WALNUT CREEK dwntwn pking FINAL COV.indd

Transcription

CHAPTER 2
DOWNTOWN SHUTTLE
Introduction
Pedestrian-oriented downtown Walnut Creek is a
5 to 15-minute mile walk from the Walnut Creek
BART station, the location of the County Connection transit center and access to the high speed
regional transit network. Though this distance
is easily walkable for many people, it is just far
enough to be a significant barrier and deterrent to
using public transportation to access downtown
jobs and businesses.
Goals of This Analysis
The analysis of Free Ride service is one element of
a multimodal downtown plan. Information from
this analysis will help in improving circulation
within downtown for all modes. This information
is also being used to answer key questions about
the shuttle including:
• Who uses it?
• How many riders use it?
• How well does it work?
• How can the shuttle be improved to better attain goals and to attract more riders?
Information collected for this analysis was used
to make recommendations about how to improve
service within the current number of service
Data Collection
For this study, existing County Connection data
was used, as well as two types of original data gathered for this study. County Connection provided
basic operation data collected over several years.
A preexisting on-board passenger survey of the
County Connection system from the year 2000
was also used to provide baseline demographic
information for the system as a whole. Though
this survey was conducted five years ago, we have
assumed that the demographics of its ridership
have not changed significantly in that time.
Two types of surveys were conducted. A 100%
ride check, covering all trips on a weekday and a
Saturday, was used to evaluate the performance
of the route, including boardings and alightings
at each stop, loading and on time performance.
Passengers were also surveyed to gather data about
their demographics, attitudes about the service,
and reasons to use the shuttle. A total of 434 surveys were collected. This statistically reliable data
was enriched by anecdotal information gathered
through conversations with riders of Free Ride,
personnel at the County Connection office, Free
Ride drivers, as well as residents of Walnut Creek
and downtown employees.
Ride check and passenger survey data were gathered on August 10, 11, and 13 of 2005. Data
were gathered for 100% of all trips on a weekday
(morning trips on August 10, afternoon trips on
Nelson Nygaard
DPOTVMUJOHBTTPDJBUFT
Downtown Shuttle
The geographic gap between downtown and the
BART station is bridged by the County Connection Free Ride (Route 104), a free shuttle that
operates between BART and downtown Walnut
Creek. This shuttle is distinguished from the rest
of County Connection’s service because it is free
for customers. The City of Walnut Creek spends
approximately $138,000 a year to subsidize this
service, about 15% of the overall operating cost.
hours, as well as recommend possible additional
improvements if more funding were to become
available.
Page 2-1
Walnut Creek Downtown Parking and Transportation Study
August 11), as well as 100% of trips on Saturday
August 13.
Existing Conditions
Context
Figure 2-1 shows the frequency and service span
for the Free Ride on weekdays, Saturdays, and
Sundays. The Free Ride is not the only County
Connection transit service in the downtown area.
Routes 101, 102, 105, and 121 also pass through
downtown, but none of these routes penetrate the
heart of downtown, staying instead on peripheral
arterial roads. Besides offering a less convenient
routing for trips downtown, these routes also
charge a fare and have less frequent service (between 20 and 40 minutes on weekdays).
Figure 2-1
Free Ride Existing Operating
Parameters
Frequency
Weekday
15 minute
Saturday
20 minute
Sunday
20 minute
Span
12.5 hours
7:10 AM – 7:31 PM
10 hours
8:45 AM – 6:40 PM
9.5 hours
9:10 AM – 6:45 PM
Buses
Required
3
2
2
As currently designed, the Free Ride offers riders
service every 15 minutes on weekdays and every
20 minutes on weekends between the Broadway
Plaza and the BART station. Each trip takes
about 15 minutes one-way. The routing (shown in
Figure 2-2) is fairly circuitous, making a “double
figure-eight” with additional loops on its way
between the BART station and Broadway Plaza.
When leaving the BART station, the route also
travels north to Parkside Drive before looping
back onto California Blvd to pass by the BART
station once again.
With its current routing and expected wait time,
the shuttle is slower than walking for most trips,
Page 2-2
for most passengers. Many still find the shuttle
desirable because it eliminates the need to walk,
especially in wet or hot weather.
Service every 15 minutes on weekdays is relatively
frequent, matching BART and offering more
frequent service than the other County Connection routes that serve downtown. The schedule
has also been designed for relatively short meets
with BART trains arriving and departing from
the east or west, with a four or nine minute wait
from arriving trains, and a five or eleven minute
wait for departing BART trains.
At present, the Free Ride carries approximately
875 people each weekday, and about 225 board
per weekend day, or about 250,000 annual passengers. Its productivity – measured by the number
of people carried for every hour of operation – is
22.3 per hour (February 2005), making it the
County Connection’s third most productive route.
It is a popular service that is well used, but not so
well used that it is overloaded; during the survey
period, the maximum load never exceeded the
seating capacity of the bus.
Senior Needs Study
The 2004 “Older Adult Recreation and Social
Services Needs Assessment for the City of Walnut Creek” describes demographic trends in the
city and recommends program and facilities
improvements to meet the needs of growing senior population. In 2000 about 25% of Walnut
Creek’s population was over the age of 65, and the
number of people over 65 is expected to increase
by 50% in 2020.
Surveys of the city’s seniors identified the following issues pertinent to this study:
• About 25% of seniors reported problems with
transportation, with 14% staying at home be-
cause of a lack of transportation.
• Seniors complained that transit stops were too
far from their major destinations (medical,
civic center, downtown, grocery stores), that
service is poor on evenings and weekends, that
it is slow and that they were not aware of how
transit works.
• More than half of seniors reported problems
with parking, particularly in the downtown,
Broadway Plaza and the Civic Park Community
Center.
• “More parking” was a first priority requested
improvement from many seniors, but more
focused discussion suggested a strong desire
for free parking and a reluctance to use parking garages.
• Increased transit frequency, longer hours on
evenings and weekends, and bus stops closer to
the Civic Park Community Center were the primary transit improvement recommendations.
Downtown Shuttle
These concerns and recommendations were taken
into account throughout the study process. They
are reflected in the recommendations herein, balanced with the City’s other transportation needs
and priorities
Nelson Nygaard
Page 2-3
Ln
Westc
liffe
North Civ
ic Dr
Shady Ln
Pimlico Dr
t
Ln
Sharene
Capwell Ln
Newell
Lacassie Ct
lvd
Hill Pl
p
Ram
Hillside Ave
I 680
Oak
land
Blvd
ic B
r
el D
mp
igu
Oly
nM
"
Landmarks
!
Bus Stops
a
Andre
Dr
121
Sa
105
102
Ln
Lilac Dr
Trl
Kaiser "
Hospital
Ln
0.5
Miles
101
e
Newell Av
in St
ay
aW
oli
gn
Ma
y
Villa W
GIS Data Source: City of Walnut Creek
li
me
Ca
n
aL
105
Maria
Ra
mp
101
Nursery
121
!
!
o Dr
lh
Bote
So. Ma
nB
lvd
Ram
p
!
t
bC
com
Lane
Hol
lisa
Ana
orse
Iron H
ay
adw
Bro
lso
102
I 68
0
North
0.25
e
Av
ma
Al
Pau
101
!
ay
0
!
w
Broad
d
Blv
d
Clover Ln
Carm
el Dr
Rd
Carm
0
101
Broadway
Plaza
Ct
Wa
lker
Ave
Dr
u el
Mig
San
r
Margarido D
I 68
t
"
Edmund
Sierra Dr
an S
Dunc
!
rnia
ne R
Alpi
Bonita Ln
Dewing Ln
Mt Pisgah Rd
!
ay
oadw
e
!
Lincoln Ave
Village Ct
N Br
t
nza S!
Bona
alifo
SC
Ln
I 68
Peterson Pl
Acorn Ct
St
ain
NM
ita
Bon
Blade Way
"
!Cypress Av
Ramp
ay Nichols
on Rd
ard W
lev
Bou
Del Hambre Cir
Library
!
Lesher "!
Regional !
Center
d
ia Blv
liforn
N Ca
Ave
105
Mount Diablo Blvd
Boulevard Cir
¯
st St
Locu
Rd
121
Randall Rd
Warren Rd
Cole Ave
lvd
Blvd
101
Dr
n Dr
Norly
Ln
ero
Brac
Lacassie Ave
ey
Shu
Sharp Ave
101
ay
enw
Gre
Arroyo Way
Carlback Ave
!
Trinity Ave
Camino Diablo
!
102
ve
Dora A
ve
ley A
Brad
ut B
Waln
l
y Rd
e
Vall
acio
Ygn
St
Crokaerts
101
ornia
ello
"!
Calif
ce
Terra
d
!
North
t
le R
ci
Sou
San
in St
Rivier
a
r
Pringle Ave
BART
Ba
rkle
yA
ve
P
elyn
Joc
!
S Main St
kD
urt
n
oy L
Mcc
Ave
oo
t
Almond Ave
Page 2-4
Way
Jones Rd
Ramp
I 680
Pine S
!
eC
Vista Hermosa
0
e
!
North Ma
erl
lsid
s Co
p
Ram
ne
liffe La
Westc
Lan
Ave
Homestead
y
Wa
Ov
Hil
Key
Oak
va
ony
ir
Ct
P
Dr
Col
Valero
sa Dr
ista
aV
C
vard
Har
Ov
erlo
ok
de
si
ark
Ct
Pimlico
Lawrenc
e
n
Bue
Ln
dy
San
I 680
102
North Main St
Pl
ve
uan A
San J
sta
a Vi
n
Bue
Existing Free Ride
eC
ont
am
Mir
Figure 2-2
Free Ride
Evaluation of Current Service
Why people use the Free Ride
The Free Ride attracts riders with a diverse set of
reasons to use it (see Figure 2-3). Most use it to go
to and from work – 48% on weekdays, 41% on
Saturday when fewer people work. Shoppers form
the second largest group – 22% on weekdays, and
34% on Saturday. The reasons why people use
the shuttle shift considerably from the weekdays
to the weekend, but the pattern of the shuttle
remains the same – it is used primarily by people
going to and from jobs, and secondarily by those
shopping and running errands (9% on weekdays,
and 6% on weekends).
pers take the shuttle downtown but must walk to
BART after the shuttle ceases operation – on the
weekdays measured, 393 boarded at the BART
station, but only 294 people got off at the BART
station.
Work as the primary trip purpose is consistent
with demographic data and ridership patterns. Of
all riders, 63% are employed, with 17% students,
