Guest Opinion: Champaign-Urbana Transit Employing Useful Technology
Contributed by Matt Heil
When it comes to planning and this blog, in particular, public transit is a hot topic. In case you were unaware, transit funding is extremely different between the two states of Illinois and Missouri. I’m originally from the St. Louis area but spent the past few years living in Champaign, IL, going to school at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC). Even though the Champaign-Urbana region (pop.120,000) is significantly smaller than St. Louis, their public transit agency, Champaign-Urbana Mass Transit District (MTD), is much more organized, runs more frequently and has embraced many new technologies in public transit.
Some of their technologies include: GPS tracking, hybrid buses, a multi-modal transportation hub and elongated buses.
Their GPS tracking was extremely useful and, during my stint in Champaign, I used this feature almost daily but at least two-three times a week. Every bus is equipped with GPS receivers that forward real-time arrival and departure information to MTD’s website, which is accessible via-smartphone; their texting service, which every bus stop has a specific code you can text to MTD; and also high volume bus stops, which are all equipped with LED signs that post the arrival times of the next buses.
Hybrid buses were added within the last two years and incorporating hybrid technology into urban buses make quite a bit of sense. Buses mostly operate at lower speeds and make frequent stops, which are both, important for the regeneration of battery power.
Another great part of Champaign’s transit system was that the system integrated multiple hubs within the network. Most of these hubs were in and around the University of Illinois’ campus but two other important ones included Downtown Urbana and the largest one in Downtown Champaign. Illinois Terminal, located at the southeast portion of Champaign’s downtown, was built in 1999. At the time, it was a state of the art facility and continues that legacy today. Like the new Gateway Multimodal Transportation Center (Amtrak and Greyhound Station), finished in 2008; Illinois Terminal integrates intercity bus service (Greyhound and MegaBus), intracity bus (MTD=Metro) and Amtrak, all into one location and was designed as a multi-modal (intermodal) transportation hub.
As mentioned earlier, Champaign is significantly smaller than St. Louis yet their public transit works extremely better than St. Louis’. This is because Champaign’s main employer (13,000employees) and destination is the University. Additionally, the population living within a 2-mile radius of campus is quite dense. Both density and a central employment/destination hub are very crucial for maximizing public transit’s efficiency. MTD has much higher ridership on some of their routes, compared to St. Louis. To cope with higher ridership, some of the busiest routes use elongated or extended buses, which aren’t even seen on St. Louis’ busiest line: the #70 Grand Bus.
Champaign might be a sleepy college town and surrounded by cornfields but, when it comes to their public transit, Champaign can compete with some of the largest cities in the country. Some have even referred to the Champaign-Urbana area as a micro-urban area. Compared to St. Louis, Champaign built their multi-modal transportation hub almost an entire decade before St. Louis. So, we should probably expect Metro to incorporate other technologies like, extended buses and GPS tracking within the next decade too, but still lagging behind areas with less than 10% of our regional population.
-Â Matt Heil
Matt Heil is a native of Edwardsville, IL and current resident of St. Louis. He holds a Bachelor of Arts in Urban and Regional Planning from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC).
Matt – great article! A couple of points. One the “elongated” buses are probably articulated buses. Other properties use them, along with double-decker buses, to provide additional capacity on routes that demand them. (Other properties also use longer trains on their rail systems than Metro does.) Why Metro doesn’t is a good question. Part of this is structural – the longer vehicles require longer bus stops and bigger service bays – but part of it may also be cultural/economic – inceased capacity also equates to less manpower. The unions here may just be more successful in protecting their operators’ jobs. Or, the ridership levels may simply be such that the extra 20 seats may simply not be needed. Adding another bus at peak times may be a better / easier / quicker solution, here.
And two, you don’t say what else the university does to shift demand to transit. Do they restrict on-campus parking? Do they subsidize transit passes for students, faculty and/or staff? Champaign-Urbana sounds much like Boulder, Colorado, where there has been a conscious and ongoing effort, over decades, to make using the single-occupant vehicle much less convenient / more expensive, while investing in a robust and functional alternative transit infrastructure, including bike facilities and higher densities, in addition to more and better transit.
Matt – great article! A couple of points. One the “elongated” buses are probably articulated buses. Other properties use them, along with double-decker buses, to provide additional capacity on routes that demand them. (Other properties also use longer trains on their rail systems than Metro does.) Why Metro doesn’t is a good question. Part of this is structural – the longer vehicles require longer bus stops and bigger service bays – but part of it may also be cultural/economic – inceased capacity also equates to less manpower. The unions here may just be more successful in protecting their operators’ jobs. Or, the ridership levels may simply be such that the extra 20 seats may simply not be needed. Adding another bus at peak times may be a better / easier / quicker solution, here.
