13% 10.20% Hours trains run 15. 03% 635% Fftquency or service 15.06% 6.36% Trovd time 3.09% 1.24% On-time pert'ormanoe of train 4 48% 0.96% Ease or lnllsferring 0.38% 0.43% Cost of ridJDe the train 1 41% 0.86% A\'llllabllll)' or route Information 1.05% 2.02% Vehicle cleanliness and comfor1 0 62% 0.14% Employee counesy 0.61% 0.63% Seauil)' 2.14% 1.34% nOt&II$WOftd 31.16% 57.86% B-21 9.34% 9.26% 5.89% 13.72% 13.75% 2.82% 3.95% 039% 133% 1.19% 0.55% 0.61% 2.02% 35.18%