11% retired, and 2% visitors.
More people board at BART than return to BART
in part because many employees and some shop-
Figure 2-3
Free Ride Trip Purpose (combined weekday and weekend)
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
re
ea
lth
Lu
ca
nc
h
k
W
or
r
O
th
e
le
ol
/C
/H
M
ed
ic
al
ho
Sc
ne
si
Bu
Pe
rs
on
al
ol
/E
ss
tS
en
er
nm
G
ov
ge
s
nd
vi
er
al
ci
n/
so
at
io
rra
ce
vi s
pi
op
Sh
ec
re
R
s
it
ng
0%
Nelson Nygaard
Downtown Shuttle
As shown in Figure 2-4, almost 60% of passengers
ride the shuttle more than 3 times a week and over
two thirds of respondents have been using the
service for over 6 months, indicating a frequent
and consistent ridership base usually associated
with large numbers of work trips. Occasional riders make up 35% of total. This contrasts sharply
with County Connection as a whole: only 15%
of County Connection riders ride two times per
week or less.
Page 2-5
Figure 2-4
Free Ride Frequency of Ridership
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
First time
Less than once 1-2 days a week 3-4 days a week 5 or more days
a week
a week
The work-oriented nature of the current shuttle
ridership is also reflected in survey responses to
the question of what riders would do if the Free
Ride were not available (see Figure 2-5). Eleven
percent of respondents said that they would not
have made the trip if it were not available, 89%
would have found another way to make the trip.
Figure 2-5
Most – 52% – would walk if the shuttle did not
exist because the shuttle provides service to a
relatively small area that is easily walkable by most
people. For those who cannot or do not want to
walk that distance, the County Connection offers
other routes (chosen by 11% of respondents).
Mode Choice if Free Ride Were Not Available
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Not have
made trip
Page 2-6
Drive
Alone
Someone
would drive
me
Carpool
Another
CC bus
Bike
Walk
Other
The number of car trips that the Free Ride prevents downtown can be inferred from those riders
who report that they would drive or carpool if the
Free Ride were not available. Though the number
of people that report that they would drive alone is
small, probably because the distance the Free Ride
serves between BART and downtown is so short,
the Free Ride does eliminate a significant number
of car trips (and therefore parking demand) in
the downtown area. These are summarized in
Figure 2-6.
Figure 2-6
Car trips
prevented
per week
418
Car trips prevented
per year
21,736
How riders use the Free Ride
The Free Ride route is designed to connect BART
with the primary downtown business and shopping streets. At present, it does not play a large
role as a downtown circulator for trips within
Walnut Creek – less than 3% of riders board near
downtown parking garages to travel to Broadway
Plaza.
As shown in Figure 2-7, which summarizes
boarding and alightings by stop for each direction of travel, the vast majority of riders use the
shuttle to go between the BART station and the
downtown area. Few stops between BART and
those near Broadway Plaza attract significant
ridership. These patterns are mapped in Figures
2-9 and 2-10.
For northbound trips, boardings are more diffused but the pattern is the same: most people
who board the Free Ride downtown are traveling
to the BART station, with little stop activity in
between. On these return trips to the BART
station, 85% of boardings occur at or south of
the Main St/Duncan stop in front of Mechanic’s
Bank. Of those passengers, 76% get off at the
BART station. The only other stop with significant numbers of alightings is the stop on Pringle
Avenue, where approximately 8% of passengers
from downtown alight.
Once arriving at their stops, 59% of passengers
said that they walk to complete their trip. Of
those that walk, 70% reported that their walk
takes ten minutes or less. Of the remaining passengers, 24% take BART to complete their trip
and 11% transfer to another bus.
Boarding patterns are similar on both weekdays
and weekends. Boardings downtown are more
diffuse on weekends, with 28% instead of 40%
boarding at Broadway Plaza, but the same proportion board in the core downtown area. The other
notable difference is on the southbound trips: on
weekends, 90% of riders board at BART, increasing from the weekday rate of 86%, and boarding
activity at Parkside Drive (in front of Jack in the
Box) falls from 8% to 2% of boardings on the
weekend.
For southbound trips, 86% of passengers board
at BART with the balance scattered among the
remaining stops. Of passengers that board the bus
Nelson Nygaard
Downtown Shuttle
Annual
Ridership
249,000
Downtown car trips prevented
by existing Free Ride service
at BART, 95% get off in the downtown area (i.e.,
at stops located to the south of Civic Drive), with
54% getting off at Broadway Plaza alone.
Page 2-7
Page 2-8
Figure 2-7
Free Ride Weekday Stop Activity
Towards Broadway Plaza
Stop
Walnut Creek BART
Riviera Avenue
North Main Street
North California Blvd
North California Blvd
Locust St.
Locust St.
Locust St.
Locust St.
Mt. Diablo Blvd
Broadway Plaza
Cross Street
-----Short St.
Parkside Dr.
2121 N. California
LaCassie Ave.
Civic Dr.
Mid block
Bonanza St.
1347 Locust St.
Main St.
Nordstrom’s
Total
Ons
393
5
30
7
7
8
0
3
3
2
NA
%
Ons
86%
1%
7%
2%
2%
2%
0%
1%
1%
0%
NA
Total
Offs
NA
4
9
0
7
23
5
46
39
67
236
%
Offs
NA
1%
2%
0%
2%
5%
1%
11%
9%
15%
54%
Max
Load
21
21
21
21
21
19
18
15
14
12
15
Avg.
Ons
8.2
0.1
0.6
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
3.0
Avg.
Offs
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.1
0.5
0.1
1.0
0.8
1.4
4.9
Cross Street
Nordstrom’s
Macy’s
South Main St.
Locust St.
Olympic Blvd.
Duncan
Bonanza St.
Civic Dr.
Arroyo Way
Main St.
------
Total
Ons
145
40
18
31
10
63
19
31
2
3
NA
%
Ons
40%
11%
5%
9%
3%
17%
5%
9%
1%
1%
NA
Total
Offs
NA
6
3
11
2
2
8
13
18
32
294
%
Offs
NA
2%
1%
3%
1%
1%
2%
3%
5%
8%
76%
Max
Load
15
15
15
15
15
16
15
16
15
15
1
Avg.
Ons
3.0
0.8
0.4
0.6
0.2
1.3
0.4
0.6
0.0
0.1
0.0
Avg.
Offs
4.9
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.7
6.1
Towards BART
Stop
Broadway Plaza
Broadway Plaza
Broadway Plaza
Bothelho Dr.
Locust St.
Main St.
Main St.
Main St.
Main St.
Pringle Ave.
Walnut Creek BART
Where riders come from
Walnut Creek residents make up 35% of the shuttle’s riders – 306 riders on a typical weekday. Of
that group, 35% use the shuttle to get to BART to
go to a job outside Walnut Creek. On weekdays,
only 2% of respondents reported using the shuttle
to go to lunch, one potential intra-downtown
use for the shuttle. Also, of all the shuttle riders
destined to locations within Walnut Creek, just
23% are residents of Walnut Creek. However, as
more housing is built in or near downtown, the
number of intra-Walnut Creek trips on the shuttle
may increase.
Figure 2-8
East Bay
Walnut Creek
San Francisco
Out of area
Residence of Workers and
Shoppers
Workers
59%
29%
6%
6%
Shoppers
46%
26%
14%
14%
Downtown Shuttle
Of all boardings onto the shuttle, 71% occur
at the BART station, with 58% of riders using
BART before connecting to the Free Ride and
7% transferring from another County Connection bus route at the BART station, and 31%
walking to access the shuttle. Of those walking,
over 70% walked less than 10 minutes to arrive
at their bus stop.
Stop activity at BART is so large because the
shuttle primarily serves people who live outside
of Walnut Creek. While 59% of respondents live
in the East Bay (this excludes Walnut Creek), only
35% reside in Walnut Creek. Most of the shuttle’s
riders – 65% on a typical weekday – arrive from
out of town on BART, and then take the shuttle
downtown to work, shop, or run errands. See
Figure 2-8.
Nelson Nygaard
Page 2-9
!
t
ve
ess A
Cypr
ffe Ln
Valero
sa D
r
Westc
li
Ln
r
Capwell Ln
d
Blv
el D
Ol
ym
pic
igu
!
20 - 59
!
60 - 99
!
100 - 393
"
Landmarks
Andre
a Dr
Lilac Dr
S Main St
e
nM
Sa
ay
aW
0.5
Miles
0 - 19
Ln
ol i
gn
y
Villa W
m
Ca
n
aL
eli
in St
Hospital
So. Ma
0
Ma
North
I 68
Kaiser "
Trl
Ra
mp
!
Nursery
Newell Ave
Total Ons
n
nB
lvd
Ram
p
!Ln
ell
p!w
a
C
L
Maria
lso
Bote
!
145
r Av
t
bC
com
Lane
Hol
lisa
Ana
Weekday Boardings
orse
Iron H
ay
adw
Bro
Pau
!r
lho D
Broadway
Plaza
"
w ay
Clover Ln
Wa
lke
Ct
Sierra Dr
0
St
Broad
d
e
Av
ma
Al
Bonita Ln
0.25
B lv
Rd
rnia
alifo
e
Alpin
SC
n
ita L
0
!
Edmund
Dr
uel
Mig
San
r
Margarido D
I 68
ic Dr
!
an
Dunc
Bon
Dewing Ln
North Civ
in St
!
ay
d
Almond Ct
!
Mt Pisgah Rd
oadw
a St
N Ma
ia Blv
ve
wA
Ramp
I 68
Peterson Pl
Acorn Ct
Lincoln Ave
Village Ct
N Br
liforn
S to
nz
Bona
!
Page 2-10
!
Mount Diablo Blvd
ay Nichols
rd W
on Rd
leva
Bou
Del Hambre Cir
0
!
!
p
Ram Boulevard Cir
¯
!
Sharene
t St
N Ca
Sharp Ave
Warren Rd
Pimlico Dr
s
Locu
e Rd
ve
ey A
Shu
East St
Carm
e l Dr
Lacassie Ct
Blvd
O ak
l and
I 680
Cole Ave
Hill Pl
Rivier
Carm
!
ve
Dora A
Blade Way
n Dr
Norly
Ln
ero
Brac
Carlback Ave
Lacassie Ave
Almond Ave
Camino Diablo
r
ay D
enw
Gre
Arroyo Way
Newell
a Ave
Ram
p
Hillside Ave
Way
Jones Rd
!
Trinity Ave
Randall Rd
y Rd
Blvd
Pl
ci
Sou
ve
ley A
Brad
Blvd
c
Terra
Rd
alle
io V
393
yA
ve
Vista Hermosa
O ak
vale
ac
Ygn
n
ut
Waln
Rd
in St
"!
St
Crokaerts
ornia
ello
Pringle A !
ve
Calif
t
elyn
Joc
San
North
eC
ont
Ba
rkle
t
oy L
Mcc
!
BART
Lawrenc
e
Ramp
I 68 0
I 680
Pine S
North Ma
urt
s Co
e
ane
!
r
Key
e Lan
ony
L
Ave
D
ok
eC
liff
Westc
Ramp
o
erl
lsid
Dr
Ct
Pimlico
Col
Homestead
Ov
Hil
P
e
sid
ark
North Main St
e
Ct
an Av
y
Wa
ok
a
Vist
erlo
Ln
Cir
vard
Har
Ov
dy
na
Bue
San
l
u
San J
P
ista
na V
Bue
Shady Ln
Free Ride Weekday Boardings
am
Mir
Figure 2-9
Free Ride
!
!
ffe Ln
Valero
sa D
r
Westc
li
ic Dr
Sharene
Carm
e l Dr
Ln
r
Lacassie Ct
d
Blv
0 - 19
!
20 - 59
!
60 - 99
Nursery
Ol
ym
pic
el D
Clover Ln
igu
Trl
!
Ln
n
!
100 - 393
"
Landmarks
Andre
a Dr
Lilac Dr
in St
ay
aW
0.5
Miles
So. Ma
0
Kaiser "
Hospital
Total Offs
L
Maria
e
Newell Av
Ra
mp
nM
Sa
d
Ca
ell
e
t
bC
com
Lane
Hol
lisa
Ana
Weekday Alightings
orse
Iron H
ay
adw
Bro
B lv
!Ln
ol i
gn
m
Ca
n
aL
eli
w ay
rnia
alifo
nB
lvd
Ram
p
r
Broadway
Plaza
Broad
SC
lso
!
lho D
Bote
!
236
Ma
y
Villa W
0.25
e
Av
ma
Al
