# Presentation: 705598

## Colonial NHP ATS Survey

**Colonial NHP ATS Survey**

***Summary of Results***

***presented to*****TRB 2004 Annual Meeting**
***presented by*****Don Vary, Cambridge Systematics, Inc.****Yoram Shiftan, Technion **
**Dorothy Geyer, Colonial National Historical Park**
**January 12, 2004**

## Regional Context

## Regional Context

## Study Background

**Section 3039 of TEA-21 (1999-2001) – An Assessment of Transit Potential at Federal Lands Administered by U.S. Department of the Interior Agencies**
**National Park Service **
**U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service**
**Bureau of Land Management **
**Principal Tasks**
**Establish level of need for ****ATS in Federal lands**
**Examine technologies and financing opportunities**

## Federal Lands Site IssuesWhat Generates ATS Need?

**Transportation requirements**
**Surface**
**Water**
**Environmental/natural resource preservation**
**Cultural/historical resource preservation**
**Economic/community development**
**Recreation opportunities for both visitors and local residents**

## Federal Lands Transit StudyStudy Findings

**117 of 169 National Park Service sites reported ****some level of transit need**
**National need for first 10 years estimated at $678 million**

## Colonial NHP Looks at ATS Because... 

**Ties together new visitor center with other Park elements**
**Provides opportunities for interpretive services**
**Provides linkages with neighboring attractions**
**Helps to meet transportation demands of Jamestown 2007**

## Study Motivation

**Follow-up to Phase I Jamestown ATS Report**
**What’s demand for transit use**
**What’s appropriate service level**
**Wanted screening before pilot program initiated**
**Objective is to evaluate the potential ridership of new services **
**Yorktown-CW-Jamestown Shuttle**
**Jamestown/Yorktown Loop Road**
**Jamestown Island/Settlement Connector**

## Parkway Shuttle

## Loop Shuttle

## Jamestown Connector

## Methodology

**Stated preference survey**
**Logit choice model**
**Model application**
**Scenario development**
**Scenario testing**

## Survey

**Survey Development **
**OMB approval **
**Three waves – 2000 surveys**
**Survey Design **
**3-part mail back survey using Colonial Williamsburg visitor database**
**Evaluate time, cost**
**Survey Response**
**330 valid returns**
**18.5% response rate**

## Jamestown ATS Survey Design

|  | Option 1 | Option 2 | Option 3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  | Drive the Yorktown Battlefield and Village loop | Use the Yorktown Battlefield and Village loop tram | I wouldn’t use the loop road. |
| You have to pay | $1.00 access fee | $1.00 tram fare (free for children under 10) |  |
| You will see and/or hear | You drive at your own pace | Brochures describing the loop road are available on the tram
You can hear the sounds of wildlife through the open-air tram, but the vehicle is not climate controlled |  |
| How often do the trams run? | N/A | 20 minutes |  |
| Which option would you prefer?
(Choose only one.) |  |  |  |

## Jamestown ATS SurveyInitial Results

**Colonial NHP visitors drive to the park and use the Colonial Parkway**
**One-half to two-thirds of Colonial NHP visitors drive the loop roads **
**Most Colonial NHP visitors find their trips uncongested and the park easily accessible **

## Jamestown ATS SurveyInitial Results

**The length of the average stay in the Historic Triangle is 3.6 days  **
**Most Colonial NHP visits are relatively brief**
**Most travel parties are relatively small **
**More than 50 percent of survey experiments indicated a choice of transit**

## AnalysisParkway and Loop Shuttles

|  | Parkway Shuttle | Loop Trams | Jamestown Connector |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Strong Influence
 | Cost (-)
Auto drive time (-) | Cost (-)
Time (-)
Tape or live   interpretation (+) | Cost (-) |
| Moderate Influence | Large groups (-)
Yorktown visit (+)
Live interpretation (+)
End/start from home (-) | End/start from home (-) |  |
| Weak Influence | Length of visit (-)
Length of bus ride (-) |  | Wait (-) Drive time (-) |