And two, you don’t say what else the university does to shift demand to transit. Do they restrict on-campus parking? Do they subsidize transit passes for students, faculty and/or staff? Champaign-Urbana sounds much like Boulder, Colorado, where there has been a conscious and ongoing effort, over decades, to make using the single-occupant vehicle much less convenient / more expensive, while investing in a robust and functional alternative transit infrastructure, including bike facilities and higher densities, in addition to more and better transit.
To answer your questions:
1. Yes, on campus parking is restricted, and rather expensive. Having a car while on campus is almost impossible unless you can afford expensive private parking, rare and remote university owned lots, or are a professor.
2. All students pay $50 per semester to transit, and get a pass as a result.
The area around the university has done a pretty good job of remaining walkable and pleasant – through need (most students don’t have cars) and the fact that it makes sense – the amount of students who go to downtown Champaign or Urbana is minute compared to those who go out on campus. When I was there as a grad student, it was mostly professional students at the downtown bars and restaurants, with a rare few undergrads. Most of them spent the majority of their time going out on campus.
For a given ridership, increases vehicle capacity means lower vehicle frequency. No route in St Louis is busy enough that overcrowding is a bigger issue than wait time. Once the 70 Grand starts running once every 5 minutes, it will be time to think about articulated buses.
Actually, it’s the other way around – for a given vehicle capacity, decreased ridership means lower vehicle frequency. Larger vehicles are inherently more efficient to operate IF (and that’s a big IF) they’re full. The hourly cost (in pay and benefits) of the operator remains relatively constant, whether they’re moving eight passengers an hour or eighty, while energy and capital costs more-closely mirror the number of passengers being carried. That’s why there will always be parts of any route when the vehicle will be nearly empty. So, once “the 70 Grand starts running once every 5 minutes, it will” be able to attract more riders simply because it’s more convenient and competetive with the SOV. The larger discussion is whether to add more service on a proven, busy route or to add or extend service in “underserved” areas, in hopes of atracting more riders to public transit?
And if the #70 ran every 5 minutes a standard size bus would work until ridership increased.
Great article Matt, and thanks for the guest post Steve. I can address some of the things Matt brings up. We are right now implementing a GPS system for all vehicles, though the project won’t be finished for over a year at least (I’m not aware of any finishing timeline yet) with capabilities for real-time data. Should be a great improvement to trip planning. I’m personally very much looking forward to it.
Hybrids: we have looked at them, but thus far have decided they aren’t a strong investment for St. Louis at this time. The reasons are our region’s service footprint and preventative maintenance. Our region is large and not as dense, meaning that buses often drive for longer periods without stopping (thus recharging the batteries of a hybrid). Less density has several negative implications for public transit service, including trying to balance service area coverage with frequency and conveniences. It will be an ongoing battle in St. Louis while we continue to build out and less up. At this time, our bus program has found that very rigid preventative maintenance program, buses would get nearly as good of gas mileage as hybrids, and last up to 200,000 miles longer. These measures were taken, of course, because we have to conserve resources, but it’s become a national model.
That said, I appreciate all the conversation about passenger amenities such as countdown clocks, transit hubs, real-time arrival, text-based alerts, etc. that help make transit that much more convenient. It’s important that leadership at Metro hear what passengers are asking about and have seen in other cities.
Great article Matt, and thanks for the guest post Steve. I can address some of the things Matt brings up. We are right now implementing a GPS system for all vehicles, though the project won’t be finished for over a year at least (I’m not aware of any finishing timeline yet) with capabilities for real-time data. Should be a great improvement to trip planning. I’m personally very much looking forward to it.
Hybrids: we have looked at them, but thus far have decided they aren’t a strong investment for St. Louis at this time. The reasons are our region’s service footprint and preventative maintenance. Our region is large and not as dense, meaning that buses often drive for longer periods without stopping (thus recharging the batteries of a hybrid). Less density has several negative implications for public transit service, including trying to balance service area coverage with frequency and conveniences. It will be an ongoing battle in St. Louis while we continue to build out and less up. At this time, our bus program has found that very rigid preventative maintenance program, buses would get nearly as good of gas mileage as hybrids, and last up to 200,000 miles longer. These measures were taken, of course, because we have to conserve resources, but it’s become a national model.
That said, I appreciate all the conversation about passenger amenities such as countdown clocks, transit hubs, real-time arrival, text-based alerts, etc. that help make transit that much more convenient. It’s important that leadership at Metro hear what passengers are asking about and have seen in other cities.
Court –
Why does it take a year to implement this process? Funding? Time to do it? On a set schedule along with maintenance? I’m curious, as it seems this is a high demand feature (though that may be confirmation bias on my part), why it is not on a faster track?
I find with most projects it’s easy to set a nebulous future finish date and hold no one accountable to it. It’s an extremely poor practice in project management.