Pau
!
"
Capwell Ln
0
Dr
uel
Mig
San
r
Margarido D
I 68
t
an S
r Av
Ct
Sierra Dr
Dunc
p!w
I 68
North
Dewing Ln
ay
in St
Cy
Edmund
Wa
lke
Mt Pisgah Rd
oadw
N Ma
ve
wA
d
Almond Ct
N Br
ia Blv
!
!press Ave
Rd
0
Peterson Pl
Acorn Ct
North Civ
Pimlico Dr
Way
Jones Rd
t St
liforn
ne
Alpi
I 68
Bonita Ln
0
t
!
n
ita L
¯
n za S
Bon
Blade Way
Warren Rd
!
Bona
!
Ramp
ay Nichols
rd W
on Rd
Del Hambre Cir
Lincoln Ave
Village Ct
Mount Diablo Blvd
p
Ram Boulevard Cir
leva
!
!
Camino Diablo
Bou
S to
ey
Shu
Sharp Ave
!
Hill Pl
Rivier
Blvd
O ak
l and
I 680
s
Locu
N Ca
Ave
East St
Free Ride
Downtown Shuttle
Cole Ave
Newell
a Ave
Ram
p
Hillside Ave
Carm
!
Almond Ave
Randall Rd
n Dr
Norly
Ln
ero
Brac
Lacassie Ave
Trinity Ave
ve
Dora A
e
Dr
way
Carlback Ave
e Rd
Rd
en
Gre
Arroyo Way
S Main St
Rd
!
Blvd
c
Terra
O ak
vale
v
ley A
Brad
ornia
Vista Hermosa
y Rd
Blvd
l
uci
ut
Waln
yA
ve
nP
e
Vall
294
Calif
t
ello
"!
acio
Ygn
St
Crokaerts
North
eC
ont
ely
Joc
Pringle A
ve!
n
So
San
in St
am
Mir
Ba
rkle
t
oy L
Mcc
t
BART
Lawrenc
e
Ramp
I 68 0
I 680
Pine S
North Ma
ourt
e
ane
!
r
sC
Key
e Lan
ony
L
Ave
D
ok
eC
liff
Westc
Ramp
o
erl
lsid
r
Ct
Pimlico
Col
Homestead
Ov
Hil
P
eD
sid
ark
North Main St
e
Ct
an Av
y
Wa
ok
a
Vist
erlo
Ln
Cir
vard
Har
Ov
l
na
Bue
dy
San
P
ista
na V
u
San J
Bue
Shady Ln
Figure 2-10 Free Ride Weekday Alightings
Nelson Nygaard Page 2-11
Who uses the Free Ride
$50,000/yr, compared to 42% of shoppers.
Summary of demographic information:
• 13% of riders are over 60 years old (compared
to 11% for the County, according to year 2000
Census); people between ages 16 and 18 make
up 9% of respondents. This is identical to the
distribution of ages of County Connection
riders overall. Neither youth nor seniors form
a disproportionate portion of the Free Ride
ridership.
• Please note that this data was collected outside
of the school year. During the school year,
Free Ride usage by those ages 5-18 is higher.
Anecdotal evidence based on Walnut Creek
City staff observations suggest that during the
school year approximately 14 school age kids use
the Free Ride to get to school in the morning,
presumably using the Free Ride in the afternoon
on their way home.
• Household income of Free Ride riders compared to County:
Less that $35,000/yr
Free
Ride
Riders
54%
Contra Costa
County
Households
19%
$35,000 to $75,000/yr
32%
32%
Greater than $75,000/yr
14%
49%
• 73% of respondents did not have a car available
for the trip (the same as the system as a whole),
with 31% from zero car households, 38% from
one car households.
• 29% of surveys were completed in Spanish.
This aggregate data obscures differences in the two
main groups of riders – workers and shoppers.
As trip purpose and boarding data has already
suggested, employed people who are going to or
from work, with the majority of riders being from
outside Walnut Creek, are the largest group of
riders on the 104 shuttle. As a group, the demographics of these workers is somewhat different
from shoppers:
• Workers have lower incomes than shoppers.
26% of workers have household incomes above
Page 2-12
• More shoppers use the shuttle on the weekend,
which changes the demographic profile of the
shuttle’s weekend riders – 34% of weekend
riders use it for shopping compared to 22%
on weekdays.
Figure 2-11 Income of Workers and
Shoppers
<$25,000
$25,000-$34,999
$35,000-$49,999
$50,000-$74,999
$75,000-$99,999
>$100,000
Workers
40%
20%
14%
16%
4%
6%
Shoppers
29%
14%
14%
23%
9%
10%
On Time Performance
On time performance is one measure of the reliability of transit service. It measures how well a
route conforms to its published schedule. In the
case of the Free Ride, evaluating on time performance requires analyzing whether or not the 104
leaves the BART station and Broadway Plaza (its
two layover points) on time, and whether or not
it arrives at its stops along the way as scheduled.
This is one measure of whether or not riders can
count on the Free Ride reliably arriving at stops
about when it is supposed to; if people learn not
to trust a transit service or shuttle, they quickly
find alternatives.
The standard for on time performance used by
the County Connection is as follows: a bus is
early if it leaves a terminal or arrives at a stop
more than one minute ahead of the published
time, and a bus is late if it is over five minutes
late. A bus is considered on time if it is between
one minute early and five minutes late compared
to scheduled time.
The most important aspect of on time performance for the Free Ride is its adherence to depar-
ture time, and this is one of the shuttle’s strengths.
For the 77 trips we evaluated, not one left early
from one of its terminuses, nor was any trip ever
missed. This is very good on time performance,
and an indication of good driver training and
discipline. Departing the terminus on time helps
the shuttle to stay on schedule for the rest of the
route and allows people to rely on the shuttle as
a reliable connecting service from BART.
Early trips are problematic for those riders that
rely upon the Free Ride schedule to use the service.
If the Free Ride arrives early to a stop, a rider who
uses a schedule to minimize their wait time (say,
someone who works downtown and uses the Free
Ride to return to BART) may miss the shuttle and
have to wait 15 or 20 minutes for the next shuttle,
or walk, rather than being picked up on time.
Scheduled time on weekends is the same as weekdays. The scheduled travel time on weekends adequately reflects operating conditions, with more
congestion from cars and pedestrians slowing the
shuttle on the weekend. 82% of all observations
were recorded on time during the Saturday survey. Even on weekends, buses are more likely to
be recorded early than late. A small number of
observations were recorded as 6 to 10 minutes late
and none more than 10 minutes late.
Figure 2-12 Free Ride On Time Performance
Weekday
Total # of Free Ride Trips
48
Total Time Points Sampled
288
# Time Points within Standard
178
% Time Points within Standard
62%
# Early (2 - 5 minutes)
104
% Early (2 - 5 minutes)
36%
# Late (6 - 10 minutes)
0
% Late (6 - 10 minutes)
0%
# Very Late (More than 10 minutes)
0
% Very Late (More than 10 minutes)
0%
# Very Early (More than 5 minutes)
6
% Very Early (More than 5 minutes)
2%
Total Time Points Sampled
174
% Time Points within Standard
82%
Weekend
Total # of Free Ride Trips
# Time Points within Standard
29
143
# Early (2 - 5 minutes)
20
% Early (2 - 5 minutes)
11%
# Late (6 - 10 minutes)
8
% Late (6 - 10 minutes)
5%
# Very Late (More than 10 minutes)
0
% Very Late (More than 10 minutes)
0%
# Very Early (More than 5 minutes)
3
% Very Early (More than 5 minutes)
2%
Downtown Shuttle
Schedule adherence on the rest of the route is
important both because on time performances is
a key measure of reliability and because it provides
a predictable service interval without “bunching”
or long gaps in the schedule. On time performance on the Free Ride varies by day of week,
with the route contending with more traffic and
pedestrian congestion on weekends. As shown
in Figure 2-12, on weekdays drivers consistently
are ahead of schedule because too much time is
allocated to each trip. Although almost all trips
begin on time, the schedule provides about six
minutes of extra time on each roundtrip (3 min-
utes in each direction). As a result, while only 62%
of observations on weekdays were technically “on
time”, virtually no late trips were reported.
Evaluation of Service
As it is currently operated and designed, the Free
Ride is a success: it is one of the more productive routes the County Connection operates, it is
relatively frequent, and customer satisfaction is
high. Of passengers surveyed, 74% consider the
service excellent or good overall, with only 2%
reporting “poor” or “very poor.” County Connection is operating (and the City of Walnut Creek
is subsidizing) a well-liked service.
Although the shuttle service does well, it could be
even better. At present, it tries to deliver shoppers,
employees, and visitors from the BART station
and surrounding area to every corner of downtown, and suffers from trying to do too many
things with too little resources. By trying to do
too much, it ends up not providing any group of
riders with outstanding service.
Strengths of the Service
• Relatively frequently: at every 15 minutes on
weekdays and 20 on weekends, this service has
achieved the minimum frequency necessary for
riders to not use schedules.
• Reliability: Its on time performance on weekends is excellent. On weekdays there is too
much time in the schedule.
• Friendly and polite drivers: There were few
complaints about driver manner, especially
when compared to other transit systems.
• Cost to riders: The service is free, which for
most people is the most important consideration when using the shuttle. “Keep it free”
was the most commonly received comment
from riders.
• Passenger ratings for specific aspects of service are high: Passengers were also asked to
rate service frequency, on-time performance,
hours of service, travel time, cleanliness of vehicles, bus stop locations, connection to BART,
where the route goes – once again customers are
generally satisfied. For each of these specific
aspects of service, the combined “excellent”
Page 2-14
and “good” ratings were at least 60% of each
category, while the combined “poor” and “very
poor” ratings never amounted to more than 3%
of each category.
• Vehicles: The Free Ride is operated with 2002
30-foot low-floor buses made by Gillig. By the
standards of transit buses, these are nearly stateof-the-art, with low floors that make it easier for
riders to board and alight, especially older riders
that have difficulty climbing steps.
Weaknesses
• Hours of operation: There are several reasons
why a disproportionate percentage of riders get
on at BART but do not use the shuttle to return
to BART, one of which is the schedule – the
shuttle does not operate late enough to take
many people who work in stores downtown
back to the BART station. About 17% of shoppers and about 23% workers cited later service
