Rider Perceptions of an On-Demand Microtransit Service in Salt Lake County, Utah

Abstract

On-demand microtransit services are frequently seen as an important tool in supporting first and last mile operations surrounding fixed route high frequency transit facilities, but questions remain surrounding who will use these novel services and for what purposes. In November 2019, the Utah Transit Authority launched an on-demand microtransit service in south Salt Lake County in partnership with a private mobility operator. This paper reports the results of an expressed preferences survey of 130 transit riders in the microtransit service area that was collected before and immediately after the service launched. There is not a clear relationship between current transit access mode and expressed willingness to use microtransit, although some responses from new riders indicate the novel service competes most directly with commercial transportation network company operations. The survey responses also reveal younger passengers express a more than expected willingness to use microtransit, middle-aged passengers a less than expected willingness, and older passengers neutral or no expressed opinion. The results suggest additional relationships between household size and transit use frequency, but further research is necessary. The effect of other user characteristics, including income and automobile availability, is less statistically clear and requires further research.

Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Framework for Determining Public Microtransit Service Zones

“…Our review of the feasibility and performance assessment studies revealed that these studies utilize different methods to define microtransit service zones and that there is no known systematic method for identifying service zones in the literature to the best of our knowledge. A TCRP Synthesis of Transit Practice report ( 7 ) and a more recent study by Macfarlane and Atchley ( 8 ) also highlighted this research gap.…”

“…Many of the feasibility studies we reviewed considered the service areas as given (typically determined by the agency, and starting as pilot programs) and conducted feasibility analysis on these areas using one or a combination of approaches. Examples are: Via Mobility, LLC ( 5 ), Macfarlane and Atchley ( 8 ), Kang and Hamidi ( 9 ), Via, VTrans ( 10 ), Mountain Line ( 11 ), and SRF Consulting Group ( 12 ). Many of these studies used various geographic information system (GIS) techniques for visualizing/mapping to provide spatial context to the analysis as well.…”

“…Similarly, Hall County Microtransit Feasibility Study ( 5 ), Southeast Vermont Transit (MOOver), and Springfield & Windsor Microtransit Study ( 13 ) were also conducted by Via using its software. Macfarlane and Atchley ( 8 ) reported the results of a microsimulation analysis conducted for the Utah Transit Authority using the open-source BEAM (the Behavior, Energy, Autonomy, and Mobility) simulation model developed by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, including on-demand microtransit services.…”

Estimating Benefits of Microtransit for Social Determinants of Health: A Social Return on Investment System Dynamics Model

“…Vehicle related cos ts = (Vehicle Purchased× (1 + Tax)× Price) + Cars × (Insurance + Maintenance + Registration) (9) In this case, it is assumed that the microtransit program purchases one vehicle per driver hired, unless there are spare vehicles available. Spare vehicles become available once a driver leaves the program.…”

“…Recognizing the pivotal role of transportation as a social determinant of health, several innovative solutions have been employed to effectively address these challenges. One such solution is the implementation of microtransit programs, which have shown promise in mitigating barriers related to SDOH [8][9][10]. As defined by the Federal Transit Administration, Microtransit is a technology-enabled, multi-passenger transportation service that operates on dynamically generated routes [11].…”