Posts about Chicago

Transit

SmarTrip's delayed, but at least we're not San Francisco

by David Alpert   •   November 13, 2009 11:17 am

Despite the issues with new SmartBenefits changes and delays in new features, Metro is well ahead of many other systems of comparable size in number of smart cards and integration across jurisdictions.

Metro's SmarTrip system is the oldest and largest of the major transit agencies' smart card systems. SmarTrip launched in 1999 and now has 1.8 million cards "active in the system," with 876,500 smart card transactions each day, according to data in a recent report by New York's Permanant Citizens' Advisory Committee to the MTA (PCAC). By comparison, the next largest, Chicago's CTA, has 474,000 cards and 260,000 transactions per day on their system that rolled out from 2002 to 2004. New York, the largest transit system, is still in the pilot phase. Update: New York's MetroCards do work pretty well despite not being proximity cards.

Metro also integrates a large number of agencies, 9, with plans to expand to 16. The San Francisco Bay Area's MTC system, TransLink, now links 3 but is expected to grow to 26. But if we thought Metro was slow, at least we're not the Bay Area: original plans called for all of those transit agencies to be part of TransLink by 2001, but there are still only 3: San Francisco's streetcar and bus system Muni, Golden Gate Buses and Ferries, and Alameda County's AC Transit. BART refused to join for years because of disputes over who would earn interest on the money paid in fares but not yet consumed.

Bicycling

Chicago trains officers on cycling laws

by David Alpert   •   September 12, 2009 11:00 am

The Chicago police created a great video describing the rights and responsibilities of bicyclists. In many cities, officers not familiar with the laws often incorrectly ticket bicyclists when drivers turn across their path unsafely, hit them with doors, or pass too close. After crashes, police reports too often unfairly blame the cyclist, or officers resist taking a police report from a cyclist.

A Chicago PD officer narrates this video, and interviews fellow officers who bicycle about the many hazards they encounter. They emphasize that "bikes belong on the road," and say, ""The public counts on us to keep the roads safe, and to protect those who are at the greatest risk."

One of my favorite parts is when the narrating officer says, "Failure to [check for bikes before opening a door] can cause a dangerous crash, what bicyclists call 'dooring,' and we call 'Violation MCC 9-80-035 Open Door In Traffic.'" Watch out for those MCC 9-80-035s out there, folks.

Transit

Google paid for NYC data (or not); Chicago removed indemnification

by Michael Perkins   •   August 20, 2009 10:39 am

New York's MTA, a much larger agency than WMATA, apparently was able to negotiate some kind of payment from Google in exchange for providing its transit data for Google Transit. Update: Google officially denied that this is true.

Chicago, whose system is closer to Metro's size, did not or could not, but they did get rid of the indemnification requirement. This information could help us understand what Metro might be able to get out of a deal with Google.

As we've discussed previously, Metro hasn't yet come to an agreement with Google to include its services in the Google Transit trip planners. Both Google and Metro have proposed licensing agreements, and up to now neither has agreed to the others' terms.

Using New York and Illinois freedom of information laws, I obtained copies of the New York MTA and Chicago CTA (PDFs) agreements with Google. Since MTA's ridership is the highest in the US, it probably represents an upper bound in what Google is willing to do for an agency. If the negotiating positions were based only on ridership, then Metro's position is more likely to be similar to CTA. Let's look at some of the differences.

The two biggest differences between the MTA agreement and Google's standard one are (1) the lack of an indemnity clause and (2) a redacted paragraph that implies that Google is paying MTA for the use of their data. CTA's agreement is almost completely the same as the Google standard agreement, except, like MTA, there is no indemnity clause.

Indemnity: According to a Metro board contact, Metro will find it difficult to impossible to indemnify Google against potential lawsuits. Google's agreeing to drop the indemnification for New York and Chicago is significant to Metro's negotiations. MTA is still liable for problems with the data, such as viruses or worms, or with ownership of trademarks, but there is no blanket indemnity as in the standard agreement. With CTA's contract, the "LIABILITY" paragraph is redacted, but there is no analagous "INDEMNITY" paragraph. It's not clear what CTA was able to negotiate, but they probably aren't indemnifying Google against everything.