on both weekdays and weekends as an important potential improvement to the shuttle.
• Frequency: Though relatively frequent, 30%
of shoppers and 22% of workers reported that
higher frequency would help them choose to
ride more often. Service every 15 minutes is
just enough for riders not to have to consult
schedules. For a shuttle that serves a short distance, service every 15 minutes is not frequent
enough.
• Routing and travel time: About 15% of shoppers and workers reported that they would like
more direct (i.e., faster) service between BART
and their destinations. While transit riders
would always like direct door-to-door service,
in this case, this may be a reflection on the
circuitous route. Anecdotally, in discussion
with many riders (and drivers), the loop north
of the BART station before going downtown
is particularly frustrating five-minute detour
from where the vast majority of riders want to
go. Also, when asked what the most important
reason to use the shuttle, 52% responded that it
was free, with only 21% reporting “the shuttle
goes where I want to go” and 19% citing “convenience.” While free is a powerful reason to use
a shuttle, ratings for convenience and routing
should rank higher.
• Routing is confusing for potential riders:
Apart from being indirect, the current routing
is potentially confusing for potential or occasional riders. The shuttle makes many loops
and requires a potential rider to decipher where
the shuttle goes and where one can board depending on travel direction. More obvious and
consistent routing can make what a route does
more transparent to potential riders.
While the current service is good, it has the potential to be even better. By focusing on improving
the core service it provides (in terms of routing,
speed, frequency, and span), better meeting the
needs of its riders and how they would like to use
it, and combining improvements with an effective marketing campaign, the Free Ride could be
a still larger success.
The success of the shuttle can be measured in
various ways. The first measure is ridership and
productivity – the number of people that ride for
each hour of operation. Improvements should
increase both. Another measure is the level of
rider satisfaction from a subsequent survey. From
the standpoint of congestion and parking demand
management in the downtown area, another
measure of success is the potential number in car
trips, existing and future, that the Free Ride can
reduce.
By the measures mentioned in the previous section, the existing Free Ride service is a success.
However, it has unrealized potential to attract
more riders, become a fixture of the downtown
landscape that is more useful, and factor into more
people’s perception of how to travel to and within
downtown Walnut Creek. Its productivity (i.e.,
passengers carried per hour) is the third highest
among all County Connection routes, but ridership has not changed significantly since 2002.
The Free Ride could be improved at little cost in
ways that would better serve existing riders and
attract more potential riders.
Principles for
Good Shuttle Design
Shuttles differ from other types of fixed-route
transit service. They typically provide direct, frequent, and free service between two points with
few stops in between. Shuttles often attract riders
that do not customarily use transit and often are
not familiar with the systems or “interface” that
regular transit users are accustomed to, such as
different ways that one can pay to ride. Airport
rental car shuttles are a common example, and one
local example is the shuttle that operates between
BART and the Oakland Airport. Other types of
fixed-route transit service are different: transit
routes make many stops between two points, are
not free, and do not necessarily follow the most
direct route. What follows is a more detailed
explanation about the principles of good shuttle
design:
• Clearly defined purpose – clear purpose and
goals help a shuttle to stay focused on satisfying
its core mission and providing the best possible
Downtown Shuttle
• Lack of awareness: Anecdotally, while in
Walnut Creek and surveying the downtown
areas, few people who were not already using
the shuttle were aware of its existence. Ridership
may not be as high as it could be on a free and
frequent service between major destinations
because so few people know about the shuttle.
Its stops, stop signage, routing, and vehicles
have little presence on the street, and are only
subtly distinguished from the other County
Connection services. Related to this issue is the
absence of any wayfinding or advertisement at
the BART station, a large missed opportunity to
let residents and visitors know about the service,
what it can do for them, and how to use it.
Proposed Changes
and Plan
service to its primary ridership groups with
available resources.
• Frequent – shuttles typically have very frequent
service. An individual’s willingness to wait is
directly proportional to the length of the trip.
Shuttles that serve very short distances can only
ask riders to wait a very short time before riders
will simply choose to walk instead.
• Direct vs. door to door – shuttle services are
typically very direct service between two locations, choosing the fastest, most direct routing.
Even those that make stops along the way do
not meander any more than is absolutely necessary. Direct service is usually the most useful
for people. Any additional stops should be kept
to a minimum.
• Transit time vs. walk time – by providing fast
and direct service, time spent on the shuttle is
minimized. But a direct route usually means
that a shuttle cannot serve every possible location between the two terminuses. The trade-off
is that by asking people to walk a short distance
to access the shuttle, the shuttle can benefit
everyone more by moving faster. Minimizing
overall travel time, including walk and wait time
,is especially important for shuttle routes.
• Consistent routing – by traveling on the same
street in both directions (rather than looping),
travelers quickly learn where a shuttle operates
Page 2-16
and where they can go to pick it up in either
direction. Routes that operate on the same
street in both directions are intuitive to the user.
By operating consistently, the first time rider
doesn’t have to wonder how to make the return
trip. Traveling on the same street also helps to
establish the presence of a transit line in an area.
Traveling the same route on every trip is another
way that the routing of a shuttle can be easily
understood and remembered by riders.
• Easy to understand – everything about shuttles
should be easy to understand, including the
routing, how to pay (free is the easiest), the
hours of operation (e.g., “7am—10pm, 7 days a
week” is easy to remember), and schedule (e.g.,
leaves the BART station every 10 minutes).
• Free – many shuttles are free, which eliminates
the cost barrier to using the service, but other
barriers as well, making it easy for “novice” or
occasional transit users to understand how to
use it (because there is no fare amount or payment method to learn about).
• Strong identity – when a free shuttle is operated
alongside traditional fixed-route transit service,
it should be distinguished from the “regular”
transit service and to the degree possible. Its
stops and vehicles should have a distinct, easily
recognizable identity. The recent conversion
of the Free Ride buses to “Trolleys” provides
this distinction.
Proposed Goals of the
Free Ride Shuttle
To improve the Free Ride, its purposes and goals
must be clarified and prioritized. Clear goals for
the service help to inform decisions about how
to improve it. One starting point is the goals for
the Free Ride as articulated in 1991:
• Tie downtown and Broadway Plaza into one
shopping area.
• Provide means for shoppers to circulate downtown without driving.
• Enhance downtown Walnut Creek’s image as
a place to shop.
• Tie downtown parking garages to shopping
area.
• Bridge the gap between downtown Walnut
Creek and the BART station.
• Increase economic vitality of downtown.
• Reduce traffic congestion in the downtown area
by reducing car trips downtown and demand
for parking from those who shop and work
downtown.
Successful shuttle designs stay focused on fulfilling their core mission and purpose, and resist the
temptation to attempt to do or be more than they
can. In the case of Walnut Creek, the Free Ride
will best serve its goals and core riders by focusing
on the needs of these riders. To best attain these
new goals, the Free Ride should:
• Follow a simple, comprehensible, and direct
route.
• Provide a service that is fast and frequent
enough to be competitive with walking the
short distance served by the Free Ride.
• Tie downtown parking garages to shopping
areas, allowing people to “park once” and shop
downtown rather than attempt to drive to different destinations in the downtown area.
Proposed Service Plan
The proposed changes to service have been designed to improve the usefulness of the service for
both employees and shoppers, the two primary users of the shuttle. These changes will not increase
that annual operating cost of the shuttle. Some
longer-term improvements that would increase
service hours, and therefore cost, are recommended in a subsequent section.
Summary of Proposed Changes
• Change routing to provide a more direct
and faster trip. By eliminating the five-minute
loop north of the BART station on Riviera and
Parkside Avenues, travel times to any destination south of the BART station will be reduced
by five minutes.
• Improve frequency. The five minutes “freed
up” by simplifying the route and the excess
running time available on weekdays should allow weekday frequency to increase to every 10
minutes (from current service every 15 minutes)
and every 15 minutes on weekends (from current 20 minute frequency). By providing service
every 10 minutes, the shuttle will become much
more useful for all users. Also, it improves the