The project managers may have a more hard set date; I’m just not privy to that. But the reason is that the system is not simply GPS; it’s an electronic system that helps track buses and also other maintenance issues, data, etc. The newer buses all have it, but we have to retrofit the older ones, and there is a lot of back end infrastructure.
Great post. You should mention, however, that ALL students at UIUC pay a $50/semester fee to subsidize mass transit in the CU area.Â
http://www.registrar.illinois.edu/financial/ugrad_fees.htmlTransportation Fee:Â A fee that supports a campus and community transportation plan for students.At 41,949 students, that’s $4 million a year for mass transit off the top. Of course, the droves of students who can’t afford cars or the prohibitive parking fees help too.Â
Still, great analysis and I fully agree with your conclusion – given Metro’s considerably larger budget and reach, they should be able to replicate this. I do have my doubts about the nimbleness of Metro as it frequently measures project implementations in years instead of weeks or month.Â
Jason
UIUC MBA ’05
Great post. You should mention, however, that ALL students at UIUC pay a $50/semester fee to subsidize mass transit in the CU area.
http://www.registrar.illinois.edu/financial/ugrad_fees.htmlTransportation Fee: A fee that supports a campus and community transportation plan for students.At 41,949 students, that’s $4 million a year for mass transit off the top. Of course, the droves of students who can’t afford cars or the prohibitive parking fees help too.
Still, great analysis and I fully agree with your conclusion – given Metro’s considerably larger budget and reach, they should be able to replicate this. I do have my doubts about the nimbleness of Metro as it frequently measures project implementations in years instead of weeks or month.
Jason
UIUC MBA ’05
To answer your questions:
1. Yes, on campus parking is restricted, and rather expensive. Having a car while on campus is almost impossible unless you can afford expensive private parking, rare and remote university owned lots, or are a professor.
2. All students pay $50 per semester to transit, and get a pass as a result.
The area around the university has done a pretty good job of remaining walkable and pleasant – through need (most students don’t have cars) and the fact that it makes sense – the amount of students who go to downtown Champaign or Urbana is minute compared to those who go out on campus. When I was there as a grad student, it was mostly professional students at the downtown bars and restaurants, with a rare few undergrads. Most of them spent the majority of their time going out on campus.Â
Court –
Why does it take a year to implement this process? Funding? Time to do it? On a set schedule along with maintenance? I’m curious, as it seems this is a high demand feature (though that may be confirmation bias on my part), why it is not on a faster track?
I find with most projects it’s easy to set a nebulous future finish date and hold no one accountable to it. It’s an extremely poor practice in project management.
Court –
Why does it take a year to implement this process? Funding? Time to do it? On a set schedule along with maintenance? I’m curious, as it seems this is a high demand feature (though that may be confirmation bias on my part), why it is not on a faster track?
I find with most projects it’s easy to set a nebulous future finish date and hold no one accountable to it. It’s an extremely poor practice in project management.
The project managers may have a more hard set date; I’m just not privy to that. But the reason is that the system is not simply GPS; it’s an electronic system that helps track buses and also other maintenance issues, data, etc. The newer buses all have it, but we have to retrofit the older ones, and there is a lot of back end infrastructure.
Go Illini and the DURP program!! I am an alum of the program and I now live in Sacramento. I miss the frequency and tech-geek friendliness of CUMTD’s transit system. Certainly one of the best in the country. Though I should tout my local Yolo County Transit District–they are one of the best for providing both urban and rural service.
Go Illini and the DURP program!! I am an alum of the program and I now live in Sacramento. I miss the frequency and tech-geek friendliness of CUMTD’s transit system. Certainly one of the best in the country. Though I should tout my local Yolo County Transit District–they are one of the best for providing both urban and rural service.
For a given ridership, increases vehicle capacity means lower vehicle frequency. No route in St Louis is busy enough that overcrowding is a bigger issue than wait time. Once the 70 Grand starts running once every 5 minutes, it will be time to think about articulated buses.
Actually, it’s the other way around – for a given vehicle capacity, decreased ridership means lower vehicle frequency. Larger vehicles are inherently more efficient to operate IF (and that’s a big IF) they’re full. The hourly cost (in pay and benefits) of the operator remains relatively constant, whether they’re moving eight passengers an hour or eighty, while energy and capital costs more-closely mirror the number of passengers being carried. That’s why there will always be parts of any route when the vehicle will be nearly empty. So, once “the 70 Grand starts running once every 5 minutes, it will” be able to attract more riders simply because it’s more convenient and competetive with the SOV. The larger discussion is whether to add more service on a proven, busy route or to add or extend service in “underserved” areas, in hopes of atracting more riders to public transit?
And if the #70 ran every 5 minutes a standard size bus would work until ridership increased.