License Fee: The fact that this paragraph was added to the MTA agreement and then redacted to protect Google's competitive position implies that MTA is paying Google some sort of fixed-price or percentage fee. (A per-use fee would more likely have been called a "royalty".) Someone on the Transit-Developers listserv suggested MTA was attempting to collect 10% of potential revenues as part of their license agreement. The MTA asked StationStops for a percentage, plus $5,000. Google could have agreed to a percentage, though unlike iPhone application sales, calculating Google's revenue on ads on Google Maps is more complex, and the redacted paragraph is very short. Or, perhaps they are only paying a flat rate. Update: Google insists they are not paying MTA anything.

Certainly MTA's position as the largest transit agency in the country, and one of the largest in the world, helped MTA's bargaining position. Metro's isn't nearly as big, at about 1/8th the ridership of MTA, but it's in the top five in the country and serves more than a million customers per day. It's also a popular tourist destination. These factors should help Metro's bargaining position. On the other hand, CTA operates a transit system just as large or larger than Metro. They either did not try or was unable to negotiate a license fee.

MTA also negotiated some clarifications about how the data would be used, a specific warranty that GTFS would continue to be an open standard, a change of venue to New York courts, and some other changes to make the agreement less one-sided. CTA changed almost nothing about the agreement except adding a portion about Illinois' Freedom of Information laws.

I have to admit where I was wrong. I was convinced that MTA would not have been able to negotiate a license fee. Maybe Metro will also be big enough to negotiate one. On the other hand, if CTA couldn't, then maybe it's not possible for Metro.

I think it is interesting and significant that both MTA and CTA's agreements were slight alterations of the Google agreement as opposed to an agreement drafted by MTA or CTA. In my opinion, that makes it less likely that Metro would be able to present their own agreement, even if it's modified from the current terms.

I have additional freedom of information requests working their way through Los Angeles, Boston and San Francisco's agencies.

Government

Transit mashups & me on Kojo tomorrow

by David Alpert   •   March 23, 2009 1:53 pm

Tomorrow at noon, I'll be on the Kojo Nnamdi show's "Tech Tuesday" to talk about transit mashups like Google Transit and other innovative ways government agencies are improving public access to information by letting private companies and individual "garage developers" innovate in ways we couldn't imagine in advance.

Michael Perkins has collected some great examples, like TransitAlarm, an Android application which uses Chicago real-time bus feeds to automatically alert you when your bus is about to arrive. I've been told that some bars in Portland even have real-time displays on their walls. Walk Score has a great "transit time map" showing the places you can reach in 15, 30, and 45 minutes by transit in the San Francisco Bay Area and Seattle.

These mashups don't only apply to transit. DC's Apps for Democracy contest last year challenged developers to build tools out of numerous DC data feeds, with information like crime statistics, repaving requests, or the locations of fire stations. Walk Score itself works because of open access to business listings and Google Maps.

How about social media? DDOT is on Twitter, as is DCRA and Metrorail service disruptions. Metro has a Facebook page.

I should be the first segment, starting just after noon. I'd like to go on the air armed with the best examples. What other mashups have you seen using government or public agency data?

Government

Breakfast links: Get out of committee

by Joey Katzen   •   March 13, 2009 7:26 am

Complete Streets in Congress: Rep. Doris Matsui (D-CA) has reintroduced legislation requiring state DOTs to follow Complete Streets principles when using federal dollars for construction. Transportation for America has a form letter you can fill out to contact "your representative and senators, asking them to support the Complete Streets Act of 2009 by becoming a co-sponsor today." A similar bill was introduced in 2008, but it appears to have never made it out of committee.

DC Potholepalooza 2009: Yes, that's the official name for Fenty's "month-long campaign to encourage residents and commuters to phone in, go online, twitter or email requests for pothole repairs." (Tip: Paul S.)

Cook wins by a hair: Republican John Cook has won the Braddock district seat in the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors by "89 votes out of more than 13,000 cast," defeating Democratic challenger Ilryong Moon. Cook's platform generally reflects the pattern of the residents of the civic association of which he was a director, calling for the elimination of group houses, continued construction of HOT lanes, and additional BRT routes. (Post)

Purple Line trash talk: Did "Save the Trail" supporters actually trash the trail during their anti-Purple Line rally last weekend? (Finish the Trail) ... One Columbia Country Club rail opponent claims that no blue-collar people work in Bethesda ... Post readers chime in on the Purple Line debate.