Free Ride’s presence on the street because the
shuttle will pass by more frequently. Increasing
the frequency can be done with no additional
operating cost if the routing is changed.
• If this change were made, bus drivers would
still have adequate recovery time at each
terminus – three minutes at Broadway Plaza
and seven at the BART station. This is more
recovery time than they currently have on weekends. On weekdays when running times are
more predictable this amount of recovery time
Downtown Shuttle
To update and clarify the goals of the Free Ride,
Nelson\Nygaard has used the principles of sound
shuttle design and the findings of this analysis to
suggest the following update of the Free Ride’s
goals:
• Have appropriate hours of service for shoppers
and employees.
should be more than sufficient. This will make
the shuttle faster than walking for most trips.
• As most passengers of the Free Ride arrive on
BART, ideally the Free Ride would be scheduled to make “timed meets” with the BART
trains to minimize wait times for these passengers. Right now, because most riders don’t
come from one direction or another on BART
(about 60% of Free Riders boarding at the
BART station come on BART from the east),
the Free Ride cannot be optimized to make
“meets” that would reduce wait time.
• The net positive impact of increasing service
frequency is that the average wait time for
those transferring to/from BART would be
reduced. The tradeoff is that the wait time
would become more variable. Adding real time
bus arrival information (discussed in subsequent
section) would help to mitigate this variability
because riders would be informed of the expected wait time.
• Reduce the number of stops on the route;
many stops are rarely used. These can be
eliminated to speed the shuttle and reduce travel
time variability, increasing the shuttle’s on-time
performance. Consolidating stops will also aid
efforts to establish a presence on the route by
concentrating stop activity. Having fewer stops
will also increase the amount of resources that
can be invested per stop for potential improvements, creating an enhanced street presence for
the shuttle.
The consultant team recommends that the Free
Ride remains free of charge to riders. This has been
a critical element of the shuttle’s success; 52% of
respondents said that the most important reason
they use the shuttle is because it is free. If a fare is
charged, the shuttle’s potential to reduce car trips
and parking demand will be reduced.
Page 2-18
Eliminating the loop
north of the BART station
All routing options include one major change:
eliminating the current loop north of the BART
station that operates on Riviera Ave., Parkside
Dr., and then uses North Main Street to join
North California Blvd to head south on its way
to Broadway Plaza.
This change is crucial to significantly improving
the Free Ride service at little cost because it is the
key to both increasing frequency (on weekdays
from every 15 to every 10 minutes) and the speed
or directness of the trip. Frequency and speed are
the two most important ways that the Free Ride
can be improved for current and potential riders.
If implemented these two changes by themselves
are expected to increase weekday ridership by up
to 30% (after people are given enough time to
change travel behavior).
As with any change to transit routing, eliminating the north loop involves tradeoffs. A clearly
defined purpose and goals for the Free Ride help
decision-makers to evaluate these tradeoffs and
choose how to proceed.
What is the negative impact of eliminating the
north loop? At present, about 6.7% of all riders
(about 59 per weekday) either get on or off the
Free Ride on stops along the north loop. Additionally, during the school year, approximately
five to ten school age children use the Parkside
stop on the north loop.
If the north loop were eliminated, these 59 riders
that currently use stops on the north loop will be
inconvenienced. Two of the three stops are within
a five minute walk of the BART station, while the
third stop (on North Main Street in front of the
Jack in the Box and near the Marriott) is just be-
yond a ¼ mile. Without the north loop, about 59
people each weekday will be asked to walk some
distance to access BART and/or the Free Ride. If
the north loop were eliminated, some impacted
riders could use Route 102 as an alternative, but
the fare on this route is currently $1.50.
What is the benefit of eliminating the north loop?
All of the 93.3% of remaining riders (about 816
per weekday) would have about five minutes
shaved from their trip because of the more direct
routing. Their expected wait time would also be
reduced by between zero to five minutes because
this change would allow the frequency of Free
Ride service to increase five minutes (e.g., from
every 15 to every 10 minutes on weekdays). Also,
because of these changes, the Free Ride itself will
benefit because the improved service is expected
When the negative impacts of eliminating the
north loop are weighed against the benefits,
there appears to be a strong case for eliminating
the north loop. As summarized in Figure 2-13,
approximately 69 people a day (59 year round
riders plus approximately 10 student riders) will
be asked to walk about ¼ mile (about a 5 minute
walk for most people) from the BART station
to reach their destination, while approximately
1,061 people a day will save approximately 10
minutes (5 minutes travel time, and 2.5 minutes
less waiting time each way for a roundtrip). The
net impact on travel time savings is summarized
in the following table; the net travel time savings
per day of eliminating the north loop is expected
to save its riders about 10,265 minutes, or 171
hours. This conclusion is supported by data
collected on the on-board survey and anecdotal
observations – the north loop is a frustrating fiveminute detour in the wrong direction for the vast
majority of riders.
Figure 2-13 Estimated Travel Time Net Benefit Per Day From Eliminating the North Loop
Those who are impacted
negatively
+ 5 min.
Those who benefit
Number of people affected per day
69 people
1,061people
Total minutes travel time change per day
+ 345 min.
-10,610 min.
Possible Improvement
Change in minutes of travel time
Net impact on all riders per day
-10 min.
Saves approximately 10,265 minutes per day (171 hrs)
Downtown Shuttle
As a major hotel in Walnut Creek, the Marriott
deserves special consideration. However, it appears that very few guests of the Marriott Hotel
use the service. The Marriott also offers its own
minivan shuttle service for their customers that
operates from 7:00am until 10:00pm. On days
surveyed, only nine people got off at the stop closest to the hotel, and none were obviously hotel
guests (e.g., with suitcases). For guests staying at
the hotel while doing business downtown, if the
north loop were eliminated, guests would have to
walk to the BART station to use the Free Ride, or
use the Marriott minivan service.
to attract an estimated 245 additional riders
each weekday (applying conservative industry
standards for ridership elasticity based on service
frequency). Assuming that 15% of those new
riders would choose to use an improved shuttle
rather than drive downtown, this would prevent
approximately 37 car trips into downtown per
day and consequently reduce demand for on and
off street parking spaces.
Page 2-20
Potential Routings
Five alternative route revisions were developed
and are presented below. Each of these routings
will help achieve the goals of the shuttle, and
each has advantages and disadvantages. These are
summarized below:
Option A: Partial Two-way on Main Street
(Figure 2-14)
This routing makes three changes from the current routing: eliminate the Parkside Drive loop
to the north, travel southbound on South Main
Street instead of Locust Street, and return northbound on South Main Street, eliminating the
Botelho/Locust deviation. This route provides
direct service on the same street in the downtown,
but because it travels in both directions on South
Main Street it is more exposed to traffic congestion
on Main. Additional delay caused southbound on
Main Street should be compensated through the
removal of the Botelho deviation (which should
save about three minutes of travel time), and this
also makes the route more direct. This option
would require the addition of a northbound far
side stop on South Main Street after Botelho
Drive.
Advantages
• Serves Main Street, arguably the center of
downtown
• Service consolidated onto one street downtown
• More direct and less confusing routing
Disadvantages
• Subject to congestion on Main, which may
cause on-time performance problems.
t
#
ffe Ln
Valero
sa D
r
Westc
li
ic Dr
North Civ
Ln
Lane
r
Capwell Ln
d
lisa
Hill Pl
Almond Ct
Sharene
Carm
e l Dr
Lacassie Ct
Blvd
O ak
l and
Blv
Ana
el D
Ol
ym
pic
Ct
igu
Clover Ln
b
com
e
nM
Sa
Trl
Nursery
Ln
n
"
Andre
in St
Landmarks
a Dr
Lilac Dr
L
Maria
0
Kaiser "
Hospital
e
So. Ma
ay
aW
0.5
Miles
Ln
Newell Av
Ra
mp
ol i
gn
m
Ca
n
aL
eli
ell
orse
Iron H
ay
adw
Bro
w ay
d
nB
lvd
Ram
p
Hol
Broad
B lv
lso
r
Ma
y
Villa W
0.25
e
Av
ma
Al
Pau
lho D
Bote
Broadway
Plaza
"
r Av
Ct
Sierra Dr
Dr
uel
Mig
San
r
Margarido D
0
ay
in St
St
pw
Ca
I 68
North
Dewing Ln
Wa
lke
Mt Pisgah Rd
oadw
rnia
alifo
Rd
0
Peterson Pl
Acorn Ct
N Ma
I 68
N Br
ve
ess A
Cypr
SC
ne
Alpi
I 68
Bonita Ln
0
d
n
ita L
¯
a St
Bon
Blade Way
Warren Rd
nz
Bona
an
Dunc
Ramp
ay Nichols
rd W
on Rd
Del Hambre Cir
Lincoln Ave
Village Ct
Mount Diablo Blvd
p
Ram Boulevard Cir
leva
ia Blv
ve
wA
Sharp Ave
Bou
Pimlico Dr
Way
Jones Rd
t St
liforn
S to
ve
ey A
Shu
Edmund
Newell
a Ave
Rivier
Ram
p
Hillside Ave
I 680
s
Locu
N Ca
ve
Dora A
East St
Option A
Downtown Shuttle
Cole Ave
S Main St
Rd
Carm
Blvd
Lacassie Ave
Almond Ave
Camino Diablo
n Dr
Norly
Ln
ero
Brac
Carlback Ave
Trinity Ave
Randall Rd
r
ay D
enw
e
r
G
Arroyo Way
e Rd
Rd
y Rd
ve
ley A
Brad
ornia
c
Terra
O ak
vale
ci
Sou
Blvd
l
nP
Vista Hermosa
alle
io V
n
ut
Waln
yA
ve
ac
Ygn
Calif
t
ello
in St
"
St
