USF Libraries
USF Digital Collections

An un-cataloged item [C01-00237] from Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF].

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
An un-cataloged item C01-00237 from Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications USF.
Physical Description:
Book

Subjects

Genre:
letter   ( marcgt )

Notes

General Note:
Full cataloging of this resource is underway and will replace this temporary record when complete.

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:
usfldc doi - C01-00237
usfldc handle - c1.237
System ID:
SFS0032327:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 2

this page IS blank

PAGE 3

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

PAGE 4

this page IS blank

PAGE 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS I. IN'IRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 n. OVERVIEW OF SYSTEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 01. SlJRVEY OBJECilVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 IV SURVEY METiiODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 V. sURVEY .ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Demographic Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Travel Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 User Satisfaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 VI. SUMMARY /CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 VII. FUTURE APPUCATIONS AND SUBSEQUENT SURVEYS .......... 105 APPENDIX A Survey ltJStrument .................................... A-1 APPENDIX B Summary of Survey Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-1 iii

PAGE 6

FOREWORD Under oontract with the Tri-County Commuter Rail Authority, the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) oonducted 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 oonducting the on-board survey and in the preparation of this report: Project Director: Steven E. Polzin, P.E., Ph.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 ii

PAGE 7

TABLE OF CONTENTS I. IN"'IR.ODUC'JlON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 n. OVERVIEW OF SYSTEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 m SlJR.'VEY OBJE.CI1VES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S IV. SURVEY ME1HOOOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 V. SURVEY ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Demographic Information . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 13 Thavel Beb.avior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 User Satisfaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 VI SUMMARY /CONCLUS IONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 VII. FUTURE APPUCATIONS AND SUBSEQUENT SURVEYS . . . . . 105 APPENDIX A -SUivey Instrument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1 APPENDIX B Summary of Survey Results . . . . . . . . . . . . B-1 m

PAGE 8

IV

PAGE 9

Table B-14 Question 14. How often do you ride the train? 0 0 B-11 Table B-15 Question 15. What is the most important reason you "d h ? n e t e traxn. ...... ............... .... . ....... B-11 Table B-16 Question 16. How would you make this trip if not by train? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Table B Question 17. Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-12 Tab l e 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 cons i der yourself? . . . . . . . . B-15 Table B-23 Question 23. Were you an experienced public transportation rider before using Tri-Rail? . . . . . . . B-15 Table B-24 Question 24. How did you first learn about Tri-Rail? . . . . . B-15 Table B-25 Question 25a. Availability of parking at station . . . . . . . B-16 Table B-26 Question 25b. Availability of buses to/from the station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-16 Table B-27 Question 25c. Days on which trains run . . . . . . . . . . B-16 Table B-28 Question 2Sd. Hours of service . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-17 Table B-29 Question 25e. Frequc;ncy of service . . . . . . . . . . . B-17 Table B-30 Question 2Sf. Travel time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-17 Table B-31 Question 2Sg. On-time performance of the train . . . . . . . B-18 Table B-32 Question 25h. Ease of transferring . . . . . . . . . . . . B-18 Table B-33 Question 25i. Cost of riding the train 0 0 0 B-18 vii

PAGE 10

Table 19 Alternative Transportation and Automobile Ownership ...... .. Table 20 Ridership Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 21 User Satisfaction Ratings ........ ............ .......... Table 22 The Area Where Improvements Woul d be Most H elpful .... . Table 23 R idership Proftles .................................... Table B-1 Question 1. H ow 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 return ? tnp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 0 B-2 Table B-3 Question 3. Where did you come from before you started his ? t tnp 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B-3 Table B-4 Question 4. What are the major cross streets nearest this l ocation? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-3 Table B-5 Question 5. Approximately what time did you start your trip? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B4 Table B-6 Question 6. How did you get to the train stop? . . . . . . . B-5 Table B-7 Question 7. You got on this train at which station? . . . . . . B-6 Table B-8 Question 8. You will get off the train at which ? Statton .......................... ... ......... B-7 T able 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 trip. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table B-11 Question 11. What is your final destination? ................ Table B-12 Question 12 How will you get to your final destination? 0 0 Table B-13 Question 13. What type of fare did you pay when you B-9 B-9 B-10 first boarded the train? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-10 Vl

PAGE 11

Table B-14 Question 14. How often do you ride the train? 0 0 0 0 B-11 Table B-15 Question 15. What is the most important reason you 'd h ? n e t e tratn .... ......... .... ........ .... . B-11 Table B-16 Question 16. How would you make this trip if not by train? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 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 consider yourself? . . . . . . . . B-15 Table B-23 Question 23. Were you an experienced public transportation rider before using Tri-Rail? . . . . . . . B-15 Table B-24 Question 24. How did you first Jearn about Tri-Rail? . . . . . B-15 Table B-25 Question 25a. Availability of parking at station . . . . . . . B-16 Table B-26 Question 25b. Availability of buses to/from the sta.tion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B .. 16 Table B-27 Question 25c. Days on which trains run . . . . . . . . . . B-16 Table B-28 Question 25d. 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 Table B-32 Question 25h. Ease of transferring . . . . . . . . . . . . B-18 Table B-33 Question 25i. Cost of riding the train 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B-18 vii

PAGE 12

Table B-34 Question 25j. Availability of train route information and changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bl9 Table B-35 Question 25k. Vehicle cleanliness and comfon . . . . . . . B-19 Table B-36 Ques tion 251. Employee counesy . . . . . . . . . . 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, al? m gener . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... Tab le B-39 Question 26. In question 25, a through m, list the three areas where improvements would be most helpful viii 0 0 0 B-20 B-21

PAGE 13

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 Automob ile Access 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 59 59 Figure 60 Trip Purpose by Station .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 69 Figure 61 Availability of parking at station, Weighted Total Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 Figure 62 Availability of parking at station, Thursday Response . . . . . 84 Figure 63 Availability of parking at station, Saturday Response . . . . . 84 Figure 64 Availability of buses to/from the station, Weighted Total Response ............................ . . . . 85 xi

PAGE 14

Figure 22 Figure 23 Figure 24 Figure 25 Figure 26 Figure rt Figure 28 Figure 29 Figure 30 Figure 31 Figure 32 Figure 33 Figure 34 Figure 35 Figure 36 Figure 37 Figure 38 Figure 39 Figure 40 Figure 41 Figure 42 Figure 43 Length of Use, Weighted Total Response o o o o o o o o 0 o o 0 0 o 0 o o 0 o o Length of Use, Thursday Response 0 o 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o Length of Use, Saturday Response 0 o 0 0 0 0 o o 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 o 0 0 Public Transportation Experience, Weighted Total Response o o o 0 0 Public Transportation Experience, Thursday Response Public Transportation Experience, Saturday Response . . . . . Frequency of Use, Weighted Total Response o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 o o 0 Frequency of Use, Thursday Response o o o o o o o o o 0 o o o o o o o o 0 o o o Frequency of Use, Saturday Response o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o Trip Purpose, Weighted Total Response 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 o o o o o o o 0 o 0 0 0 0 Trip Purpose, Thursday Response 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o Trip Purpose, Saturday Response o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o Reason for Riding Train, Weighted Total Response 0 o o 0 o o 0 o 0 0 o o Reason for Riding Train, Thursday Response o o o o 0 0 o o 0 o o 0 o o 0 0 o Reason for Riding Train, Saturday Response o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 o o Alternative Mode of Transportation, Weighted Total Response 0 o o Alternative Mode of Transportation, Thursday Response 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Alternative Mode of Transportation, Saturday Response o o o o o o o o o TIDle Trip Began, Thursday Response o o o o o o o o o 0 o 0 o o o o o o o o o o TIDle Trip Began, Saturday Response o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o Round Trip or OneWay, Weighted Total Response o o o o o o o o o o o o Round Trip or OneWay, Thursday Response o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o X 29 29 29 31 31 31 33 33 33 35 35 35 37 37 37 39 39 39 41 41 43 43

PAGE 15

Figure 44 Round Trip or One-Way, 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 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 59 59 59 Figure 60 Trip Purpose by Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Figure 61 Availability of parking at station, Weighted Total Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . M Figure 62 Availability of parking at station, Thursday Response . . . . . 84 Figure 63 Availability of parking at station, Saturday Response . . . . . 84 Figure 64 Availability of buses to/from the station, Weighted Total Response ............................ . . . . . 85 xi

PAGE 16

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

PAGE 17

TRIRAI L ONBOARD SURVEY ANALYSIS I INTRODUCfiON An on-board survey of Tri-Rail 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 objecti v es. Survey methodology is reviewed alon g with response rates for Thursday and Saturday by direction and by train. Sample 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 findings. These sections include demographic information, travel behavior, and user satisfaction. The findings summarized in these sections will be usefu l to Tri-Rai l 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 recommendations 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 18

xiv

PAGE 19

. TRI-RAIL ON-116ARD StiRVEY ANALYSIS I. INTRODUCI10N An on-board 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 1bis 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 Sample response rates are also provided for e ach question on the survey. The preliminary discussion of the survey is then followed by the survey analysis which includes t hree major sections that review and discuss the survey findings These sections include demographic information, travel behavior and user satisfaction. The findings summarized in these sections will be useful to TriRail 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 bow they relate to the identified survey objectives. Future research applications are suggested along with recommendations 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 20