Stimulus notables: President Obama has signed into law the stimulus legislation, awarding hundreds of millions of dollars to the region. Some funding includes money for the Silver Line, the Frederick Douglas Bridge, new Metro rail cars, MARC improvements, along with a bevy of other beneficiaries like the DC Public Schools. Somewhat controversially, the DC voucher program lost out. Also, PG County laments that it's not succeeding in getting as many stimulus dollars from the state, with one delegate complaining that "it's very evident and clear that this is about politics." Apparently PG's highest priorities aren't shovel-ready. (Post, Gazette)

Clang, clang, Columbia Pike: The Columbia Pike streetcar project, though not advanced enough for stimulus funds, is set to receive $3 million of local funds for preliminary design and environmental planning. In a perfect world, construction could start in 2011. (Sun Gazette) The Arlington board will vote Saturday, and anti-streetcar forces are likely to turn out to try to oppose the project.

Metro skip-stop: Though WMATA runs no standard skip-stop service as suggested by Steve Offutt, they do utilize the principle occasionally to work out scheduling kinks. (DCist)

Chicago icon to change names: The Sears Tower, the tallest building in the western hemisphere, which hasn't housed an employee of its eponymous previous user since 1992, will be changing its name to the Willis Tower. Apparently we've left the era where iconic skyscrapers named for their corporate benefactors keep their names long after the tenants have changed. (Tip: Jaime)

And: Business leaders unite in support of new "Science [Edge] City" between Gaithersburg and Rockville (Gazette)... Statistics on how urban-core neighborhoods have seen a revival in construction, nationally, in the past few years (USA Today)... Germantown goes affordable, if it wasn't quite there yet already (DCmud).

Public Spaces

Breakfast links: The morning after (the stimulus vote)

by David Alpert   •   January 29, 2009 9:15 am

Counting our chickens: State and local officials have started discussing how to spend the stimulus money. Maryland's John Porcari says they'll prioritize repairs over new projects, which is the right choice; VDOT head Pierce Homer wants to pay for repairs and some of the delayed projects, meaning potentially more freeway widenings or new freeways. Most likely, according to COG transportation planner Ronald Kirby, the Purple Line won't get any of this money. Update: Or maybe it will. Nobody really knows yet.

Screw nature: $200 million to repair the Mall's grass and keep the Jefferson Memorial from sinking underwater got cut from the stimulus. MoCo is cutting port-a-potties from Rock Creek Park in winter. And auto manufacturers have confirmed they plan to use public bailout money to keep suing the public for imposing higher clean air standards (via Ryan Avent).

Wires have their high points: That Bombardier wireless streetcar technology looks pretty cool but, writes Manifest Density, it'll probably be quite energy inefficient, likely wasting 20% of the power it consumes.

Thanks for reading, Examiner: It looks like the Examiner noticed GGW's weekend links about the emergency DMV rule for federal judges. Reporter Bill Myers called the DMV, who said "the emergency order sprang from 'a situation' recently," but wouldn't elaborate.

Cut transit and people stop riding transit: Maryland Politics Watch's Marc Korman reluctantly stopped riding MARC after recent service cuts (and falling gas prices). No word yet on whether he's changing his name to I-95 Korman.

Lose the LOS: Streetsblog SF explains how Level Of Service (LOS) warps traffic engineers' thinking and blocked important improvements in San Francisco. city and state planners are trying to dethrone LOS as the primary driver of traffic decisions.

Midwest vs. DC smackdown: President Obama mocks the Washington region for its inability to handle some snow; City Desk's Andrew Beaujon says he'll take this over Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan anytime.

Stop hatin' on K Street: Yglesias points out, "'K Street' is a synedoche for the influence peddling business, but it's also an actual street," which is definitely not full of lobbyists over in the Mount Vernon Triangle. "You wouldn't want to actually crack down on K Street, leaving out all the bad people on other streets but hitting the new Busboys & Poets coffee shop."

And: A new Colesville Wendy's will site the building close to the sidewalk, but still will face a mostly blank wall to the street; Imagine, DC almost loses his wheels after meeting GGW contributors.

Transit

How do you evaluate Metrobus performance?

by Michael Perkins   •   December 10, 2008 8:46 am

Previously, I looked at WMATA's Metrobus performance data for 2007. Metro highlights the "worst performing" lines based on ridership and financial performance data. The criteria for good performance are:

• More than 300 passengers per day
• More than 10 passengers per trip
• More than 1.3 passengers per revenue mile
• High cost recovery ratio (>12.4%)
• Low subsidy per passenger (<$4.80)

In September, a Washington Post article by Lena Sun discussed WMATA's new ability to track bus on-time performance, and reported that WMATA has an overall system on-time performance of 75%. This figure is based on showing up at the published time points between 2 minutes early and 7 minutes late. Almost immediately after the article, I requested the on-time performance figure for each bus line in the system.

