AASHTO GIS-T GIS Network Analysis for Finding the Potential Metro Rail Ridership by Access Modes in Los Angeles County

Transcription

1 AASHTO GIS-T 2010 GIS Network Analysis for Finding the Potential Metro Rail Ridership by Access Modes in Los Angeles County Bin Mo (Owen) Graduate Program Department of Geography and Urban Analysis California State University Los Angeles Submitted on 12/11/2009

2 Table of Contents Section Page Introduction...1 Literature Review....1 Metro Rail Ridership... 1 Metro Rail Access... 3 Mode Choice of System Access... 4 Walking... 4 Bus Riding Driving Methodology...7 Actual Ridership and Potential Ridership... 7 GIS and Spatial Analysis.. 8 Network Analysis... 9 Walking Bus Riding Driving Findings...16 Potential Metro Rail Ridership by Walking Potential Metro Rail Ridership by Bus Riding Potential Metro Rail Ridership by Driving Five Minutes Alternative Access Modes Conclusion Acknowledgements...25 References...26 ii

3 List of Figures, Maps and Tables Page Table 1: Average Metro Rail Weekday Boarding in Map 1: 2009 Los Angeles Metro Rail System...3 Figure 1: Relationship of Access and Accessibility...4 Table 2: One-Way Trip Ridership by Access Modes...8 Figure 2: Implementation of Calculating the Area of the Polygon... 9 Figure 3: Flowchart of Walking Access Analysis Figure 4: Comparison between Buffer Analysis and Network Analysis...12 Figure 5: Flowchart of Bus Riding Access Analysis Step Figure 6: Flowchart of Bus Riding Access Analysis Step Table 3: Roads and CFCC Codes. 15 Figure 7: Flowchart of Driving Access Analysis Map 2: Potential Metro Rail Ridership by Walking Table 4: Potential Metro Rail Ridership by Walking Map 3: Potential Metro Rail Ridership by Bus Riding Table 5: Potential Metro Rail Ridership by Bus Riding Map 4: Potential Metro Rail Ridership by Driving Table 6: Potential Metro Rail Ridership by Driving Map 5: Potential Metro Rail Ridership within Five Minutes by Alternative Access Modes 23 Table 7: Potential Metro Rail Ridership within Five Minutes by Alternative Access Modes iii

4 INTRODUCTION An urban railway system may have different components. In the case of Los Angeles, Metro Rail system includes grade-separated heavy rail subway (Red and Purple lines), a gradeseparated light rail line (Green Line), and two light rail lines (Blue and Gold), with mixed private-right-of-way and street operation. While it might seem that rail stations have been built based on the philosophy if you build it, they will come, the truth is that providing quality rail service is not that simple. Station planning is an integral part of building any modern rail line. Metro Rail service, including stations, must be made as attractive as possible, becoming the critical link in the journey from home to work. While other riders make up part of the traffic, it is the commuter that generates most of the demand for urban mass transit. An access mode is the way in which riders travel to and from departing buses or trains. Mode choice analysis has considerable significance for Metro station access and for establishing urban transportation policies. This is due to the fact that walking, bus riding and driving are expected to have an important role in transportation planning for areas that depend heavily on the mode choices for station access. Access mode is important because it supports service improvement planning by increasing accessibility and potential ridership levels. By using the Geographic Information System (GIS), this paper presents spatial analysis of the potential ridership as Metro Rail users choose their modes accessing a station in Los Angeles County. LITERATURE REVIEW Metro Rail Ridership Ridership is a type of statistical forecasting used to study the average quantity of passengers carried at a certain time in the public transit system. The Los Angeles County Metro 1