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 running 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 history of T ri-Rail is provided in Figure 1. Jan. 9,1989 Sept.1989 Jon. 8, 1990 Doc. 8, 1990 Doc. 28, 1990 Jon. 9, 1991 Mardl1991 FIGURE 1 Brief Hlslor)' of Tri-Rail rn.c-.:. c-ur MidMy..,.Wbopu. s-.l#y,..;..bopu 11,869. Tri-IIAII't_...........,.. 0.--.ISwwy. 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 21

III. SURvEY OBJEcriVES Prior to this on-board survey, there had not been a single comprehensive survey of ridership. Recognizing the potential benefits, Tri-Rail approached CUTR for support in this survey effort. The survey was scheduled as soon as possible in order to capture seasonal residents in the SUIVey. The on-board sUIVey 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 aval1ability at stations. to provide information for the bidding of new feeder services. to identify consumer preferenoes toward specific characteristics of Tri-Rail. to establish demographic information on users. to define travel characteristics and information on patrons. to gather relevant information neoessary to better seiVe the market in general. The sUIVey was designed to obtain three major types of information: demographics, travel behavior, and user satisfaction. These three topics provide the information and data neoessary to fulfill the stated objectives and will contribute to improved planning for commuter rail services in the Tri-Rail servioe area. 5

PAGE 22

Tri Rail ridership has increased approximately 140 percent since the service began operating in January 1989. During 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 motivations 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 contnbute to improvements in the provision of commuter rail services to the region. 6,000 4.000 2,000 0 FIGURE3 Average Daily Rldenhlp Trend JAN F1!B NAR APR YAY JUN JUL AUG SBP OCT NOV DEC I 1 m 1m mil 1"1 I 4

PAGE 23

III. SURVEY OBJECITVES Prior to this on-board survey, there had not been a single comprehensive survey of rider s hip. Recognizing the potential benefits, Tri-Rail approached CUrR 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 objecti v es incl ude the following: to determine the rel ationship of tourism and seasonal travel o n TriRail ridership. to collect data useful in effective station p l anning 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 demographic i nformat ion on users. to define travel characteristics and information on patrons. to gather relevant information necessary to better serve the market in general. The survey was designed 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 24

IV. SURVEY METHODOLOGY Based on a review of on-board transit surveys conducted around the country, a survey instrument was designed to distinguish demographic information, 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 implementation 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 fonn. 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 Tri-Rail 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 filled out As a result, sample response rates differ by question. The sample response rate refers to the number of survey respondents answering a particular question as a percentage of the total number 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 weighting 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 25

TABLE2 Saturday,l/30/91, IUspoDse Rate II)' Dlroctlon and Train NORmBOUND (NB) SOUTHBOUND (SB) Train Riders Train Riders Respondenls Response Rate Rate P220 126 6S 52% P221 64 28 44% P222 295 lOS 36% P223 405 166 41% P224 196 58 30% P225 783 303 39% P226 sss 80 14% P1Z1 487 139 29% P228 790 76 10% P229 225 99 44% P230 547 74 14% P231 863 167 19% P232 262 67 26% P233 168 60 36% P234 644 n/a n/a P23S 83 13 16% P236 .29 12 41% P237 85 32 38% NB Total 3,444 nfa n/a SBTotal 3,163 n/a n/a Sampled NB Sampled SB Total 2,800 537 19% Total 3,163 1,007 32% AD Tral.ns Riders Respondents Rrsponse (NB& SB) Rate System Total 6,607 D/3 n/a Saturday Sample 5,963 1,544 26% Saturdlly (txducllng 3,888 1,544 40% return trips) 9

PAGE 26

TABLE 1 Tburscla! 1YJI2$I91, IUspoase Rate By Dlrectiou, Time, ud Train NOR111BOUND (Nil) SOVTHBOUND (SB) nm.. Train Riden Respoudeuts Respouse nm.. Tralu Riden Rapoudeuts IUspouse Rate Rate AM P200 106 T1 73% AM P201 m 82 35% 1'202 434 175 40% P203 SOl 333 66% P204 484 225 46% P20S 425 361 85% 1'206 1137 178 62% PZJ11 588 171 29% MD P208 303 I nla MD P209 335 150 45% PM P210 486 nla nla PM P211 454 Ia n/a P212 617 I I P213 191 nla nla P214 515 I nla P215 320 n/a n/a P216 214 u/a n/a P217 12$ I n/a P218 165 I I P219 92 I nla NB Total 3 ,671 I nla SBTolal 3,871 I I Sampled NB Sampled SB Trip Tolals 1,311 655 SO% Trip Totals 2,086 1,097 53% All Trains Riders Respondmts Response (Nil & SB) Rate System Tolal 7,542 ufa nla Thursday Sample 3,397 1,752 52% Thursday Sample (exdudlotl 4,054 1,752 43% roturD lrlps) 8

PAGE 27

TABLE2 Satu rday, f/30/91, Respoase Rate By D lrtctloa and Tralo NORTIIBOUN D (NB) SOUTHBOUND (SB ) Trala Riden Respoadmts Respoase Tralo Riden Respoacleats Respoase Rate Rate 1'220 126 65 52% P221 64 28 44% P222 295 105 36% P223 405 166 41% P224 196 58 30% P225 783 303 39% P226 sss 80 14% PZt1 487 139 29% P228 790 76 10% P229 22S 99 44% P230 547 74 14% P231 863 167 19% P232 262 67 26% P233 168 60 36% P234 644 nja aja P235 83 13 16% P236 .29 12 41% P237 8S 32 38% NB Total 3,444 a/a of a SB Total 3,163 nja nja Sampled NB Sampled SB Total 2,800 537 19% Total 3,163 1,007 32% All Tralos Riders Respoodents Resp oose (NB & S B ) Rate System T otal 6,607 a/a a fa Saturday Sample 5,963 1,544 26% Saturday Sample (excl udlag 3,888 1,544 40% retum trips) 9

PAGE 28

TABLE3 Respooase Rates By QuesUoa 1. How many months have you been using Tri-Rail? 2 Will you be riding TriRail on your return trip? 3 Where did you eome from before you started this trip? 4. What are the major aoss streets nearest this localion? S. Approximately what time did you start your trip? 6. How did you get to the train stop? 7. You got on this train at station. 8. You will get off the train at station. 9 Where are you going now? 10. Approximately what time will you eomplete this trip? 11. What is your final destination? (nearest intersection) 12. How will you get to you final destinatioa? 13. Which type of fare did you pay when you first boarded the train? 1 4. How often do you ride the train? lS What is the most important reasoa you ride the train? 16. How would you make this trip if not by train? 17.Age 18. Gender 19 Ethaic origin 20. Aaaual househol d ineome 21. How many vehicles are owaed by your housebold? 22 Residency Status 23. Were you an experienced public transportation rider before using Tri Rail? 10 91% 76% 99% 96% 97% 94% 86% 68% 94% SS% 95% 92% 94% 86% 94% 83% 96% 92% SS% 79% 88% 68% 91% 88% 94% 87% 90% 64% 87% 83% 94% 89% 97% 92% 96% 92% 94% 91% 84% 75% 95% 89% 96% 90% 94% 86%

PAGE 29

DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION A number of questions were asked of patrons in order to establish a demographic profile of TriRail users. Demographic-related questions include age (question 17), gende.r (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 30

V. SURVEY ANALYSIS The survey 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 survey include age, gender, ethnic origin, household income, auto ownership, and residency status. The demographic information i s 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 Aorida 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 hoardings 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 has used Tri Rail, public transportation experience, frequency of use, reason for riding, alternative transportation, time trip began, return trip transit use, and fare type. This information contributes to effective scheduling. station planning. feeder service planning and service levels, 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 c haracteristics 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 c haracteristics and asks the respondent to rate Tri-Rail's performance in each of these c haracteristics Strengths and weaknesses are identified as perceived 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 31

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 (question 17), gender (question 18), ethnic origin (question 19), annual househo l d 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 32

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 distribution for the entire population of the Tri-County area. The population data for the age categories were taken from the 1990 Aorida Statistical Abstract. The age distribution 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 TriCounty area are within this age category. The Thursday age data indicates the significant use of Tri-Rail for weekday commuting Correspondingly, the Saturday data shows more children and seniors using the system. The age comparisons are provided in Table 4. 1}.14 19% l.S-24 12% 30% 21% 65 aad oYer 18% TABLE4 Comparisoa or Age Categories 1}.18 19-22 23-45 65 and OYer 14 3% 11% 5% 7% 60% 43% 23% 17% 6% 13% 3% 9%

PAGE 33

F I G URE7 Geoclu, WelcJIU
PAGE 34

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 wbile 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 distn'bution observed in the Thursday response differed somewhat when compared to the gender distn'bution 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% not answered 0% TABLES Comparison or Gender PopulaUoll Male Female 16 51% 42% 45% 49% 4% 9%

PAGE 35

F IGURE7 Gellder, Weig,blecl Totai.Respoase FIGURES .. Gender Tbunday Respoose Pcmolc 20'1(, F IGURE9 Gender, Saturday Respoase 1 7

PAGE 36

Ethnic Origin Approximately 60 percent of the survey respondents were White/Caucasian while 1 6 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 s u rvey been provided Figures 10 through 1 2 represent the ethnic origin statistics for those surveyed. 1 8