Crokaerts
North
eC
ont
ely
Joc
Pringle A
ve
#
am
Mir
Ba
rkle
BART
ane
t
San
North Ma
urt
s Co
e
oy L
Mcc
r
Key
Lawrenc
e
Ramp
I 68 0
I 680
Pine S
e Lan
ony
L
Ave
D
ok
eC
liff
Westc
Ramp
o
erl
lsid
r
Ct
Pimlico
Col
Homestead
Ov
Hil
D
ide
rks
Pa
North Main St
e
Ct
an Av
y
Wa
ok
a
Vist
erlo
Ln
Cir
vard
Har
Ov
l
na
Bue
dy
San
P
ista
na V
u
San J
Bue
Shady Ln
Figure 2-14 Proposed Routing Option A
Page 2-22
Option B: Main-Locust Couplet (Figure 2-15)
This routing makes the same changes as Option
A, but retains southbound service on Locust. Although splitting the service on two streets is less
desirable, it causes fewer changes, retains service
where riders and merchants are accustomed to
it, and is likely to be slightly more reliable than
Option A.
Advantages
• Requires the least amount of change
• More direct and less confusing routing
Disadvantages
• Subject to congestion on downtown streets
• Service downtown is not on the same street
t
r
Valero
sa D
North Civ
Westc
li
ic Dr
ffe Ln
Carm
e l Dr
Sharene
Hill Pl
#
Blvd
O ak
l and
Lacassie Ct
Almond Ct
Ln
lisa
Lane
r
Capwell Ln
Ana
el D
d
Ct
igu
Blv
e
nM
Sa
Ol
ym
pic
r Av
Ct
Sierra Dr
Trl
Ln
n
"
Andre
Landmarks
a Dr
ay
aW
Lilac Dr
in St
ol i
gn
0.5
Miles
So. Ma
0
Kaiser "
Hospital
e
Nursery
Newell Av
Ra
mp
Ma
y
Villa W
m
Ca
n
aL
eli
Ln
L
Maria
nB
lvd
Ram
p
ell
b
com
Hol
orse
Iron H
ay
adw
Bro
lso
w ay
d
e
Av
ma
Al
Pau
r
pw
Ca
I 68
North
0.25
B lv
0
lho D
Bote
Broadway
Plaza
"
Broad
rnia
alifo
Rd
Clover Ln
t
an S
Dr
uel
Mig
San
r
Margarido D
0
ay
in St
SC
ne
Alpi
Bonita Ln
Dewing Ln
Wa
lke
Mt Pisgah Rd
oadw
d
ve
wA
N Ma
ia Blv
I 68
N Br
liforn
S to
n
ita L
I 68
Peterson Pl
Acorn Ct
t
ve
ess A
Cypr
Bon
0
n za S
Dunc
Ramp
ay Nichols
rd W
on Rd
leva
Bou
Del Hambre Cir
¯
Lincoln Ave
Village Ct
Mount Diablo Blvd
p
Ram Boulevard Cir
Warren Rd
Pimlico Dr
Way
Jones Rd
t St
N Ca
Sharp Ave
Bona
Edmund
Newell
a Ave
Rivier
Ram
p
Hillside Ave
I 680
s
Locu
e Rd
ve
ey A
Shu
East St
Option B
Downtown Shuttle
Cole Ave
S Main St
Rd
Carm
Blvd
Lacassie Ave
ve
Dora A
Blade Way
n Dr
Norly
Ln
ero
Brac
Carlback Ave
Almond Ave
Camino Diablo
r
ay D
enw
e
r
G
Arroyo Way
Trinity Ave
Randall Rd
y Rd
ve
ley A
Brad
ornia
c
Terra
Rd
alle
io V
ci
Sou
Blvd
Pl
Vista Hermosa
O ak
vale
ac
Ygn
n
ut
Waln
yA
ve
t
Calif
t
ello
in St
"
S
Crokaerts
North
eC
ont
elyn
Joc
Pringle A
ve
#
am
Mir
Ba
rkle
BART
ane
t
San
North Ma
urt
s Co
e
oy L
Mcc
r
Key
Lawrenc
e
Ramp
I 68 0
I 680
Pine S
e Lan
ony
L
Ave
D
ok
eC
liff
Westc
Ramp
o
erl
lsid
Dr
Ct
Pimlico
Col
Homestead
Ov
Hil
ide
rks
Pa
North Main St
e
Ct
an Av
y
Wa
ok
a
Vist
erlo
Ln
Cir
vard
Har
Ov
dy
na
Bue
San
l
u
San J
aP
Vist
na
Bue
Shady Ln
Figure 2-15 Proposed Routing Option B
Page 2-24
Option C: Two-way Locust (Figure 2-16)
This routing also eliminates the Parkside Drive
loop to the north, but largely avoids Main Street.
Though Main Street is arguably more of a “main”
street than Locust, Locust is still in the heart of
downtown, is only one block away from Main
Street, and has less traffic congestion, allowing for
faster and more reliable operation. This routing
allows for a direct return trip on Locust, preserving the current service on Locust south of Mt.
Diablo Blvd, and makes possible a return trip via
California, a slightly faster routing. With this option, the fastest return to the BART station would
be via Ygnacio Valley Road instead of Pringle (but
either is possible). This would require the addition
of northbound bus stops on Locust.
Advantages
• Service consolidated onto one street downtown
• More direct and less confusing routing – faster service for riders
• Less subject to downtown congestion, which
should make service more reliable. City staff
and consultant observations find this route
several minutes faster than Main.
• Retains service on Botelho with major stops
at South Locust/Botehlo
• One block from Kaiser
Disadvantages
• Does not serve Main Street
t
#
ffe Ln
Valero
sa D
r
Westc
li
ic Dr
North Civ
Ln
Lane
r
Capwell Ln
d
lisa
Hill Pl
Almond Ct
Sharene
Carm
e l Dr
Lacassie Ct
Blvd
I 680
O ak
l and
Blv
Ana
el D
Ol
ym
pic
Ct
igu
Clover Ln
#
0
e
nM
Sa
Trl
Nursery
n
Ln
L
Maria
"
Andre
in St
Landmarks
a Dr
Lilac Dr
So. Ma
0
Kaiser "
Hospital
e
b
com
r Av
Ct
Sierra Dr
Dr
uel
Mig
San
r
Margarido D
d
ay
aW
0.5
Miles
Ln
Newell Av
Ra
mp
ol i
gn
m
Ca
n
aL
eli
ell
orse
Iron H
ay
adw
Bro
w ay
r
Hol
Broad
B lv
nB
lvd
Ram
p
lho D
Bote
Broadway
Plaza
"
Ma
y
Villa W
0.25
lso
I 68
North
Dewing Ln
ay
in St
t
an S
pw
Ca
e
Av
ma
Al
Pau
#
rnia
alifo
Rd
0
Peterson Pl
Acorn Ct
Wa
lke
Mt Pisgah Rd
oadw
N Ma
I 68
N Br
ve
ess A
Cypr
SC
ne
Alpi
I 68
Bonita Ln
Blade Way
0
d
n
ita L
Del Hambre Cir
¯
a St
Bon
ay Nichols
rd W
on Rd
Warren Rd
nz
Bona
Dunc
Ramp
leva
Lincoln Ave
Village Ct
Mount Diablo Blvd
p
Ram Boulevard Cir
Bou
ia Blv
ve
wA
Sharp Ave
Camino Diablo
Pimlico Dr
Way
Jones Rd
t St
liforn
S to
ve
ey A
Shu
Edmund
Newell
a Ave
Rivier
Ram
p
Hillside Ave
Carm
s
Locu
N Ca
Almond Ave
ve
Dora A
East St
Option C
Downtown Shuttle
Cole Ave
Trinity Ave
Randall Rd
n Dr
Norly
Ln
ero
Brac
Lacassie Ave
e Rd
Rd
e
Dr
way
Carlback Ave
S Main St
Rd
#
Blvd
c
Terra
O ak
vale
ornia
Vista Hermosa
d
en
Gre
Arroyo Way
ci
Sou
Blvd
l
nP
n
ut
Waln
yA
ve
R
lley
v
ley A
Brad
Calif
t
ello
"
Va
acio
Ygn
St
Crokaerts
North
eC
ont
ely
Joc
Pringle A
ve
in St
am
Mir
Ba
rkle
BART
ane
t
San
North Ma
urt
s Co
e
oy L
Mcc
r
Key
Lawrenc
e
Ramp
I 68 0
I 680
Pine S
e Lan
ony
L
Ave
D
ok
eC
liff
Westc
Ramp
o
erl
lsid
Dr
Ct
Pimlico
Col
Homestead
Ov
Hil
ide
rks
Pa
North Main St
e
Ct
an Av
y
Wa
ok
a
Vist
erlo
Ln
Cir
vard
Har
Ov
dy
na
Bue
San
l
u
San J
aP
Vist
na
Bue
Shady Ln
Figure 2-16 Proposed Routing Option C
Page 2-26
Option D: California Blvd. (Figure 2-17)
This routing also eliminates the Parkside Drive
loop to the north, and uses N. California Blvd.
between BART an Mount Diablo Blvd, preserves
the current routing through the Broadway Plaza
area, and then returns to BART via California
Blvd. Of all potential routings, this route would
be the fastest most direct routing between BART
and Broadway Plaza. This routing would also
avoid the congested portions of Locust and/or
Main Street, but at the expense of not traveling
on these streets.
Advantages
• Service consolidated onto one street
• Most direct routing
• Fastest and most reliable routing
Disadvantages
• Service does not serve downtown streets
• Eliminates shuttle’s potential to facilitate
pedestrian circulation within downtown
t
ffe Ln
Valero
sa D
r
Westc
li
ic Dr
North Civ
Ln
Lacassie Ct
Almond Ct
Sharene
Carm
e l Dr
S Main St
Lane
r
Capwell Ln
Hill Pl
#
Blvd
d
lisa
Newell
a Ave
Rivier
Ram
p
Hillside Ave
I 680
O ak
l and
Blv
Ana
el D
Ol
ym
pic
Ct
igu
Clover Ln
e
nM
Sa
Trl
Nursery
n
Ln
L
Maria
"
Andre
in St
Landmarks
a Dr
ay
aW
Lilac Dr
e
So. Ma
0
Kaiser "
Hospital
ol i
gn
0.5
Miles
Ln
Newell Av
Ra
mp
Ma
y
Villa W
m
Ca
n
aL
eli
ell
b
com
Hol
orse
Iron H
ay
adw
Bro
nB
lvd
Ram
p
r
w ay
lso
lho D
Bote
Broad
Pau
#
Broadway
Plaza
"
r Av
Ct
Sierra Dr
Dr
uel
Mig
San
r
Margarido D
0
t
an S
pw
Ca
I 68
North
Dewing Ln
ay
d
0
e
Av
ma
Al
Bonita Ln
0.25
B lv
Rd
rnia
alifo
ne
Alpi
SC
n
ita L
I 68
Peterson Pl
Acorn Ct
in St
ve
ess A
Cypr
Wa
lke
Mt Pisgah Rd
oadw
t
N Ma
d
I 68
N Br
n za S
Bon
0
Bona
Dunc
Ramp
ay Nichols
rd W
on Rd
leva
u
o
B
Del Hambre Cir
Blade Way
Lincoln Ave
Village Ct
Mount Diablo Blvd
p
Ram Boulevard Cir
¯
ia Blv
ve
wA
Sharp Ave
Warren Rd
Pimlico D
Way
Jones Rd
t St
liforn
S to
ve
ey A
Shu
Edmund
Option D
Downtown Shuttle
s
Locu
N Ca
ve
Dora A
East St
#
Rd
Carm
Blvd
Cole Ave
Almond Ave
Camino Diablo
n Dr
Norly
Ln
ero
Brac
Carlback Ave
Lacassie Ave
Trinity Ave
Randall Rd
r
ay D
enw
Gre
Arroyo Way
e Rd
Rd
y Rd
ve
ley A
Brad
ornia
c
Terra
O ak
vale
ci
Sou
Blvd
l
nP
Vista Hermosa
e
Vall
n
ut
Waln
yA
ve
Calif
t
ello
in St
"
acio
Ygn
St
Crokaerts
North
eC
ont
ely
Joc
Pringle A
ve
#
am
Mir
Ba
rkle
BART
ane
t
San
North Ma
urt
s Co
e
oy L
Mcc
r
Key
Lawrenc
e
Ramp
I 68 0
I 680
Pine S
e Lan
ony
L
Ave
D
ok
eC
liff
Westc
Ramp
o
erl
lsid
r
Ct
Pimlico
Col
Homestead
Ov
Hil
P
eD
sid
ark
North Main St
e
Ct
an Av
y
Wa
ok
a
Vist
erlo
Ln
Cir
vard
Har
Ov
na
Bue
dy
San
l
u
San J
aP
Vist
na
Bue
Shady Ln
Figure 2-17 Proposed Routing Option D
Option E: All two-way on Main St. (Figure 2-18)
This potential routing would travel on Main Street
in both directions between Pringle and Mt. Diablo Blvd, going one step farther than Option A
to consolidate service onto Main Street not just
in the downtown portion of the route, but for
the entire route. Because this routing is slower,
it would also require the removal of the Botelho
loop, so service from Broadway Plaza to Pringle
would follow Main Street.
Advantages
• Service consolidated onto one street as much
as possible, making the routing easy for riders
to remember
• Preserves service on Main Street
Disadvantages
• Congestion on Main Street and time spent
accessing Pringle (rather than entering North
California Blvd directly from the BART station) will slow travel times and will make the
route less reliable
• Removes Botelho loop
Page 2-28
t
ffe Ln
Valero
sa D
r
Westc
li
ic Dr
North Civ
Way
Jones Rd
Shady L
#
Ln
Lane
r
Capwell Ln
d
Hill Pl
Almond Ct
Sharene
Carm
e l Dr
Lacassie Ct
Blvd
I 680
O ak
l and
Blv
lisa
Ana
el D
Ol
ym
pic
t
bC
igu
Clover Ln
e
nM
Sa
Nursery
n
Ln
L
Maria
"
Andre
in St
Landmarks
a Dr
ay
aW
Lilac Dr
e
So. Ma
0
Kaiser "
Hospital
ol i
gn
0.5
Miles
n
Newell Av
Ra
mp
Ma
y
Villa W
m
Ca
n
aL
eli
ll L
Trl
e
pw
Ca
com
Hol
orse
Iron H
ay
adw
Bro
d
nB
lvd
Ram
p
I 68
North
0.25
lso
r
w ay
B lv
e
Av
ma
Al
Pau
#
lho D
Bote
Broad
rnia
alifo
0
Broadway
Plaza
"
r Av
Ct
Sierra Dr
0
t
an S
Dr
uel
Mig
San
r
Margarido D
I 68
ay
in St
SC
Rd
Bonita Ln
Dewing Ln
Wa
lke
Mt Pisgah Rd
oadw
d
ne
Alpi
I 68
Peterson Pl
Acorn Ct
N Ma
ia Blv
ve
wA
n
ita L
0
ve
ess A
Cypr
Bon
¯
t
Dunc
Ramp
ay Nichols
rd W
on Rd
leva
Bou
Del Hambre Cir
Warren Rd
n za S
Mount Diablo Blvd
p
Ram Boulevard Cir
Blade Way
Lincoln Ave
Village Ct
N Br
liforn
S to
Sharp Ave
Bona
Edmund
Newell
a Ave
Rivier
Hillside Ave
p
Ram
t St
N Ca
ve
ey A
u
h
S
S Main St
Rd
Carm
s
Locu
e Rd
ve
Dora A
East St
Option E
Downtown Shuttle