5 Rail is the mass transit rail system, run by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA). Due in September 2009, there were five lines, totaling 73 miles of rail, sixty-two stations (Map 1), and the average weekday estimation of Metro Rail boarding in 2009 stood at 292,393 (LACMTA,2009) shown in Table 1. Month in 2009 Average Weekday Boarding January 273,930 February 273,123 March 293,537 April 293,079 May 297,381 June 303,712 July 305,988 August 301,144 September 289,647 Total 2,631,541 Average 292,393 Table 1: Average Metro Rail Weekday Boarding in 2009 Los Angeles County, California is the most populous county in the United States. The census of 2000 reported 9,519,338 people, 3,133,774 households, and 2,137,233 families residing in the county. The population density was 2,344 people per square mile. A Metro Rail On-Board Survey Report of 2004 presents some of the highlights of Metro Rail demographic profile: A large majority of weekday Metro Rail riders (78%) used more than one bus or train in the course of their one-way trip. Riders accessed their first bus or train mostly by walking (72%) and an even larger percentage (80%) walk to their final destinations. Most riders (69%) used Metro Rail five or more days per week. In 2004, 38% of riders used Metro Rail to travel to work, while 34% were headed home, with a total of 72% home-work travel. School, social or recreational events followed as popular destinations. 2

6 Map 1: 2009 Los Angeles County Metro Rail System Metro Rail Access Access and Accessibility are two interrelated issues to be addressed in providing Metro Rail services. Access is the opportunity for system use based upon proximity to the service and its cost; accessibility encompasses the operational functioning of a system for regional travel (Murray, Davis, Stimson and Ferreira, 1998). Access and accessibility are dependent upon each other if Metro Rail network is to be successful and well utilized (Figure 1). Access is important because it is the process associated with getting to and departing from the services of the Metro Rail system. Such access is typically perceived of in spatial terms as the physical proximity to the stations. Access greatly impacts the system and complements 3

7 service accessibility. Therefore, it must be made as attractive as possible to get riders from their homes at the start of a journey to the entry point of the system in a reasonable amount of time. Figure 1: Relationship of Access and Accessibility (Murray, Davis, Stimson and Ferreira, 1998) Mode Choice for System Access Access to Metro Rail system presents the opportunity to use the service. This paper specifically looks at how the location of Metro Rail stations serving the needs of the population. Ensuring suitable service coverage is a worthwhile objective, as the time taken to reach a station has a major impact on total travel time, which influences potential ridership. The choices of access to Metro Rail in Los Angeles County can be divided into three major modes: walking, bus riding and driving. Walking Walking is the first main mode of access to Metro Rail system, as 52% of riders walk to Metro Rail stations as their primary form of access. The 2006 Gold Line On-Board Survey reported 7,792 riders (44.6%) out of 17,484 total ridership, used transit including bus, Metrolink Rail, Amtrak Rail and private transit to access Metro Rail stations. Amongst the riders (7,792), 38.4% used Metro bus and 6.7% used general transit such like shuttles, municipal bus and 4

8 private transit to access Metro Rail. This accounted for 45% (3,506 riders) of the total transit access mode, resulting in 20% ((3,506/17,484)*%) of riders that access Metro Rail station by using bus services. When compared with the percentage of other access modes like driving and dropped off with the other three rail lines (Red, Blue, Green), the percentage figures were similar. As 72% of Metro Rail riders access their first train/bus in their one-way trip by walking, then this percentage also included those using bus services to access Metro Rail stations, which indicated that 52% (72%-20%) were identified as riders that walked to Metro station, while 20% was used for bus riding access. It is very important to know how far Metro Rail riders are willing to walk, so that the effective service area of a transit stop receives special attention from planners and developers. The distance that a person will walk, and the mode of transport that he or she will use, are strongly affected by the walking environment. There is a wide variety of walking distance guidelines of access to Metro Rail stations that are used in cities of the United States. In general, areas within 0.25 miles or within approximately five minutes walking time (three miles per hour) are considered well-served, and areas within 0.5 miles or with approximately ten minutes walking time are considered served (O Sullivan and Morrall 2001). Analyses of access modes to the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) stations and LRT stations in Edmonton, Canada, found that virtually nobody walked farther than one mile to reach a metro station (no more than a 20-minute walk at three miles per hour) (Stringham, 1982). O Sullivan and Stringhan also found that 50% of the population will not walk longer than five minutes, or further than 0.25 miles to a non-downtown rail station. Compared to the walking distance at Metro Rail stations and the walking distances at bus stops, O Sullivan and Morrall also indicate that people walk farther to reach a Metro Rail station than a bus stop. Beyond walking, riding the 5