PAGE 37

FIGURE 13 Anoual Household iil&imt, Weiii:J!ud Total Response Lea m. $5,000 $1,0110 .. $9,999 $10,000" 11<,999 $U,O..Il9,999 $20,00) 10 $24,999 1'2'.000 .. "'"' $)0,000 10 "'"' $40,000 oo$49,999 $)0,000 .. "'"' $60,000 1016',, $11),000 "m.m $80,000 ad Oftt "' FIGURE 14 Amlual Honsebold Income, Tb1U'5day RespoDH Lao !boo IS,OOO $l,OOOoo$9,m 110,00010$14, su,ooo .. $19.999 $20,000., $2>tm I'Z',ooo .. m,m $l0,0110 .. $l9,m 140,0110 .. 149,999 $10,00010$59, l'Q,ooo .. w,m $7ii,000 .. $19,m l80,000...!-"' FIGURE15 Anoual Household Income, Saturda)> Response Lea d.m $5,000 ll.OOO"""" 110,000 .. $14,, IU,00010$19,m $20,0110 .. $24,, $2l.OIIO""'"" $l0,0110 .. $l9,999 140,0110 .. $49,999 $lO,L1Q) .. "'"" $10,0110 .. $69,999 $7il,L1Q) .. $79,999 l80,ooo...trlt 21

PAGE 38

Total Annual Household Income Approximately 65 percent of Tri-Rail survey respondents reponed an income of greater than $20,000. Nearly 26 percent reponed 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 transponation 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 39

FIGURE13 Anaual Household liu:ome, Weighted Tolal Respouse l.css ..... $S,IICIO $S.OOOO>.P.999 $10,000 10$14,999 $U,00010$!9J!9 $20,00011>$24,999 $)0.00011>$!9,999 $(0,000 .. $49J!9 $lO,OOO .. 1(<),000 .. $69,999 $10,000 .. $29,999 $8/),0000Dd .... "' F1GURE.l4 Anaual Household Income, Tbursda,y Respoase l.css ..... $!,000 $S.OOOO>I&J!9 $10,00010$14,999 $l5,0001D$!9J!9 $20,00011>$24,999 $25,00010$:29,999 $)0 J00010$3,,!199 $(0,000li>$49J!9 $10,000 ., f/9,999 $80,00010d-"' FIGURE 15 Anuual Household lacome, Saturda,y Rfspouse l.css ..... $!,000 $1,000 .. $9J!9 JIO,OOO ID$14,999 $1.5.000 1D$1l1J!9 $lO,OOO .. $24,999 $25,000 .. $29J!9 $(0,000 .. $49,999 $l0.000 .. $)9,999 f/0,0001Dil'J!9 $$),00010d .... "'' 10'1. 21

PAGE 40

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 significantly larger portion of patrons having no automobile. Figures 16 through 18 illustrate the auto ownership survey results. 22

PAGE 41

FIGURE19 Resjdency Status, Wdgbted Total Respoase --JIX)j! FIGURE20 Resldeacy Status, 1biii'Sclay Respoose -FIGUREll Resklency Status, Saltlrda Respoase --25

PAGE 42

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 which ridership may fluctuate seasonally. While the timing of the survey may have missed the peak winter vis itor /seasonal resident season, the pre-Easter date shou l d 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 43

FIGURE19 Resfclmcy StatliS, -l!d Total Respoase IOO!i FIGURE20 ResldeDcy Status, 1bursclay IOO!i FIGURE.Zl Resiclmcy Status, Saturday Respoose ,.-------,----, 1011% 25

PAGE 44

Demographic Comparison of TriRall Users a n d Conventional Bus Transit Users It is interesting to compare the demographics of TriRall ridership with those of other systems in the state of Florida Table 6 provides data for TriRail, Metro-Dade Transit Authority (regular bus riders only), Sarasota County Area Transit, and Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority in 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 proportion of minorities to ride on bus transit. TABLE6 Democrapbk Comparboas Wllh Bus Riders In Florida Geocler male SO% 'II% 41% 42% female 45% 73% 59% 58% EthDlo Origla wbite 62% 23% 72% 72% black 16% 29% 24% 22% hispanic 11% 44% 3% I 01ber 4% 4% 1% 6% Househo l d r....,.,., Jess thaD $10,000 8% 35% ala nla less thaD $15,000 I nla 49% 55% $W,000 to $14,999 5% 30% nla I $15,000 to $25,000 17% 20% 31% 24% $25,000 "' greater 51% 14% 19% 21% 'Metro-Dade Transit Aulhority lUdet Retelllioa aud Service Performaaee Evaluatioa Study, July 1989. NOie: Data includes oDiy those respoadeats classified as regular users. 'Pinellas Suncoast Transit Alllhority, On-board Survey, 1986. 'Sarasota CoUDty Area Transit On-board Ridership Survey, February 1991. Income data were reoategoriud t o eaable comparisons with other oaboard .urveys. 26

PAGE 45

FIGURE2l l.algtb of W$tM Total RtspoDSe 010)_.. 411>7""""' &1DliI210Ul61019-20102)_.t. 241D2711>001ha FIGURE23 l.eaglh ol Use, 'lbursday Rtspouse OIO)......!o 41D7111001ba SiDlllllOOU""""' lh>l9...,..m. 2010V......!o 24 .. :17_.. "'' FIGUREZ4 l.algtb or Use, Saturday RfspoDSe 010)-4 .. 7......!o h>U......!o u .. u......t. l61019......!o 2010V......!o 241027-o/o 29

PAGE 46

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 less 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, wbo 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 bow long patrons have been using tbe 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 47

FIGURE%% Ler>glb ot Use, WeJgbttci >folal Response 0103aal. 41071110011. 8 IDIIII>OOI!o I210UII>OOI!o 16 1Dl91110111ho 20102.lii>OIIdo 2A10ZI.....t.l ,. FIGURE23 Leogth of Use, 1bunda,y Respoose 0 .. ,.,m, 41D 711101l7IIlCIIIho 8ooliii>OO!bo UO>UII>OO!bo 161>1911>001bo 200>2.lii>OIIdo 2A10ZIIIlCIIIho ,. 29

PAGE 48

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 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 Tri-Rail. 1bis result is consistent for weekdays and Saturdays as indicated in Figures 25 through 1:7. This indicates that Tri-Rail has penetrated the non-transit-dependent market in the Southeast Florida area. 30

PAGE 49

FIGIJRE28 Frequency ol USe; Wa Totalllt$ponse 4 ......... pa-2oddayopa.lhoat lciq pa-0... ""'Z-1"""" 0...MI)'5hda a:.:r Cftl3' 8 web FIGIJRE 2.9 Frequency or Use, Thunday Respoase ........ ..,.pa-2or)dayopa.lhoat lclqpa-0...""' Z-1"""" 0... ...., ,., """" 0... ""'8 or.,... ..do "' FIGURE30 Fnqueocy or Use, Saturday Rtspoose 4or.,...clqopa-2)ciqspa...d< .lhoat I clq pa ,.a 0... ""'Z-1"""" 33

PAGE 50

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 two to four weeks followed by 13 percent riding approximately once a week. A significant proportion 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 51

FIGURE28 Froqueocy orl1$t; Wftghled Total Respoose more dqJ per ftck 2orlcta,.per..S Aboar I dq"" wdo O...auy Z-1-ab 0.......,.1-8-ab Oocc nay 8 mottwck& rJa FIGURE29 Frequeocy or Use, Thursday Respouse .. dl)spcrri 2 "') dlrs ..,....J. Al>ooo 1 dq ..,....J. 0...-2-4-ab a.......,., .. ..... o.......,a ...... ..w FJGURE30 Fre'queacy or Use, Saturday Respoase ...... ..,...,....J. 2or) dajspcr....k Aboar ldqpcr....k O...auyZ-1' 33

PAGE 52

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 proponion 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 supponed by Figures 31 through 33, which represent trip purpose for the Thursday response Saturday response, and weighted total response. 34

PAGE 53

FIGURE31 Trip Purpose, Thursday Respoase -Wodo: SdJool SpecWI!-011>0' 0% 10% .FIGURE32 Trip Purpose, Thursday RespoDse Hamc Wade SdJool SpecWE-011>0' FIGURE33 Trip Purpose, Saturday Response -Wodo: Scbool Dodlorll>cnlist 10% 35

PAGE 54

Most Important Reason for Riding the Train The reasons indicated most frequently for using the Tri-Rail system i nclude: more convenient (28 percent), more economical (25 percent), and dislike driving (11 percent). The result 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. Oearly, Tri-Rail 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 55

FIGURE34 Reasoa ror Rldlag Train, Welghlrse I cloo\ddo: I cloo\ lib: klcldoo 'n.ilil Dft o:madcat Tnia it IDOt'C 0 I" ....... 37

PAGE 56

Alternative Mode of Transportation Respondents were asked how they would have made their trip without the use o f Tri-Rail. A significant majority of Thursday (70 percent) and Saturday (53 percent) respondents, as well as the resu l ting 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. F i gures 37 through 39 provide the responses graphical l y 38