Cole Ave
Almond Ave
Camino Diablo
n Dr
Norly
Ln
ero
Brac
Carlback Ave
Lacassie Ave
Trinity Ave
Randall Rd
r
ay D
enw
Gre
Arroyo Way
Blvd
c
Terra
Rd
y Rd
ve
ley A
Brad
ornia
Vista Hermosa
O ak
vale
e
Vall
uci
Blvd
Pl
n
ut
Waln
yA
ve
Calif
t
ello
"
acio
Ygn
St
Crokaerts
North
eC
ont
elyn
Joc
Pringle A
ve
in St
am
Mir
Ba
rkle
BART
ane
t
So
San
North Ma
ourt
e
oy L
Mcc
r
sC
Key
Lawrenc
e
Ramp
I 68 0
I 680
Pine S
e Lan
ony
L
Ave
D
ok
eC
liff
Westc
Ramp
o
erl
lsid
Dr
Ct
Pimlico
Col
Homestead
Ov
Hil
P
e
sid
ark
North Main St
e
Ct
an Av
y
Wa
ok
a
Vist
erlo
Ln
Cir
vard
Har
Ov
dy
na
Bue
San
l
u
San J
aP
Vist
na
Bue
Pimlico D
Figure 2-18 Proposed Routing Option E
Recommended Routing
All of the potential routings will significantly
improve service, helping the City to maximize
its return on investment from its subsidy of the
Free Ride and to attain its goals for downtown.
Moreover, among the five routing options the
consultant team expects little difference in terms
of operating cost.
Another common element in all routing options
is the removal of the northern loop. This change
is essential for three of the most important improvements to the Free Ride – making the Free
Ride much more direct, decreasing travel times
significantly from BART to downtown, and
increasing service frequency by five minutes on
weekdays and weekends. The benefits of this
change for existing and potential Free Ride riders,
and the corresponding reduction in congestion
and parking demand in the downtown area, far
outweigh its impacts.
Removing the northern loop will have the most
significant contribution to improving service.
After this improvement, the advantages and disadvantages of each routing option are a matter of
degree. Among these options, the consultant team
recommends Option C, with two-way service
on Locust, as the alternative that will best serve
the City of Walnut Creek’s goals for the shuttle
service. Operating on Main Street is also a viable
option, but is likely to present operational challenges that significantly degrade service quality
and require undesirable changes to the routing
through the core of the downtown retail area.
Compared with all the other routing options, operating two-way on Locust has several important
advantages. These are summarized below:
• Using the slack time in the existing schedule
to increase frequency of service, combined
with a more direct route, is the most important way to increase the attractiveness of the
Free Ride service. These changes will make
the Free Ride more sensitive to unpredictable
delays caused by traffic congestion. Operating
on Locust, which has less traffic congestion
than Main, will help the Free Ride to retain its
on-time performance.
• Allows Locust between Mt. Diablo and
Botelho to continue to be served by the Free
Ride. Two-way operation on Main Street
requires about three to four more minutes of
running time because of the longer travel path,
as well as turns from Main to Botelho, Locust to
Mt. Diablo, and then from Mt. Diablo to Main
Street. For Options A and E to have enough
running time with the increased frequency of
service, both are expected to require eliminating service on Locust between Mt. Diablo and
Botelho, abandoning service to that portion of
Locust with many new stores and significant
pedestrian activity. When balancing the desire
for a direct route and a route that serves the most
locations, it is desirable to serve Locust between
Mt. Diablo and Botelho and Option C appears
to be the most elegant way to do this.
• The routing of Option C is easy to understand. Perhaps most crucially, this routing
does not double back on itself (as with the
existing routing) or operate on separate streets
in different directions, which makes the route
more comprehensible to potential riders. The
routing of Option C is not quite as simple and
comprehensible as Option D and E, but should
be readily understood by riders.
• Retains service downtown. Operating on
North California to and from Mt. Diablo is,
in terms of operational efficiency and reliability, the superior option, but it does not serve
as much of the downtown area, or allow for
the use of the Free Ride as a circulator within
downtown. This violates one of the core purposes of the Free Ride.
• Facilitates the use of the Free Ride as a parkand-ride service. To the degree that the Free
Ride is intended to help people who park in
Page 2-30
parking garages access Broadway Plaza, operating on Locust is superior to operating on Main
because it has more parking garages.
• Takes advantage of superior stops on Locust.
By operating on Locust, Walnut Creek could
leverage the existing stop infrastructure on Locust to create a series of uniformly high-quality
Free Ride stops in the downtown area that are
commensurate with Walnut Creek’s status as
a premiere retail destination for the Bay Area
as well as the Free Ride’s identity as a unique
service.
Before making a decision for the routing of the
Free Ride, the City of Walnut Creek may request
that the CCCTA do an operational analysis of
Option A and E to confirm that these could not
be operated with the proposed service frequencies
without eliminating service to Locust between
Mt. Diablo and Botelho. Their operational
experience will allow them to make more accurate run time estimates that they can commit
to operating within their on-time performance
standards. Additionally, proposed changes to
parking management downtown may also make a
routing on Main Street more viable, because these
changes are expected to reduce congestion on
Main caused by double parking and cars circling
to find parking.
If in the future the City of Walnut Creek and/or
the County Connection were to invest more
resources into Free Ride, there are several ways
to enhance the shuttle to better meet its goals for
shoppers, employees, and residents. These are:
1. Add real time bus arrival information at
high usage stops. Real time bus arrival
information at stops predicts when the
next bus will arrive at that stop. Unless
waiting times are predictably very short
(e.g., less than five minutes), real time
information makes waiting for a bus or
shuttle much more pleasant by reducing
anxiety about when the next bus may
arrive.
With this technology, bus arrival information can also be accessed by computer or
web-enabled cell phone, helping people
to plan their transit trip. Though not
strictly necessary for an effective shuttle
service, this technology is expected to
attract additional riders and is consistent
with downtown Walnut Creek’s status as
a premiere downtown shopping area in
the Bay Area. Even with the proposed
increase of weekday service to every ten
minutes and weekend service to every 15
minutes, real time bus arrival information
is expected to increase ridership and rider
satisfaction.
The following table (Figure 2-19) provides planning level cost estimates for
the technology, but does not include the
costs of electrification of each bus stop
Downtown Shuttle
To not operate on Main Street is a significant
decision with tradeoffs for the City to consider.
Two-way service on Locust Street has important
operational benefits, but it does not have the same
symbolic value of operating on Main Street, the
location of many Walnut Creek civic institutions.
When considered from the perspective of people
who use the Free Ride service, the benefits of
operating on Locust may outweigh the benefits
of operating on Main.
Prioritized List for Potential
Long Term Improvements
Page 2-32
where arrival time would be provided
(bus arrival signs require electricity). The
cost for NextBus, a company in Alameda,
CA, to provide this technology for the
Free Ride is approximately $52,400, with
about an $800 recurring monthly ($9,600
annual) fee. These costs are summarized
in the following table. This cost estimate
includes the cost of implementing and
installing this technology on the three
Free Ride vehicles and at the ten highest
usage stops, but does not include the cost
of electrifying each bus stop.
The cost of electrifying bus stops can
vary substantially, depending on location
and proximity of an appropriate source
of electricity, so the total initial cost of
implementing NextBus technology may
be substantially higher than $52,400. Because these costs can vary so significantly,
estimating the cost of electrifying LED
sign locations at bus stops will require
a separate technical assessment. After
desired stop and LED sign locations are
determined, an engineer could provide
a technical assessment to determine the
proximity of acceptable sources of electricity and, where it is not readily available, the cost of providing electricity to
each location.
Figure 2-19 Estimated Costs of NextBus
Technology for Free Ride
Note: These estimated costs include
installation of equipment on buses and
at stops, but do not include provision
of electricity for LED signs at stops
Initial Cost Items
Cost
Set up two websites
• One for riders
• One for CCCTA management
$6,000 per route
LED signage at a stop
$3,100 per stop
Electrify each LED location
Varies – TBD
Bus tracking equipment (on the bus)
$3,100 per bus
Software license fee
$5,000 for three
buses
Set up and training
$1,000
Subtotal – One Time $24,400
Recurring Annual Fee
Cost
Communication fee for each bus
$720 per bus
(3 buses)
Communication fee for each LED sign
$720 per sign
(10 signs)
Subtotal – Annual Costs $9,630
This would add approximately 2,700
service hours and approximately 13,200
service miles a year. Assuming a fully
allocated cost per service hour of $40.00/
hour and $1.42/mile (supplied by County
Connection), this enhancement would
cost County Connection approximately
$127,000 a year to operate.
3. Increase hours of operation on weekends.
The hours of operation the weekend
should be increase for the same reasons
as for the weekdays, but Walnut Creek’s
prominence as a regional center for nightlife and restaurants means that there is
high potential demand for shuttle service
on weekends. After improving the Free