9 bus and driving are the alternative access modes for people using Metro Rail services. Bus Riding The second main mode of access to Metro Rail system is through bus feeder service. An estimated 20% of the riders access Metro Rail stations by using bus service in Los Angeles County. The extensive bus system operated by LACMTA includes the Metro Local, Metro Rapid, and Metro Express services. These buses have an estimated 1.3 million people boarding on the weekdays. Including Dash, Foothill transit, Carson Shuttle and other municipal bus operators, Los Angeles County averages 1.7 million bus boarding per weekday, which account for approximately 5.9% of the 29 million trips originating in Los Angeles County daily (LACMTA, 2009). The same walking guidelines used for bus stops should not be used for Metro Rail stations. How far a person is willing to walk to a particular bus stop depends on the attractiveness of the service running through the stop. For example, a person will walk farther when the bus comes frequently or the service is reliable. The general guideline is that a person will walk about five minutes, or 0.25 miles to reach a bus stop (O Sullivan and Morrall, 2001). A study of the relationship between transit ridership and walking distance in the low-density Florida retirement areas found a strong relationship between walking distance and bus usage. The study found that among adults, transit use dropped by almost 70% as the walking distance increased from 0.12 miles to 0.25 miles (Fowler and Neilson, 1972). Many riders can use bus feeder service as an alternative mode to reach a Metro Rail station when the walking distance is over 0.25 miles, or the travel time is more than five minutes. Driving Many residents in Southern California consider the automobile a necessity because it 6

10 provides freedom of choice, time-savings and versatility. In Los Angeles County, a total of 26% riders used automobiles to access Metro Rail stations, including 16% utilizing the "Park and Ride", and 10% dropped off by another personal vehicle. Parking usage is an indicator of ridership for automobile access. Field research and study of available station parking is very important to analyze privately owned vehicle access to the system. Park and Rides is advantageous to commuters who can drive into a metropolitan area and park their vehicles in a car park, then make the transition to public transportation nearby. The suburbs and exurbs are home to many Park and Ride facilities which serve commuters who drive into the city for work every day. The idea of suburban "Park and Rides" is to make public transportation a viable alternative to mitigate traffic congestion approaching the innermost parts of the city. Structuring car parks on the outer edges reduces demand for more car parks within the city itself in which real estate comes at a premium. In addition, many railway stations feature an area in which cars can discharge and pick up passengers. These kiss and ride facilities allow drivers to stop and park temporarily, instead of using the longer-term parking associated with Park and Ride facilities. Most Park and Ride lots offered by Metro are free. Currently, there are twenty-six Metro Rail Stations offering free parking, with 11,046 spaces. Studies have shown that drivers dislike paying for parking, especially Southern California drivers (Brady, Gutierrez and Hoose 2004). Free parking facilities are more attractive in these economics hard times, and are expected to show the greatest and quickest increases in capacity. METHODOLOGY Actual Ridership and Potential Ridership 7