PAGE 57

FIGUR Alteroalive Mode of Traosportatloa, Weighted Total RespoDSe FIGUR Alteroatlve Mode or Traosportatloo, Thursday Respoose Dm. Tai .,, 01\ 201\ 39

PAGE 58

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 am. to 8:00 am., when 65 percent of the respondents began their trip. An additional 16 percent began their trip between 4:00 am. 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 59

201-400 601-800 801-1000 1001-1200 1201-1<100 .,. r.m;,. Tlaoe FIGURE< FIGURE41 11me Tdp BepD, Saturday Rapouse 201-'100 <101.600 601-800 801-1000 1001-1200 1201-1<100 140t.l600 16011800 1801-2000 2001-2200 :UOI-2400 n/a 41

PAGE 60

Round Trip or One-Way Approximately 90 percent ofTriRail 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 for the weighted total response, Thursday response, and Saturday response. 42

PAGE 61

FIGURE42 Round Trip or Wfl8Jited Total Respouse FIGURE43 Round Trip or One-Way, Thursday Response FIGURE44 RODDd Trip or ODe-Way, Saturda;y Response I !lOll 43

PAGE 62

Fare Type 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 month l y 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. TABLE7 Sallsfadloa Wlt.b Faro Slnlcture One-Way Fare $2.00 Round Trip Fare $4.00 Weekly Pass $ 17.00 Moathly Pass $60. 00 SeaiorfHaadicap/StudeDt Fare $1. 00 88% 90% 86% 86% 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 realized 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 reponed satisfaction with the fare structure 44

PAGE 63

FIGURE4S Fare 'I)>pe, Weighted ToW Response "'' FIGURE47 Fare 'I)>pe, Saturday Respoase -.-----.----, Dla 45

PAGE 64

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 Beacb 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 be West Palm Beacb/Metrorail Three and one-balf percent of all trips are from the West Palm Beacb station to tbe Metrorail station. The percent is virtually the same for trips from tbe Metrorail station to the Palm Beacb station. The crosstab for Thursday respondents indicates similar travel patterns to those descnbed for the weighted total response. However, the crosstab for Saturday respondents indicates even greater statio n activity at the West Palm Beach and Metrorail Stations. Twenty-five percent of all trips originate (end) a t the Metrorail station wbile twenty percent originate (end) at the West Palm Beacb station. In addition, the Lake Worth and Ft. Lauderdale stations sbow increases in station activity wbile 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 65

! 0 0 H ;Jj a!l h t ft 5 .. 6 .. 0 s .. 6 0 l I .. ::1 .. ::1 .. 5 0 0 0 s 0 I I 47 s s s 0 .. ::1 s .. .. 6 I 0 .. 0 I 0 ! I ! s I I 0 0 0 .. s s ! I

PAGE 66

! l : ;; 5 a ! 6 5 5 c ! 5 ;; 5 l a 11 5 5 t Ul
PAGE 67

. 0 ! 5 ! 5 -3 s l 0 .Jj 0 a IJ .. ;I ;I ! a 0 0 0 s s ! 5 49

PAGE 68

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 hoardings and alightings take place at Metrorail and 11 percent take place at West Palm Beach. These two stations have even greater station activity on Saturday as 26 percent of all boardings and alightings take place at Metrorail and 20 percent take place at West Palm Beach. The data provide useful information concerning the utilization of stations throughout the system. Figures 48 through 50 represent the volume of activity at each statio n for Thursday and Saturday (measured in terms of the proportion of hoardings and aligbtings at each station). 50

PAGE 69

FIGURF;49 Station Activity, Thursday Response W...Polms..dl Dadlei!Bcacb F< IAudctdolc Abpoot -Mi..,; Ailport 2001. 51

PAGE 70

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 Tri-Rail 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 slopes 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 Creek Station PBA Palm Beach Airport SWion FTL Ft. Lauderdale Station LWS Lake Worth Station FLA Ft. Lauderdale Airport Station BOY BO}'DtOD Beach Station HOL Hollywood Station DEL Delray Beach Station GOL Golden Glades Station BOC Boca Raton Station MET Metrorail Station DFB Deerfield Beach Station MIA Miami Airport Station POM Pompano Beach Station FIGURE 51 Rlclushlp Volume by lJne S
PAGE 71

FIGURES% R!dersblp Volume by Une Segmeul, Thurs.,_, Southbound 8,000.,------------, II Socmbound Volume +----1-s,s.= C.padty 'I----{ FIGURE 53 Ridenbip Volume by Liue Segmeol, Saturday, Norlbbouod Nonhbound Volume 4,000 +----! -51>..., C.padty 1---l 0 FIGURE 54 Rldenblp Volume by IJoe Segmeol, Saturday, Southbound Ill Souol>bow>d Volom< 4,000 +----! S,...m O.po
PAGE 72

Trip Length Frequencies and Average Trip Length Table 11 identifies the frequency of trips that fall within 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 all trips are greater than 40 miles. Alternatively, 48 percent of Thursday trips are between 10 and 30 miles 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 attnbuted 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 73

0 10 9.9 miles .10 lo 19.9 miles 20 lo 29.9 miles 30 lo 39.9 miles 40 lo 49.9 miles SO 10 59.9 miles 60 lo 67 miles TABLE 11 Trip Leot:tb Frequeocies by Weekday and Weekend 0 10 2% 18% 30% 17% 14% 9% 9% FIGURE 55 Avenge Trip Leogth 20 55 JO Miles 2% 4% 12% 15% 19% 23% 26% 50 2% 16% 28% 17% 15% 11% 12% 60

PAGE 74

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 chan 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 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 75

-.. --... --... System Total 57

PAGE 76

Driving Distance for Access by Automobile The primary mode of access in the trip to work is driving to a stat i on and parking Respondents w ho 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 77

FIGURE !r1 Drlvlllg Distance ror Aaless, Welgllltd Tolal Response 1'""" 6-10ma.. ll-20mib 21-.lOmib )1-40mib 41-lOmib ,a)miiot >jG .... "" FIGURE 58 Drlvlllg DlslallCe ror AutomobUe AcctSS, Tbursday RespoDse M..U.. 6-10.W.. 11-lO.W.. 21-JO..U.. J1-40milot 41.l0 n,a,.w.. >ja.W.. "" FIGURE 59 Driving Distance ror AntomobOe Aaless, Salurclay Response 1-l..U.. 6-10..U.. 11-lO..U.. 21.)0 Olllrs J1-40ma.. 41-.lOma.. l1,a)mib >jG..a.. "" Ill! 59

PAGE 78

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 Airport 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 shortages. Parking lot occupancy studies can verify the schedule for parking lot fill-up by station. 60

PAGE 79

TABLE12 Satisfadioa Wltb th e Availability ot Parldog by Station West Palm Beach .46% 34% 11% 5% 4% 100% Palm Beach Airport 12% 24% 22% 22% 20% 100% Lake Worth 37% 31% 13% 9% 10% 100% Boynton Beach 35% 26% 14% 13% 12% 100% Delray Beach 47% 33% 9% 7% 4% 100% Boca Raton 30% 23% 12% 14% 21% 100% Deerfield Beach 48% 39% 9% 3% 1% 100% Pompano B each 47% 38% 3% 3% 100% Cypress Creek 38% 27% 14% 7% 14% 100% Ft. Lauderdale 49% 38% 9% 4% 0% 100% Ft. Lauderdale Airport 55% 36% 5% 3% 1 % 100% Hollywood 29% 25% 16% 13% 17% 100% Gokleo G lades 69% 22% S% 1% 3% 100% Metrorail 39% 33% .13% 3% 12% 100% Miami Airport 54% 30% 6% S% 5% 100% 61

PAGE 80

Feeder Service An important objective of the on-board survey was to determine whether feeder services to and from Tri-Rail stations were adequate and whether current patrons were satisfied with the feeder services. Tri-Rai l patrons are gene r ally 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, Tabl e 13 represents satisfaction with the availab i lity 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 TriRail stations are effective in their purpose. However, 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 respondents i ndicated 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 81

TABLE13 saus r actlon With the Avalla b Uity o1 Buses by. Station West Palm Beach 37% 32% 14% 6% 11% 100% Palm Beach Aitport 33% 25% 21% 9% 12% 100% Lake Worth 34% 31% 14% 12% 9% 100% Boynton Beach 30% 39% 16% 11% 4% 100% Delray Beach 28% 39% i7% 8% 8% 100% Boca Raton 28% 38% 18% 9% 7% 100% D eerfield Beach 39% 33% 19% 8% 1 % 100% Pompano Beach 35% 39% 7% 9 % 10% 100% Cypress Creek 42% 34% 9% 8% 7% 100% Fl. Lauderdale 40% 31% 15% 7% 7% 100% Fl. Lauderdale Aitport 19% 40% 14% 19% 7% 100% H ollywood 29% 37% 10% 13% 11% 1 00% Golden Glades 33% 26% 25% 6% 10% 100% MCIIOrail 31% 37% 15% 9% 8% 100% Miami Aitport 26% 40% 18% 7% 9% 100% 63

PAGE 82

Trip Purpose Weekday responses were dominated by horne/work trip pairs Approximately 37 percent of all trips taken on Thursday originated at horne 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 involved the return trip from the recreational activity bac:k to home. Other common origin/destination pairs on Saturday include: horne to shopping/errands (7 percent), shopping/errands to home (7 percent), home to special event (6 percent), and special event to home (6 percent). In addition, a significant portion of the respondents indicated from home to other types of trips (10 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 res!londents 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 83