Based on the information reported (MS Excel file), the worst performing routes in terms of WMATA's ridership and financial criteria are better than average for on-time performance, probably because the routes operate in lower-density areas and don't have to slow down as often or as long to board or alight (drop off) passengers. On the other hand, WMATA's best performing routes have lower than average on-time performance, probably for the opposite reason: high traffic and congestion as well as ridership-driven delays due to boarding and alighting.

This brings up an interesting idea: How do you evaluate transit system performance? From the look of the WMATA productivity report, the only performance data highlighted is financial and ridership based. For a board that's is concerned with trying to ensure the region gets a reasonable bang for its subsidy buck, that makes sense. But for the ridership, is it really the best measurement of system performance?

Compare this to a transit system that is a leader in reporting performance data to its ridership: the Chicago Transit Authority. When CTA publishes its "dashboard"-style performance data for the system, they track six categories of system performance:

• What's the ridership?
• Is it on time?
• Is it efficient?
• Is it safe?
• Is it clean?
• Is it courteous?

Chicago publishes a monthly performance metric report, prominently linked from the home page. In the report, they state the performance goals and show the system performance for many months, highlighted in green when the goal was met, and in red when it was not. The report describes each item they measure, so you know what they're talking about. For example, one of the metrics is "% of bunched intervals, bus", which they define as "Number of weekday bus intervals (time between buses at a bus stop) that are 60 seconds or less divided by the total number of weekday bus intervals during the month." They have a goal of 2% or less, and it looks like they are not meeting it but with no strong trend up or down.

The Metrobus Performance Report appears to ask only one question: Does it carry a lot of passengers compared to how much we (WMATA) have to pay? That's a good question to ask for a system efficiency standpoint, but I think the riders of Metrobus deserve to have Chicago's five questions asked and reported too. I only have the Metrobus performance report and I do not know whether there are other reports out there that are as comprehensive as Chicago's. The Customer Service Operations and Safety Committee receives a monthly report on system on-time or reliability performance, and also a report on safety, but that report still does not delve more deeply into the on-time performance beyond WMATA's one top-line statistic. If there are better comprehensive reports, WMATA isn't presenting them to the board or posted for public consumption.

Here's the data. The first table is for the previously reported worst performing bus lines, and the second is for the best. The data covers the month of August 2008, which is from a different year than the 2007 Performance Report WMATA has released. I've been asking for the 2008 report for a couple of months through various channels and have not gotten a response.

There are a couple of bus lines missing from the reliability data because WMATA does not track on-time performance for them, and there are a couple of lines that are no longer operated so I can't make a direct comparison. Also, if you look at the Excel spreadsheet linked above, bus lines ending in "99" are employee shuttles not open to the public.

Parking

Breakfast links: Two sides of many coins

by David Alpert   •   October 15, 2008 7:59 am

Adams Morgan ANC commissioner arrested: Nancy Shia, representing northeastern Adams Morgan on ANC 1C, was arrested Sunday for taking pictures of a crime scene. Shia claims she was "just trying to document the scene," while police claim she was "impeding a police investigation" and opened the door of a police vehicle to get a picture of a juvenile suspect.

Petworth median parking compromise: The Petworth ANC, community and DDOT have reached a compromise about church parking on New Hampshire Avenue. DDOT wanted to replace a concrete median with a landscaped median, but a nearby church has been using it for parking on Sundays. Under the plan, the median will go in, but one of the travel lanes will become a parking lane on Sundays only.

Nobody's enforcing Capitol Hill meters: What good is having market-rate performance parking meters (which still aren't actually market rate, yet) when most of the cars parked at them haven't paid? (Infosnack)

Falls Church kinda-sorta-semi-urban-ish: A resident of Falls Church praises his "bucolic suburban village"'s transition "towards [a] quasi-urban place" by building some denser, mixed-use buildings on Route 7. Via Planetizen.

Ride-and-drive in Chicago: CTA is creating a unified fare card that's also an access card for I-GO car sharing services. This coincides with new shared cars that will be parked at CTA lots. (Apparently we have some Zipcars in WMATA lots too).