11 A one-way trip demonstrating ridership is compared with the Metro weekday boarding to determine prospects for future ridership growth by different access modes. The average weekday boardings of Metro Rail System Wide Ridership in 2009 were 292,393 (round-trip), therefore the one-way trip boarding was achieved as 146,197 (292,393/2), which was used for the analysis. To estimate rider access to Metro Rail stations by different modes, 52% was assigned for walking, 26% for driving (including 10% of riders dropped off by other vehicles without using public transit, 16% for Park and Ride ) and 20% for bus. The weekday boarding is shown in Table 2. Driving Mode Actual Ridership Potential Ridership Walking 52% 76,022? Bus 20% 29,239? Total 26% 38,011? Dropped Off 10% 14,620? Park and Ride 16% 23,391? Total 98% 143,272? Table 2: One-Way Trip Ridership by Access Modes GIS and Spatial Analysis Whether it is the assessment of broad scale regional policies or linking specific capacity, GIS technologies are proving to be a valuable transportation management and modeling platform (Nyerges, 1995). GIS has the ability to link spatial data with information about a particular feature on a map. The information is stored as attributes, or characteristics of the graphically represented feature. Description, analysis and prediction are the advanced applications that GIS technologies provide for representing how the world exists in a virtual reality. These advanced applications answer questions, test a hypothesis, and making predictions regarding how the world might appear. Measuring distance and area of a polygon are the two common measurements for determining the spatial relationship between two or more locations. Cartesian distance is the formula used to measure the distance between points, from point to polygon or zone boundary, 8

12 and between polygon centroids. For the two points of i = (x i, y i ) and j = (x j, y j ) in the Cartesian plane, the distance between i and j is defined as: d ij = 2 ( Xi Xj) + ( Yi Yj ) 2 For calculating the area of a polygon, the coordinates of the vertices (corners) of the polygon must first be known. Each vertex "i" will have to coordinate with respect to some coordinate system, like (X 1, Y 1 ), (X 2, Y 2 ),... (X n, Y n ). The last vertex "n" (X n, Y n ) is assumed to be the same as the first when the polygon is closed. With the information, here is a formula, which is modified from one developed by Dr. Ron Briggs of University Texas at Dallas and its implementation is shown in Figure 2. i= 1 (Xi+ 1 - X i )[(Yi + Yi 1)/2] n + Network Analysis i X Y X i+1 -X i (Y i + Y i+1 )/2 product sum Figure 2: Implementation of Calculating the Area of the Polygon Network Analysis is the technique used to calculate and determine the relationship and locations of network facilities in transportation, utility and communication systems. Routing, districting and allocations are the three advanced applications for Network analysis (Briggs, 9

13 2009). Routing finds the shortest path between two points such as locating hotel from airport; Districting expands the study area along a network until one or more criteria (time, distance or object count) is reached, then defines a districting plan for voting, schools, and fire services; Allocation assigns locations to the nearest center based on the travel time or distance through a network such as appointing customers to pizza delivery outlets. Network Analysis is used to analyze potential Metro Rail ridership of Los Angeles County, with various modes of access such as walking, bus riding and driving to Metro Rail stations, according to commute time. TIGER/Line shapefiles are the essential data layers used for GIS Network Analysis, which is spatial extracts from the Census Bureau s MAF/TIGER database, containing features such as roads, railroads, rivers, as well as legal and statistical geographic areas. Provided by ESRI (Environmental Systems Research Institute), the Census 2000 Tiger data layer of Los Angeles County (lacty00), Block Group (grp00), Metro Rail Station Points (Metro stations), Line Feature-Roads (lka) and Census Block Group Demographics (SF1) were used for this purpose. For the bus access mode, data layers of bus routes and bus stops are also used to perform the analysis, which were requested from LACMTA. Because block groups are irregularly shaped and with increased distance from downtown areas, the selection of block groups was performed to obtain a percent-inside method, which was splitting and merging the population inside of the polygon based on the geometry ratio to find the potential ridership. The street network data layer was the fundamental file required to build a network dataset. Road segment lengths and speed limits were used to estimate the travel time of different access modes in minutes for each road segment. The speed limit for each road segment was needed to compute the travel time in minutes. CFCC (Census Feature Class Codes) were used to assign different speeds to the road segments. After the network dataset was built, it was used to 10