H o me I 1 7% 32.2% Work 30.9% 1.8% School 28% 0.1% Dodor/Deallst 0.9% 0.1% .... Vl I Shopplng/Erraads 1.6% 0.0% VbiiiDg/Recreatloa 4.0% 0.1% Spedal Event 1.4% 0.0% Other 3.11% 0.1% TABLE 1 4 Weighted Total Percent Response Trip Purpose Origin/Desllaatioo 28% 0.9% 1.7% 0.1% 0.1% 0.11% 0.2% 0 0% 0.11% 0.0% 0 .1% 0.11% 0.11% O.Q% 0 .1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0 0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.9% 0 0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 1.6% 0.1% 0.4% 1.5% 3.6% 48.4% 6.0% 0.1% 33.1% 0.0% 0.1% 3.2% O.Q% 0.0% U% O.Q% 0.1% I L9% 0.1% 0.5% 6.3% 0.0% 0.1% L7% 0.1% 0.5% 4.3%

PAGE 84

Home 0.6% Wortr. 35.5% School 3.1 % D octorfll
PAGE 85

Home I 8.7% 3.8% Work I 3 7% 0.5% Scbool I 0.7% 0.0% Dodor/I)en tls t I 0.2% I 0.0% I I Shoppi.DgfErran ds 7.11% 0.0% VlsttJ"'fRec:motton 12.()% 0.0% Spec i a l Emit 5.5% 0.1% Olbtr 10.1% 0.3% TABLE16 Saturday p.,.ceDI Respon se Trip Purpose Orlgln/D
PAGE 86

Trip 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 chart is provided for each station and indicates the proportion of the various trip purposes in each of the summary categories. The home-based trip provides the proportion of trips that are between that station and home while the work-based trip provides the proportion 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, special event, and other. For the system as a whole, 47 percent of all hoardings and alightings are home-based, 38 percent are work-based, and 15 percent are other types of trip purposes. The trip purpose by station is particularly 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 clearly serves an employment center since over 51 percent of all trips are work-based. 68

PAGE 87

FIGURE60 Trip Purpose by StatiOD -- ... c-\ Welt Pallll Bach Station M'J(..,.IW ---s ..... .. M.ecranD S&don .... ... .. A'j Mloml.u.,.rtS....., ..., ""''"' System Total 69 Wort ... .. ...

PAGE 88

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. TABLE 17 How did you llnlleam about TriRall? Advertisiilg (radio, televisioa, newspaper, ocher) Friend Family Employer Observed system operating Other N<>t aDSWered 70 41% 19% S% 6% 5% 8% 17%

PAGE 89

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 indicated that they were a tourist, visitor, or seasonal residenL 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 FrequeDcy or Use and Resideocy Status 4 or more days/ week 48% 2% 1% 51% 2 or 3 daysfw
PAGE 90

Transit Dependents and Choice Riders One of the major goals of Tri-Rail is to encourage individuals to get out of the single oocupant automobile and on to the commuter rail system. Data collected in the survey can be analyzed to determine how successful Tri-Rail is in attaining this objective. Table 19 provides two pieces of i nformation: (1) al t ernative mode of transportation that would have been used had 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 had they not taken Tri-Rail on this trip. Another 12 percent would have ridde n with someone else to malce the trip It is clear that the vast majority of Tri-Rail 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 Alteruali>e Transportation and Automobile Ownership Drive 1% 24% 34% 11% 70% Bus 2% 2% 1% 1% 6% Rlde wltb soJDeODe 2% S% 3% 2% 12% Would aot make trip 2% S% 4% 2% 13% Taxi 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 72

PAGE 91

Ridershi p Profile . . ... The characteristics provided in Table 20 describe the typical patron of Tri-Rail on a normal Thursday and a normal Saturday. Age GCDclcr Ethnic Origin Household Income Length of Use Trans;t Experience Frequency of Use Reason for Rid.ing Alt e rnative Transportation Auto Ownership Residency Status Time Trip Began Round Trip or OneWay Fare Type TABLE20 Ridershi p l'l'o O ies 23to 34 male white $20,000 to $40,000 0107 months inexperienced 4 or more da)'S per week con..,oient/economical drive 2 autos permanent resident 6:()().8:00 a.m. r onnd trip monthly fare pass 23to 34 female white $20,000 to $40,000 0 to 3 months inexperienced once every 1 to 4 weeks drive 2 autos permanent resident 6:00-12:00 a.m ronnd trip round trip fare With respect to the questi o ns d iscussed, there are several differences that are apparent when the ridership profile is compared for Thursday patrons and Saturday patrons. The majority o f Thursday trips are oriented to or from work while trip purpose on Saturday includes recreation, shopping, e rrands, and o thers. Men have a tendency to ride more ofte n on the weekday wlnle women tend to ride more fr e quently on S a turday Weekday ride rs have been using Tri Rail for a longer time period (0-7 months) than Saturday riders (0-3 months). Frequency of use is !Ouch greater o n Thu rsday as compared to Saturday as a result of the work-oriented lri.PS 73

PAGE 92

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 93

Crosstabulations Seventy-six crosstabula.tions were pedormed in the process of analyzing data. This includes many of the same crosstabulations being pedormed for the survey total, Thursday response, and Saturday response. Many of the crosstabulations were reviewed and determined to not be useful enougb to include in the report. A list of crosstabulations that were compiled is provided below. 1. Mode of access (06) by origin station (Q7) Total, Thursday, Saturday. 2. Mode of egress (Q12) by destination station (Q8) Total, Thursday, Saturday. 3. Trip purpose (Q9) by gender (Q18) -Total, Thursday, Saturday. 4. Trip purpose (Q9) by frequency of use (Q14) TotaL 5. Mode of egress (Q12) by satisfaction with availability of buses to/from stations (Q25b) -Total. 6. Mode of access (Q6) by satisfaction with availability of buses to/from stations (Q2Sb)-Total. 7. Origin station (Q7) by satisfaction with availability of parking at stations (Q25a) Total, Thursday, Saturday. 8. Frequency of use (Q14) by residency status (022)Total. 9. Alternative transportation (Q16) by auto ownership (Q21) Total, Thursday, Saturday. 10. Frequency of use (Q14) by fare type (013) TotaL 11. Fare type (Q13) by satisfaction with cost of riding the train (025i) Total, Thursday, Saturday. 12. Frequency of use (Q14) by destination station (08)TotaL 13. Frequency of use (Q14) by origin station (07) TotaL 14 Reason for riding train (Q15) by satisfaction with availability of parking at stations ( Q25a) Total. 15. Mode of access (06) by satisfaction with availability of parking at stations (Q25a) -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 (Q25b) by destination station (Q8) -Total. 18. Satisfaction with availability of buses to/from stations (Q25b) by origin station (Q7) Total. 75

PAGE 94

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 Q25n) Total. 22. Reason for riding train (015) by ethnic origin (019) Total. 23 Mode of access (Q6) by auto ownership (021 ) Total, Thursday, Saturday. 24. Mode of access (Q6) by gender (Q18) by auto ownership (021) Total. 25. Mode of access (06) by gender (018) Total. 26 How long using Tri-Rail (Q1) by all satisfaction questions (025aQ25n) -Total. 27 Income (020) by origin station (Q7) Total. 28. Reason for riding train (015) by satisfaction with availability of parking at stations (025a) Total. 29. Origin purpose (Q3) 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 access (Q6) by mode of egress (Q12) by origin station (07) Total. 76

PAGE 95

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 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 respouse are provided below. Some of the comments have been edited for clarification Comments From Thursday Patrons 'The Palm Beach Airport station has no parking and just recently they posted "NO PARKING" signs everywhere which made it more difficult to park altogether. Also, the feeder buses were not very cooperative in my case. I work at the ATC Tower in Palm Beach and I could not get service to that location. As a result, I had to purchase an old vehicle to get me back and forth from the station to work and I worry about leaying 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 Tri-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 Mon-Fri. 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 1-1/2 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 96

"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 schedu l e to keep. A5 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 tnidnight for dinner crowds and theater groups; also concert service for Miami crowd. "I 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. fve 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 97

'1 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." '1 believe the trains should run every 1/2 hour during peak times. This is the reason a Jot of commuters do not ride. The times are not convenient for a Jot of people I've spoken to." "Run trains more frequently." "Run trains all day and more frequently. "My job depends on this train. I l ove Tri-Raill" ''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-Railleaves 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 Saturda.y PatroN '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 coni:rete pillar is worn out and cannot be read; please repaint the signs and include the Saturday bus schedule. Thanks! 79

PAGE 98

"Connect Metro bus 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 Aiiport station." "Public transportation buses should be directly (linked) to Tri-Rail, including Saturday." "Feeder buses should run on Saturdays. Also Sunday service provided." "Extended service." "Extended 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 great -I'd much appreciate it." "Open on Sundays." 80

PAGE 99

"More information. I got Tri-Rail and Amtrak confused." "More seats. We had standing room only. Glad to see it is weU used." "This is a very necessary service. Not only for local population, but also for tourists! Needs 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." "I 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 Tri-Rail. I think it's a great service for this area. 81