Ride’s usefulness on weekdays, the next
priority for expanding Free Ride’s hours
of operation would be on weekend evenings.
To be more useful on Friday and Saturday evenings, the Free Ride’s last shuttle
should operate until about midnight to
coordinate with the last BART trains, and
on Sunday until about 10:00pm.
If these expansions of service were combined with the higher priority weekday
expansions, the Free Ride would operate
until about 10:00pm Sunday through
Thursday, and until about midnight on
Friday and Saturday.
The additional annual cost of adding additional service for each potential weekend service expansion:
• Friday from 10:00pm until 12:00am:
$11,000/year (annually an additional 240
service hours and 1,200 service miles)
• Saturday from 6:30pm until 12:00am:
• Sunday from 6:30pm until 10:00pm:
Impact on Car Trips in
Downtown Walnut Creek
If the speed, frequency, routing, and hours of
operation of the Free Ride (see Figure 2-20 for
full suite of improvements), the Free Ride service
is expected to capture 32,900 trips per year that
would otherwise have been taken by automobile – a 52% increase. This translates into reducing
approximately 116 (increased from 76 at present)
car trips downtown each weekday, and approximately 29 each weekend day (increased from 20
at present), as summarized in Figure 2-21.
To estimate the car trips that would be reduced if
the shuttle service routing, frequency, marketing,
and span (i.e., hours of service) were improved,
Downtown Shuttle
2. Increase hours of operation on weekdays until 10:00pm. At present, the
last trip leaves downtown at 7:14 PM on
weekday (Monday – Friday) evenings.
Most stores in the area close at 9:00 PM,
and most employees interviewed said that
they often must work until 10:00 PM to
close and clean their stores. From the
perspective of employees, as well as that
of the patrons of their stores, it would be
helpful if the last trip left downtown at
10:00 or 10:30 PM. Right now, more
people board at BART than return to
BART in part because many employees and some shoppers take the shuttle
downtown but must walk to BART after
the shuttle ceases operation – on the
weekdays measured, 393 people boarded
at the BART station, but only 294 people
got off at the BART station.
Nelson\Nygaard estimated how much each improvement would increase ridership (see Figure
2-20). If the full suite of improvements were
implemented, it is estimated that the number
of downtown car trips prevented would increase
by 52%. The car trips prevented by improving
service grows at a faster rate (52%) than overall
ridership (45%) because improved service will
attract more people to the Free Ride who would
have otherwise driven. In other words, more
people who can drive will choose to use the improved Free Ride service.
Marketing Plan
Figure 2-20 Estimated Impact of
Each Change on
Free Ride Ridership
Minimally, this marketing plan should include
the following:
Possible Improvement
• Branding of buses – In December 2005, the
City of Walnut Creek worked with County
Connection to replace the existing low-floor vehicles used on the Free Ride route with “historic
trolleys”. The new vehicles accomplish the goals
of visually distinguishing the Free Ride service
from other CCCTA routes, providing it with
a unique identity, as well as a more attractive
vehicle that may help attract new riders.
Percent
Increase in
Ridership
Increase weekday frequency from 15 to
10 minutes
15%
Increase weekend day frequency from 20
to 15 minutes
10%
Improved marketing of Free Ride
10%
Reduce BART to Broadway Plaza travel
time from 15 to 10 minutes
15%
Add NextBus
The Free Ride is in need of a marketing plan.
Anecdotal surveys of downtown pedestrians and
employees suggest that few people in downtown Walnut Creek know that the Free Ride
exists, much less that it is a free service between
downtown and BART. Upon finding out, most
people wanted to know more. This suggests that
the Free Ride has a large untapped reserve of
potential riders in the area, and that an effective
marketing campaign and branding strategy could
significantly increase ridership.
• Improved wayfinding at the BART station –
At present, there is little wayfinding information
at the BART station or an obvious indication
of what the Free Ride is, that it is a free service,
and where it goes. With thousands of people
entering and leaving the BART station each day,
this is an opportunity for County Connection
and the City of Walnut Creek to advertise this
service. If service speed and frequency are improved, even more people will find this service
useful. Improved signage is expected to cost
approximately $1,000.
5%
Add service from Sunday to Thursday until
10:10 PM
7.5%
Add service on Friday and Saturday until
12:00 AM
7.5%
Eliminate north loop
(6.7%)
Figure 2-21 Impact on Ridership in Walnut Creek
Annual
Ridership
Car trips
prevented per year
Annual
Service Hours
Annual
Operating Cost
Cost per rider
Existing service
249,000
21,600
11,800
$944,000
$3.79
Service with full suite of
improvements
362,000
32,900
15,800
$1,132,000
$3.13
45%
52%
34%
20%
(17%)
Percent change
Page 2-34
• Increase presence of stops on route – Right
now, the route of downtown shuttle is not
obvious to the casual passerby. Consolidating
service onto one street, simplifying the route,
increasing service frequency (so more buses pass
each hour), and eliminating low usage stops (so
that more riders will congregate at remaining
stops) will help to establish the presence of the
route.
Improving the shuttle’s stops is also an opportunity to announce that the shuttle passes by
and to imply something about the quality of
the service. Stop improvements can include
adding seating, lighting, shelters, trash bins,
and landscaping.
AC Transit is working to improve route and schedule information at
key bus stops.
Figure 2-22 Estimated Cost for
Improved Stop Information
Product
Cost
Installation
Total
Information Holder
$1500
$500
$2,000
• Marketing – The improvements to the downtown shuttle should be accompanied by an effective marketing campaign. There is a lack of
awareness of the shuttle among Walnut Creek
residents. The marketing campaign would likely
focus on Walnut Creek and possibly the areas
where the majority of people are already coming from to use Free Ride: Concord, Pleasant
Hill, Pittsburg, and Oakland. AC Transit’s San
Pablo Rapid is a local example of an effective
marketing campaign that accompanied a dramatic improvement of a transit service and other
changes on the route. By effectively rolling
out a new “product” – both the new San Pablo
Rapid service and the “Rapid” brand – with
a comprehensive marketing campaign, AC
Transit was much more effective at creating
awareness, understanding, and “buzz” for its
new service.
Arlington County’s “Pike Ride” service advertises itself
with detailed information at every stop.
Downtown Shuttle
• Improve information available at Free Ride
stops – Minimally, each stop on the Free Ride
route should have improved information about
what the Free Ride is and what it can do for
someone walking by. Every stop should display
all the information that a new rider would
need to use the service, and to emphasize that
it is free. Besides helping to attract new riders,
this would help existing riders as well: Most
riders responded that the best way to get most
information to them was via notices at County
Connection facilities, with 44% saying notices
in the buses are best, and 31% preferring information at bus stops. The following table
provides a planning level estimate of what it
may cost to provide improved information
at each stop (samples pictured below). Fig-
ure 2-22 estimates costs for improving stop
information.
Page 2-36
Potential Next Steps
• Select preferred routing for Free Ride. The
City and County Connection should work with
key downtown stakeholders to balance the need
for a fast, direct and reliable service with the
need to serve various downtown destinations.
This study recommends running in both directions on Locust -- the fastest and most reliable
route in the heart of the downtown – with a
big loop that serves all of the key retail and
entertainment destinations at the southern end
of downtown. Once a route is agreed upon, the
City would make a formal request to County
Connection’s Board Operations and Scheduling
Committee. County Connections would then
verify travel time and schedule assumptions
and stop locations. Following a formal public
hearing process, the recommended change
would be brought back to the committee for
adoption. Physical bus stop change and updated marketing materials would then need to
be completed.
• Improved bus stops. Signage, bench, information and landscape improvements to bus stops
can be made incrementally over time.
• Kaiser extension. Kaiser Permanente operates
its own shuttle to the BART station. While the
Free Ride stops just a five minute walk from
Kaiser, the City and Kaiser should consider
partnering with each other to extend the Free
Ride to Kaiser’s front door. The route would
run from South Main to Newell, then north on
California to Botelho and South Locust.
• Rossmoor Extension. Since the Free Ride has
proven to be a cost effective tool for reducing
parking demand and congestion downtown, the
City and County Connection could consider
expanding this model to other services. Streamlining County Connection’s Route 101 might
offer one possibility, connecting Rossmoor to
Kaiser, Locust Street, the BART station, John
Muir Hospital and Heather Farms Park in one
simple line. Such an extension would require
significant additional study.

WALNUT CREEK dwntwn pking FINAL COV.indd

Transcription

Similar documents

Palm Springs, CA - KPCR Flyer 2016

Downtown and Shuttle Map

Come join us for a fun ride on April 7th, 2006 from 10:00

Tierra Bella Bicycle Tour

just steps away - Arts District Hyattsville

PTC15 True Training Ride 6-13-15

Silverliner V

The Hearth Times - The Hearth On James

Park at Fair Grounds and take the shuttle to VooDoo Fest!

Live Lakini`s Juice