14 create a series of polygons to represent the areas that people could reach Metro Rail stations within three travel time increments (5-, 10- and 15-minute). Computing the population within the 5-, 10- and 15-minute zones were the last step to analyze the potential Metro Rail ridership. Walking For walking access Metro Rail stations, Line Features- Roads was used to perform this analysis, because the file included almost all types of roads covered in the Los Angeles County where riders could access the stations. CFCC codes were used to assign three miles per hour for walking to the road segments. CFCC group A1-A18 (Interstate Highway) was skipped, as pedestrians are not allowed to walk on the freeway. The analysis procedure of walking access is shown in Figure 3. Figure 3: Flowchart of Walking Access Analysis 11

15 Buffer analysis can identify areas with surrounding geographical features, in which case a circular buffer is generated to create an area for the feature, which was only used for reference for this study. For example, a walking distance of 0.25 miles is considered the "well-served" distance served by Metro Rail System. Many studies selected buffer zone within 0.25 miles of the nearest transit stop or route for analysis. Due to buffer analysis involving an area within a specified distance (radius) around a feature, a potential problem is that the entire area within a 0.25 miles buffer could be inadvertently selected for analysis. Regions without connecting roads, areas that lack of conveniences or inadequate walking environments that access to public transportation stations could be incorrectly selected if this method was used. Figure 4 shows that the coverage area (blue) by Buffer Analysis is much larger than the potential ridership area (pink) using Network Analysis. The surrounding areas almost touch the neighbor buffer zone and some streets or regions without direct connecting to the station were also covered. Therefore the method of Network Analysis is used for finding the potential ridership by all access modes. Figure 4: Comparison between Buffer Analysis and Network Analysis Bus Riding For bus access to Metro Rail stations, two network datasets were needed to perform the analysis. The first network dataset used road network to define the potential travel zone boundary of riding the bus to the Metro Rail stations, then determine the number of bus stops directly 12

16 serving the rail stations. The speed of 11.7 miles per hour was assigned as the speed of travel along each bus route, according to information about average bus speeds in Los Angeles County (Zahnister, 2009). After defining three specific travel time zones (5,10,15 minutes) representing the bus stops that serve the rail stations, those travel zone polygons were exported to form new shapefiles for subsequent analysis. Taking a 5-minute travel zone for further analysis, using the "clip" tool, the bus stops were selected within that zone. Choosing "Select by Location" determined bus lines within 1,000 feet (loading zone guideline by AASHTO) of Metro Stations, and then obtained the corresponding bus stops contained within those bus lines. Bus stops that connected directly to the stations were selected for analysis, which excluded transfers between one or more bus lines that access the Metro Rail system, or those within complicated and long journey routes (Figure 5). The same steps were repeated for 10- and 15-minute travel zones, and the bus stops serving Metro Rail station within those different time intervals were defined. Figure 5: Flowchart of Bus Riding Access Analysis Step 1 13

17 The second network dataset was built to determine the population that can access bus stops that serve Metro Rail stations within 5-, 10- and 15-minute intervals within a 5-minute walk(figure 6). Because the analysis for each time interval was performed separately, the data from one covered area of potential ridership might overlap another coverage area. The tool "Erase" was used to separate the overlaid areas, in order to obtain potential ridership of bus transit passengers as they access the Metro Rail stations within the three time intervals. Figure 6: Flowchart of Bus Riding Access Analysis Step 2 Driving For calculating Driving Access to Metro Rail Stations, average driving speeds were used instead of posted speed limits, as drivers would not normally be able to maintain travel at maximum posted speeds under normal circumstances, especially during rush hour. Average 14