PAGE 100

82

PAGE 101

USER SATISFACTION Respondents were asked to rate Tri-Rail in fourteen different areas of performance. These ratings provide measures of user satisfaction with various characteristics of the system. The results indicate areas of strengths and weakn esses in service delivery. Based on these observations, decisions can be made to direct efforts for future improvements in the system based on patron perception. Patron Pem:ption of S]stem Cbaracteristjcs 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 trams run (d) Hours of service (e) Frequency of service Travel time (g) On-time performance of the train (h) Ease of transferring (i) Cost of riding the train (j) Availability of train route information and changes (k) Vehicle cleanliness and comfort (1) Employee courtesy (m) Security (on train and while waiting for the train) (n) How do you fee l 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 very satisfied with T ri-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 102

FIGURE61 Avallai>W!1 ol JlU'Idal at slatloa, WeJpted Tolal RtspoDse FIGURE62 AwlllobiUI)' of JIU'Idalatmdom, 'lbamla)' Rapoose FIGURE63 Awlllobllll)' ol puldDa at otalloa, Salllrday Rapo84

PAGE 103

FIGURE 64 AvaUabUity of buses ro/rr6/n Weigllled Total Response FIGURE65 Avallablllly of buses ro/from the atatlou, Thursday Response FIGURE66 AallabUity or buses to/rrom the station, Saturday Response 85

PAGE 104

FIGURE67 oa wbi cll lraiDI nm, Weigllled Total RespoDM FIGURE68 D1111 oa wllich lralas nm, 1bnnday RespoDSe FIGURE69 Jla11 OD wbicil lr'liJDjJ raJI, Saturdlly RespoDM Vtl)' Di r lefi.d 86

PAGE 105

FIGVRE70 Houn or service, Welgllted Tolal Respoase FIGURE71 Houn or service, Thuncby Respoase FIGtJRE7Z Hours of senic:e, Saturday Response 87

PAGE 106

FIGURE73 FftqDeDC)' of senlce, Total Response 01 101 FIGURE74 FftqueDC)' of s
PAGE 107

FJGUJlE76 Tra.-el tlm("W'efjiiitd:'l'Oial RespoDse FIGIJRE77 Travel time, Tbunday Respouse FIGURE78 Travel lime, Satarclay Respoase 89

PAGE 108

FIGURE79 Oo-time performaDCe or the lralo, Wef&hled To&al Respoos e FIGURE SO On-time performaace or the 1ra1o Tllursday RespoDSe FIGURE II On-time performaDce or the tra1D, Saturday llespoose 90

PAGE 109

FIGUREBZ Ease ot Total Rapouse FIGURE83 Ease or transfeniDg, Thursday Response FIGURE84 Ease ot lnDsferri.Dg, SaturdaJ' Response 91

PAGE 110

FIGURE85 Cosl of ridl"' lbe lraiD, We!Pied Total R.espoose FIGURE86 Cosl of ridl"'lbe tra111, Tbarsd8y R.espoDSe 92

PAGE 111

FIGURE88 A.,.llablllty ollraln route lnformaUoa aDd cbagges, Weighted Total Response Vay D;ooorio6a! FIGURE89 AvallabOlty of trala route lnformaUOD ud cbanges, Thursday Respoase Vays..Dd FIGURE!IO AvallabiUty or lrala route lnformaUoa aDd Saturday Responae Vay 1)jmtfofW 93

PAGE 112

FIGURE 91 VdJide d0811UIIess aad COtDfort, Wefah!H Tocal Respoase FIGURE92 VdJide de&DIIDess ud comfort, Thurscla7 RespoDSe FIGURE93 VdJide deanllness aad COtDfort, Salllrda7 RespollSO 94

PAGE 113

FIGURE94 Employoe courtesy, Welgbted Tolal Respo11se FIGURE95 Employoe courtesy, Thursday Respouse FIGURE% Employee courtesy, Saturday Respoose ,,, < ,. "' 21" ----95

PAGE 114

FIGURE97 Security (on train and whUe wafll"' ror the train), Wefabted Total Response FIGURE98 Security (on train and whlJe Wllllfns ror the train), 'lbunday Response FIGURE99 Security (on train and while WII!Uag ror lhe train), s.-da7 Response 96

PAGE 115

FIGURE 100 How do you feel about TriRall surice, Ill Dtral?, Weigllted Total Response FIGURE lOt How do you feel about TriRall service, Ill Thursday Response FIGURElOZ How do yon reel about TriRall service, Ia Salw'day Response '<' ,, A A A A -97

PAGE 116

Summaa ot Perfonnance 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, all of which are provided in Table 21. The numerical assignments are as follows: Very Satisfied = 5 Satisfied = 4 Somewhat Dissatisfied = 2 Very Dissatisfied = 1 Somewhat Satisfied = 3 TABLEll User SaUsr..:tloa Ratings AnllabiUI)' ot parldng 3.85 4.10 AvaUabllil)' of buses 3.70 3 .93 Days tralos MID 4.20 3.99 Hours or senke 3.65 3.89 Fnqueocy ot senke 3.30 3.77 Travdllme 4.00 4.28 Oa.Ume perfOI'IIWI<:e 3.90 4.42 Ease ot lrlulsfet'rini 4.23 4.33 Coot ot rldlq tra.lo 4.29 4.49 AYllllabUII)' ot route laformatlon 4 .12 4.22 Veblde deaDIIness/CODilort 4.50 4.56 Emp)O)'ee c:ourla)< 4.45 4.44 Secnrity 4.30 4.26 How do )'00 red about Tri-Rall? 4.31 4.47 98 3.88 3.73 4.17 3.68 3.36 4.03 3.97 4.25 4.32 4.13 4.51 4.45 4.29 4.33

PAGE 117

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). In 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. If a responde nt 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 res pondents would necessarily indicate the aspects in order of importance since they were not asked to do so. In all cases, frequency of service and h ours of service were identified as the asp ects 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 respondents 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 118

TABLE22 Tbe ara wbeft lmp.........eats would bo most bdprul 1. FroqutDC)I or l. Houn or service 3. Availability of buses 4 Days of operatioa 5. Availability of parking 6. Ontime performance 7 Travel time 8. Security 9. Cost of riding lhe train 10. Availability of informatioa 11. Ease of traasferring 12. Vehicle cleanliness & comfort 13. Employee courtesy L FrequeDey or 2. Hours or sen1ce 3. Availability of buses 4. On-lime pcf()mUII!Ct S Availability of parking 6. Travel time 7 Day$ of opera/ion 8. Security 9. Cost of ridi.og the train 10. Availability of informatioa lL Ease or traasferring 12. Vehicle cle a nliness & comfort 13 Employee courtesy 100 1. or senlce l. Hounofsenlce 3. Days of operrllion 4. Availability of parking 5. Availability of buses 6. Security 7. Availability of information 8. Travel time 9. C:O..t of ridi.og the train 10. On-lime pcfomt411Ct 11. Ease of traasferriag 12 Employee courtesy 13. Vehicle cleanliness & comfort

PAGE 119

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 1 991. The purpose of this survey was to collect demographic information, travel behavior characteristics, and user satisfaction . Ridership profiles were developed t hrough the compilation of resp o nses to demographic and travel behavior questions The ridership profiles for Thursday and Saturday are provided again in Table 23. Age Gender Ethnic Origin Houselhold Income Length of Use Transit Experience Frequency of U s e Reason for Riding Alternative TraDSportation Anto Ownership ResideDcy Status Tune Trip Begu Round Trip or OneWay Fare Type TABLE23 Ridership Prollles 23 to 3.4 male white S2ll,OOO to $40,000 0 to 7 months inexperienced 4 or more days per weelc eonvcnient/cconomlcal drive 2 autos permanent resident 6:(1(1.8:00 a.m. round trip monthly fare pass female white $20,000 to $40,000 0 to 3 months inexperienced once every 1 to 4 weelcs convenient drive 2 a utos permanent resident 6:00-12:00 a.m round trip round trip fare A majority of Tri-Rail patrons are satisfied with every chara c teristic asked about in the survey. Approximate l y 80 percent of the responden t s indicated being satisfied or very satisfied with each system characteristic. Despite the positive responses regarding the general performance of the system, respondents indicated areas where improvements would be most helpful including the frequency of service and the hours of service. This was true for respondents on Thursday and Saturday. Beyond the tw o identified characteristics, rider preferences for improvements differed somewhat between Thursday and Saturday. Thursday patrons were much more sensitive to on-time p e rformance while Saturday p a trons were m ore concerned with the days of Operation. This result makes sense since a majority of 101

PAGE 120

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 identified 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 miles) is shorter 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 most common mode of access for Tri Rail users is the automobile. A majority 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 Metrorail/mover. A majority of Tri-Rail respondents are satisfied with the availability of parking at Tri-Rail stations. H owever, three stations were identified that should be monitored including Palm Beach Airport, Boca Raton, and Hollywood Stations. These three stations bad the highest proportion of respondents indicating they were somewhat or very dissatisfied with the availability of parking. A significant majority of Tri-Rail respondents are satisfied or very satisfied with the availability of buses to/from the stations, 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. However, stations with the least positive response were identified. The feeder services to the Ft Lauderdale Airport Station, Hollywood Station, Palm Beach Airport Station, Lake Worth Station, and Pompano Beach Station should be monitored closely. These stations had the highest proportion of respondents indicating they were somewhat or very dissatisfied with feeder service. A majority 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 121

shopping/ errands, and special events. A majority of Tri-Rml users found ouf ai.o6hf the 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 responsible for a significant share of the ridership. Approximately 11 percent of the responden ts 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 Tri-Rail. 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 122