## Model Structure

**Multinomial Logit**

## Model Results

| Variable | Parkway Shuttle | Loop | Connector |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Auto constant | 2.488       (4.2) | -0.185    (-0.7) | -0.983      (-2.5) |
| Auto pay | -0.177      (-5.7) | -0.208    (-2.6) | -0.20        (-3.3) |
| Auto drive time | -0.05313  (-2.4) | N/A | N/A |
| Auto wait time | -0.04107  (-1.5) | N/A | N/A |
| Bus fare | -0.22073  (-7.4) | -0.0615  (-0.9) | -0.3876    (-5.1) |
| Bus headway | -0.02436  (-1.3) | -0.0091  (-1.4) | -0.03378  (-0.4) |
| Person | 0.4589     (2.7) | 0.881     (5.0) | N/A |
| Tape | N/A | 0.826     (3.7) | N/A |
| Party size | -0.1267    (-2.8) | -0.138    (-3.2) | N/A |
| Start/End at home | -0.6029    (-3.4) | -0.397    (-2.5) | N/A |
| Model statistic | Parkway Shuttle | Loop | Connector |
| Number of observations | 825 | 822 | 810 |
| Likelihood with zero coefficients | -571.85 | -569.77 | -559.36 |
| Likelihood with constants only | -571.83 | -563.91 | -522.83 |
| Final value of likelihood | -503.64 | -534.00 | -495.96 |

## Model Results (continued)

**Value of IVT and OVT roughly equivalent**
**Implied value of in-vehicle time – $16.90**
**Out-of-vehicle time – $10.90**

## Model ApplicationParkway Shuttle

|  | Transit Share | Auto Fee | Auto Wait Time | Auto Time | Bus Fare | Live Inter. | Party Size | Day-Tripper | Bus Wait Time |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Base | 17% | $1 | 0 | 19 | $1 | Yes | 3.2 | No | 5 |
| Party Size | 16% | $1 | 0 | 19 | $1 | Yes | 4.0 | No | 5 |
|  | 20% | $1 | 0 | 19 | $1 | Yes | 2.0 | No | 5 |
| Interpret | 12% | $1 | 0 | 19 | $1 | No | 3.2 | No | 5 |
| Auto Fee | 20% | $2 | 0 | 19 | $1 | Yes | 3.2 | No | 5 |
|  | 23% | $3 | 0 | 19 | $1 | Yes | 3.2 | No | 5 |
| Transit Fare | 14% | $1 | 0 | 19 | $2 | Yes | 3.2 | No | 5 |
|  | 12% | $1 | 0 | 19 | $3 | Yes | 3.2 | No | 5 |
| All Local Visitors | 10% | $1 | 0 | 19 | $1 | Yes | 3.2 | Yes | 5 |
| Full Transit Support | 28% | $2 | 1 | 19 | $0 | Yes | 2.0 | No | 2 |

## Model ApplicationLoop Shuttle

|  | Transit Share | Auto Fee | Auto Wait Time | Bus Fare | Inter. | Party Size | Day-Tripper | Bus Wait Time |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Base | 43% | Free | 0 | Free | No | 3.2 | No | 5 |
| Party Size | 40% | Free | 0 | Free | No | 4.0 | No | 5 |
|  | 47% | Free | 0 | Free | No | 2.0 | No | 5 |
| Interpret | 63% | Free | 0 | Free | Yes | 3.2 | No | 5 |
| Auto Fee | 48% | $1 | 0 | Free | No | 3.2 | No | 5 |
| Transit Fare | 41% | Free | 0 | $1 | No | 3.2 | No | 5 |
| All Local Visitors | 38% | $1 | 0 | $1 | No | 3.2 | Yes | 5 |

## Conclusions

**Survey and model results show potential for successful service**
**Shuttle – 15-25%**
**Loop – 40-50%**
**Jamestown Connector >50%**
**Non-model factors important **
**Model issues**
**Low response rate **
**Potential bias **
**Parkway shuttle pilot starts this Spring**