18 driving speeds were assigned based on CFCC codes and the General Motors chase car study by Chang and Herman (1978) and information of average speeds in heavy traffic for Los Angeles (Gordon, Peter and Richardson, 1994). Statistically, non-linear regression is a form of regression analysis in which observational data are modeled by a function that is a nonlinear combination of the model parameters and depends on one or more independent variables. The data are fitted by a method of successive approximations. After using non-linear trend analysis to calculate a regression percentage for each of the five groups of roads (if the known average speed of 65mph for primary highway (A1) was 43.1mph (66% of 65mph), the posted 55mph was estimated as 36.4mph (55*66%) and the estimated average speeds for A1 was 39.8mph ( ( )/2); the average speeds for A2 was estimated as 28mph (( )/2); For urban roads (A3), the average speed was known as 21.5mph and the local roads (A4) were estimated as 15.3mph (25*61%) and others were estimated as 9.2mph (15*61% )), the estimated average speeds were achieved in Table 3 and flowchart of the analysis is shown in Figure 7. Since free parking facilities are more attractive for riders, it was beneficial to perform one more analysis for driving to the station that offers free parking spaces. This helped obtain better results and comparison with access to all Metro Rail stations by driving. Group A1 Types of Roads Primary Highway with Limited Access CFCC Codes Speed Limit Formula A11-A mph = 43.1 (average speed) 55mph= 43.1*66%=36.4 A21-A *66% = *66% =29.7 A31-A mph = 21.5 (average speed) Estimated Average Speed 39.8 A2 Primary Road without Limited Access 28 A3 Secondary and 21.5 Connecting Road A4 Local, Neighborhood, A41-A *61%= and Rural Road A5 Others >A *61%= Table 3: Roads and CFCC Codes 15

19 Figure 7: Flow Chart of Driving Access Analysis FINDINGS Several tables and maps were used to summarize the potential Metro Rail ridership of the county of Los Angeles, showing the areas where people could access the nearest station within 5-, 10- and 15-minute intervals by walking, bus riding and driving. The 5-minute time increment is used for further analysis to determine potential Metro Rail ridership, by each different access mode because the mode of transportation chosen has to be competitive in terms of cost, time, and convenience with other modes of transportation. Potential Metro Rail Ridership by Walking The potential ridership of rider accessing the nearest rail station within a 5-minute walk is considered well-served, which represents about 1% of the total Los Angeles county population 16

20 Walking Potential Zone Potential Coverage Zone (sq.mile) Coverage (sq.mile) Access Ridership % Ridership % Area % Area % 5 Minutes 81,950 1% 81,950 1% 6 0.1% 6 0.1% 10 Minutes 272,621 3% 354,571 4% % % 15 Minutes 389,249 4% 743,830 8% % 47 1% Total 9,519, % 9,519, % % 4, % Map 2 and Table 4: Potential Metro Rail Ridership by Walking 17

21 including six square miles of the area that was covered. This ridership of 81,950 is slightly larger than the actual walking access (76,022). The potential ridership of rider accessing the nearest rail station within ten minute walk is considered served and 4% of Los Angeles County population (354,571), including twenty-three square miles of the county covered. The potential ridership is more than four times larger than the estimated boarding by walking access. When walking access is increased to fifteen minutes, this level of service coverage could reach 743,830 potential riders, consisting of 8% of the total Los Angeles county population (Map 2 and Table 4). As mentioned in the literature review section, only 50% of riders tends to walk to the stations when the travel time is over five minutes (27,621*50% = 13,810). My inference is that for over ten minutes, the percentage might drop to 25% (389,249*25% = 97,312), as the rest of the riders can choose other modes of transportation to reach Metro Rail stations. Within fifteen minutes travel time, the potential ridership will be 193,072 (81, , ,312), which is twice as large as the actual walking access. Potential Metro Rail Ridership by Bus Riding The results exclude riders walking time to access the bus stop, but include the estimated bus travel time carrying potential numbers of riders to Metro Rail stations (Map 3 and Table 5). The potential ridership by riding the bus to access Metro Rail stations within five minutes covering 11% (1,001,232) of the county s total population and it is almost thirty-four times larger than the original estimated boarding by bus (29,239). Of special note, downtown Los Angeles is the region fed by large amounts of bus service to access Metro Rail system. When a time increment of ten minutes is used, the number reaches 17% of the county population (1,660,837), covering 118 square miles. Within fifteen minutes, about 22% of the population (2,048,441) with 18