104

PAGE 123

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 plann i ng 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 information. This data may be useful to Tri-Rail in addressing a variety of station p l anning 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 124

Future Surveys This survey provided a good detailed database on TriRail 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 into 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 tha t issue could be used to provide the information at a lower cost. 106

PAGE 125

APPENDIX A Survey Instrument A-1

PAGE 126

J..IUIVU.IJ auue. a .,v a Col DEAR TRI -RAIL RIDER: Tri-Rai.l would like your opinioo to help imprcwe its c:ommoter rail service. PLI!AS B complete the following auney. Check( I) tbe correct box or ,....;te out your answea. Retum the Sllr'leJlO tbe eoUectioo box as you ellit tbe traia, or baad it to the survey taker. IF YOU HAVE COMPIEIED DIIS SURVEY EAR.LIER TODAY, rr IS Nor NECESSARY TO COMPLETE ANOfHER. RETURN tHE SURVEY TO 11IE 11U-RAIL REPRESENTAnVE ON BOARD. 1. How many months have you been using Trl-Rail ? 2. W ill you be riding Tri-Rail on your ret urn trip? Yes No 3. Where did you come from before you started thls trip? Home Doctor /Dentist Special Event Work Sboppiog/Brrands Other School V>SitlDg/Reereatioo --;-('P... 4 What are tbe major cross stJUts oeares1 thls location? ______________ __ S. Approximately what time did you start your trip ? _:_ w/pm 6. How did you get to the train stop? (Check ooe) Walked 1).4 bloeb W as dropped off Walked over 4 blocb Drove_ miles and parked By M etro Mover fRail By jitney -By Tri -Rail shuttle bus Other. _,_ ___ By other bus (t01.1tc 1: A n.me) 7. You got on thls train at--,..--,..-..,-,..-----(IM ot nadon) 8. You will get olf the train at-;:=-:-::-:=,-.----(oa ... ot ... doo) 9. Where are you going to oow? Work Doctor fOeotist Spe<:ial B.W School : SboppingJBrrands : Olberc ___ H ome Reer eatioo 10. Approximately what time will you complete thls trip?_:_ amjpm 11. What is your f1.0al destiotion? &====== ( lbcW: that iocersect Marut )'OUt flDil dutilalion) 12 How will you get to your fuW destination? (Check ooe) Walked 1).4 blocb Get picked up Walked over 4 bloeb Drive miles _By M etroMcwerjRail :By jitney By TriR ail shuttle bus Other ________ B y other bus (route I & umc) 13. What type of rare did you pay wheo you fJrst boarded the traio? One-Way Fare Round Trip Far e : W eekly Pass : Monthly Pass Seoior /Handlcapped/S tudeot Far e 14. How ofteu do you ride the train? 4 or more days per weel: 2 or 3 days per week :About 1 day per week : ouce every_ weeks IS. What is the most important reasou you ride the train? (I" ooly one) I dOG't drive Parking is dilliadt feq>easive Doo1 like to drive Car is not ao;ailable Tr aio is more coaveoieot Traio is more ecoaomical Other-----16. How would you make this trip if not by train? DriW> Ride with someooe Taxi Bus W ouldn't make trip 17. Your age is? 231034 60 to 64 18. You are: Male 19. Your ethoie origin i&18 or under 3S to 45 6S to 7 4 Female 19 to 22 46to 59 15 or more Wbi!e Bladt Hispanic Othcr(spod!J), __ PLWE CONl'1NUE ON BACK

PAGE 127

SIDE %: TRl-RAIL ON-BOARD RIDERSHIP SURVEY 20. The total annual income of your househot.fls . Less thaD $5,000 $5,000 to $9,999 $10 000 to $14,999 = $20,000 to $%4,999 = S:ZS,OOO to $29,999 = SJO,OOO to $39,999 $50,000 to $59,999 $60,000 to $69,999 $70,000 to $79,999 Zl. How many vehicles are owned by your household? Nooe One Two Three or more :i2. What do you coa.sider yourselt'l $15,000 to $19,999 $40,000 to $49,999 $80,000 and over Pennanent resident Seasonal resident _Tourist/visitor 23. Were you an experienced public transportation rider before using Tri-Rail? Yes No Please explain -Z4. How did you first learn about Tri-Rail ______________ ? ZS. In general how sar:isfied are you with each of the following aspects of Tri-Rail service: Please ODSWer the questions by placing a cbeek (-/) in the appropriate column. a. Availability of parking at station b. Availability buses to/from station c. Days on which trains run d. Hours of semce (how early & how late) trains run e. Frequency of service (how ofteD trains run) f. Travel time (time it takes to malce a trip by train) g. On-time performance of the train h. Ease of transferring i. Cost of riding the train j. Availability of train route information and changes !c. Vehicle cleanliness and comfort L Employee courtesy m. Security (on train and while waiting for the train) n. How do YOU feel about Tri-Rail service, in general Very Somcwte:t Somewhat Very s.wn.d SatWJod s.u.&od lliS$1liand-. TIIANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION. PLEASE PLACE IN RETURN BOX ON TRAIN OR RETURN TO THE SURVEY TAKER. If you ban auy additional comments or questloas eaU 1-800-TRJRAIL.

PAGE 128

this page IS blank

PAGE 129

APP ENDIXB Summary of S urvey R esults B-1

PAGE 130

TABLE B-1 Questloa 1. How IIUUQ' m onths b ave bee n aslns TriRaU? 0 to 3 months 2621 % 41 .43% 28.50% 4 to7 months :W.SO% 15.9 1 % 19.87% 8 to 11 months 9 .84% 5.45% 9.18% U to 15 monlb s 13 73% 731% 12.75% 16 to 19 m onlbs 5.88% 228% 534% 20 to Z3 monlbs 2.71% 0.33% 235% Z4 to 2 7 monlbs 12.60% 3 65% 1125% DOl answond 8 47% :!3.67% 10.76% TABLEBl Qnestlon 2. WIU you bt riding TriRall on your rtluru trip? Yes 92.51% 82.30% 90.97% No 5.88% 12.64% 6.90% not answond L61% 5 .06% 2.13% B-2

PAGE 131

TABLE B Questloa 3. Where did you come from !>
PAGE 132

TABLE 11-5 Questloa 5. Approxlmalely wbat tilDe did )'1NI start )'1Nir trip? 0-200 O.OS% 0.00% %01-400 0.12% 0.00% 401-600 16 41% 1.35% 601-800 64.74% 1 6.56% 801-1000 6.75% 20.58% 1001-1200 3.46% 13.38% 1201-1400 2.39 % 8.78% 1401-1600 0 .00% 5.61% 1601-1800 0.00% 10.26% 1801-2000 0.00% 3.51% 2001-2200 0 00% 3. 1 4% 2Z01-l400 0 00% 0.91% Dot ,_,..d 3.06% 15.92% B-4

PAGE 133

TABLE B-6 Q11eslion 6. How clld you g
PAGE 134

TABLE 11-7 Queslloa 7. You got oa this trala al wflicb slaUoa? West Palm Beach 10.57% 19. 90% 11.97% Palm Beach 3.10% 2.71% 3.G4% LabWol1h 7.11% 10.24% 7.58% Beach 3.93% 4.40% 4.00% Beach 3.51% 3.22% 3.47% Boca Ratoa 435% 1.77% 3.96% 4.45% 2.87% 4.22% Beach 4.62% 2.21% 4.26% Cypress Cnek 6.85% 2.31% 6.17% Ft. Lauderclale 10.18% 5.1 6% 9.42% Ft. Lauderdale 430% 1.06% 3.81% Hoi Qwood 1o.93% 4.54% 9.97% Golcleo Glades 8.89% 334% 8.06% MetroraU 639% 14.91% 7.68% Miami Airport 5.06% 5.38% 5.11% not answered 5.75% 15.99% 7.29% B-6

PAGE 135

TABLE B-8 Question 8. You will get oil" tbe train at whloh statioo? West Palm Beaoh 12.24% 11.13 12.07% PalmBeaoh 3.29% Lake Worth 1.64% 3.82% 1.97% Beach 2.12% 2.66% 2.20% Beach 1.36% 3.10% 1.62% Boca Raton 10.60% 333% 9.50% Doerfield Beach 5.58% 2.46% 5.11% Beaoh 2.81% 1.69% Cypftss Creek 11.20% 2.41% 9.88% FL Laudecdale 5.71% 10.25% 6.39% FL Laucludale 2.90% 0.82% 2.59% 3.20% 2.65% Golden Glades 2.79% 5.10% 3.14% MetroraU 23.65% 24.81% Miami 5 .77 % 433% 5.55% Dot answered 5.79% 18.27% 7.67% B-7

PAGE 136

TABLE B-9 Questloo 9. Where are )'
PAGE 137

Queslloo B-1 0 Question 1 0. Approximately wbat lime will ,.. complete tbls trip ? 1).200 O.oo% 1 .20% 201 -400 0.07% 0 .63% 2.$2% 0.53% 601 -800 40.91% 3.52% 8011000 33.57% 6.75% 1 001 0.83% 9.99% 1201 1 400 3.73% 8 .96% 1 401-1600 1.26% 10.25%. 1601-1800 1 40% 16.97% 1 801 2000 0 .92% 7.40% 2001 2200 0.19% 8 .69% 2201 2400 0 .00% 3.69% uot answered 1 4 .60% 21.41 % TABLE B-11 Questioo 11. Wha t i s your rmal destioatioo ? Answered 87.46% 84. 43% Left Blaok 12.54% 32.68% 15.57% B-9

PAGE 138

TABLE B-ll Question ll. How will you get to your llnal destlDatlon? Walk 6-4 blocks 15.18% 6.00% Walk over 4 blocks 4.58% 4.09% By MecroMover/Rall 11.06% 8.39% By Tli Rall sbuttle bus 33.o7% 14.04% By other bus 6.02% 5.56% Gel pld

PAGE 139

TABLE Jlo14 Qu .. uoa 14. Bow oileD do you ride tbe ll'aio? About 1 clay per week 4.10% 1290% 5.42% l or 3 clays per woek 12 .01% 8.18% 11.43% 4 or more clays per week 65.07% 10.97% 56.92% Ooce tvery l-4 weeks 4.16% 15.89% 5.92% Onee every 5-8 weeks 1.65% 5.22% 2.19% Ooce every 8 or more weeks 1.53% 4.76% 2.02% aot answered 11.48% 42.05% 16.09% TABLEB-15 Question 15. What is tbe most important reasoa you ride tbe trala? I don't drive 5.51% 7.69% 5.84% I don't Uke to drive 11.87% 6.33% 11.04% Trata Is more coavenieat 26.81% 31.42% 27.50% Paridog Is dlllkult/upeaslve 1.12% 3.11% 1.42% Car is ao< availab le 7 .26% 6.96% 7.22% Train is more ecooomical 26.93% 13.78% 24.95% Othu 7 .26% 12.23% 8.01% aot aaswered 13.23% 18.47% 14-02% B-11

PAGE 140

TABLEB-16 Qoestiou 16. How would you mw lhls trip tr not by train? Drive Bus Ride with SOIDtODe Woulda't malce trip Taxi D 01 llllS1ftftd 18 or unclu 19 to 22 l3to34 35 to 45 46 to 59 60to64 65 to 74 75 or more aot aaswaed 69.92% 52.77% 4.84% 7:12% 9 03% 12.67% 9.16% 12.83% 0.32% 1.35% 6.73% 13.16% TABLE B-17 Question 17. ABO 3.17% 11.05% 5.12% 7.20% 32.23% 24.15% 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% 31.01% 26.54% 16.32% 4.92% 5.66% 1.49% 4.26%

PAGE 141

Male aot uSftftd Wlllte Blspaalc Otber DOl II>Swertd TABL8 B-18 QuestJoa 1&. Geotder 5L43% 41.74% 44.69% 48.97% 3.88% 9.29% TABLE B-19 Question 19. Ethnic Or1po 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% 4.10% 61.49% 15.&1% 11.32% 4.01% 7.38%

PAGE 142

TABLE B-20 Quesdoa 20. Total annual bouseb old luoo""' D O t ao.swered Noue Tbree or more uolauswued 5 42% 5.62% 4.64% 4.57% lLTI% 9.99% 7.61% 6.52% 10.75% 8.88% 9 .95% 6.28% 9.62% 5.41% 6.13% 3.88% 4.27% 2.97% 7.64% 7.09% 15.75% 25.42% TABLE B-21 Quesdoa 21. H ow mauy Yehkles are owned bJ your bouubold? 3 .12% 10.60% 34.90% 31.65% 42..27% 33.29% 14.98% 12.90% 4.73% 11.55% B-14 3.52% 5.45% 4.63% 11.50% 7.45% 10 47% 9.40% 8.98% 5.79% 4.08% 7.56% 17.20% 4.25% 34.41% 40.92% 14.66% 5.75%

PAGE 143

TABLE 8 Question 22. What do you CODS!d..-yourself? Pennaaenl ruideat 87.44% 6&29% 84.56% SeasoDall'
PAGE 144

TABLE B-15 Quesdoa 25a. A .. Uablllty ol parking al staUoa Tbursday 'lO Total 35.27% 28.19% 10.35% 7 .09% 8.17% 10.93% Saturday 'lO Total 3953% 23.06% 8.54% 4 11% 4.93% 19.83% 'lO Welgbted Total 35.91% 27.41% 10.07% 6.64% 7.69% 1227% TABLE B-26 Quesdoa l5b. AnUablllt)' of buses h>/fnxlt the stadoa Thursday % Total 24.15% 27.29% 12.16% 7.09% 7.24% 21.48% Saturday %Total 26.65% 21.11% 9.50% 4.63% 4.09% 34.02% % Weighted Tolal 25.04% 2636% 11.76% 6.72% 6.76% 23.37% TABLE B-27 Qu
PAGE 145

Thursday CJO Total 24.02% Saturday CJO Total 29.05% CJi> Weigbted Total 24.78% Tburscla.Y CJO Total 16.97% Saturday CJO Total 25.88% CJi> Weighted Total 1 8.31% Iburscla.Y % Total 31.31% Saturday % Total 38.43% % Weigbted Tolal 32.38% TABLE B-28 Question 2Sd. Hours ol service 31.99% 18.9 1 % 1 1.24% 26.70% 13.12% 6 16% 31.20% 18.G4% 1D.47% TABLE B-29 Question 2Se. Fre
PAGE 146

TABU: 11-31 Quostloa 25a-O...U.. perf--of t.be tram . ... .. 1 !7 "ve' .. ..... .... s-.uc, Soazwlai&>; DOC .... ery ... ; s.lllt&cH - 1 ' .. . .-:-.-........ 1bunclar
PAGE 147

TABLE lh14 Questlou 2Sj. AvaUabiUty or lnlin route iurormation aad cbaages Thursday 'll> Total 34.20% 38.33% U.69% 3.63% 1.62% 10.52% Saturday % Tolal 37.08% 28.12% 8.70% 2.83% 1.83% 21.45% % Weighted Total 34.64% 36.79% U24% 3.51% 1.66% 12.17% TABLEB-35 Questioo 251<. Vehicle deaalioess aod c:omfort '11tursda7 %Total 55.00% 4.69% 0.86% 0.58% 6.68% Satorday -% Total 54.50% 22.48% 3.89% 0.48% 1.16% 17. 49% % Welghted Total 54.92% 30.73% 4.57% 0.80% 0.66% 831% TABLE B-36 Questiou 251. Emplo)'ee courtesy '11tunday % Total 52.63% 3L84% 5.52% 1.73% 0.73% 7.55% Saturday % Total 44.66% 26.86% 6.29% 0.48% 0.96% 20.75% 'll> Weighted Total 51.43% 3L09% 5.64% L54% 0.76% 9.54% B-19

PAGE 148

TABLE B-37 Q-lloa 25m. Security (on trala aDd whUe waillll8 ror 11M! traiD) lbanclay TC)(al 44 17% 34 44% 9.08% 2.46% 0.99% 8.86% Saturday-., Total 35.78% 30.87% &.39% 1.44% 22.12% Weighted Total 42.90% 33.90% 8.98% 1.06% 10.86% TABLE B-38 Question 25a. How do YOU red &boat TriRall sei"YI<:t, Ia general? lbunclay TC)(al 40.63% 42.92% 7.50% 1.59% 0.36% 6.99% Saturday -., Total 46.38% 30.71% 4.51% 0.67% 0.63% 17.09% Weighted Total 41.50% 41.0S% 7.05% 1.45% 0.40% 8.51% B-20

PAGE 149

TABLE B-39 Question 26. In question 25, a throuah m, list the 3 areas wtl..-. improvements li"OIIld be most helpfu l to (table represents lint choice only) Availability or parking at station 9.91% 6.12% AvaUabUlty or buses to/Crom statloa 9.93% 5 .48% Days OD wbicb !raiDs rD.D 5.13% 10.20% Hours or service tralDs roo 15.03% 6.35% Frequency or service 15.06% 6.36% Trsvel time 3.09% 1.24% ODUme o r trala 4 .48% 0.96% Ease or transferring 038% 0.43% Cost of ridia g the traia 1 .41% 0 .86% AvaUablUty of route tarormatioa 1.05% 2.02% Vehicle cleaaltaess and comfort 0.62% 0.14% Employee cou rtesy 0.61% 0.63% Security 2.1 4% 1.34% not answered 31.16% 57.86% B-21 9.34% 9.26% 5 .89% 13.72% 13.75% 2.82% 3.95% 0.39% 1.33% 1.19% 0.55% 0.61% 2.02% 35.18%

PAGE 150

this page IS blank


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 C01-00237
2 USFLDC DOI
0 245
[An un-cataloged item [C01-00237] from Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF].]
500
Full cataloging of this resource is underway and will replace this temporary record when complete.
1 773
t Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF]
4 856
u http://digital.lib.usf.edu/?c1.237