22 Bus Potential Zone Potential Coverage Zone (sq.mile) Coverage (sq.mile) Access Ridership % Ridership % Area % Area % 5 Minutes 1,001,232 11% 1,001,232 11% % % 10 Minutes 659,605 7% 1,660,837 17% % % 15 Minutes 387,604 4% 2,048,441 22% % % Total 9,519, % 9,519, % % 4, % Map 3 and Table 5: Potential Metro Rail Ridership by Bus Riding 19

23 151 square miles can be covered. The results show that bus access to the stations has a large potential for future growth in Metro Rail Ridership. Bus access has a competitive disadvantage with automobiles in terms of time and convenience, because of the lack of service frequency, coverage and flexibility. Even though some bus stops are closer to Metro Rail station, Map2 indicates it would take more than five minutes to transfer riders accessing stations, as bus lines were designed in a fixed route to serve local destination instead of Metro Rail stations. Potential Metro Rail Ridership by Driving The results show that the population residing within 145 square miles of the county could drive to the nearest station within five minutes (Table 5 Map 4: Outline Purple Color). The potential ridership is 1,830,702, consisting of 19% of the total county population, which is fortyeight times larger than the actual automobile access (38,011). The map shows that the furthermost Southern, Southeastern and a portion of Southwestern sections of Los Angeles County are serviced within a 15-minute drive to the closest rail station, whereas 597 square miles (19% of the County) and 60% of the total population of the county are covered. The statistical results retrieved from GIS Network analysis indicate there is no service for the Northern, Northeastern and Northwestern parts of the county, where only 7% of the Los Angeles County population is located according to Census, where there are mountainous, rugged and forest areas. The study of available station parking is very important to analyze automobile access to the system. Since free parking facilities are more attractive to ridership, analyzing free parking available at the Park and Ride rail stations provided good data to determine potential ridership as shown in Table 6 and Map 4. Currently, there are only twenty-six Metro Rail stations offering 20

24 Driving Access Potential Zone Potential Coverage Zone (sq.mile) Coverage(sq.mile ) Ridership % Ridership % Area % Area % 5 Minutes 1,830,702 19% 1,830,702 19% 145 3% 145 3% All 10 Minutes 2, % 3,920,653 41% 231 5% 376 8% Stations Free Parking Stations 15 Minutes 1,774,400 19% 5,695,053 60% 221 5% % Total 9,519, % 9,519, % % 4, % 5 Minutes 900,764 9% 900,764 9% 92 2% 92 2% 10 Minutes 2,207,365 23% 3,108,129 32% 224 5% 316 7% 15 Minutes 2,165,175 23% 5,273,304 55% 236 5% % Total 9,519, % 9,519, % % 4, % Map 4 and Table 6: Potential Metro Rail Ridership by Driving 21

25 11,046 free parking, which accounts for half of all ridership that access Metro Rail stations by driving (Park and Ride) boarding (23,391). My potential thinking is that some riders might choose to pay for parking, or use other Park and Ride facilities along the bus routes. When analyzing the potential ridership within five minutes driving access to Metro Rail stations that offer free parking spaces, 9% (900,764) of the county population can access to Metro Rail stations. However, there will be not enough free parking spaces (11,046) for all drivers when compared to the daily boarding in 2009, as there will be eighty-two riders competing for each parking spot within a 5-minute drive and 477 riders within a 15-minute drive. Five Minutes Alternative Access Modes Service coverage that is within five minutes walking time to the nearest Metro Rail station is considered well-served. Metro Rail System will definitely be attractive if there is more than one access option that riders can use to reach the stations when the walking time is over five minutes. Therefore the best analysis is alternative modes that connect to the station within five minutes to obtain comparable results (Map 5 and Table 7). The result shows that when walking time is over five minutes, and riders are using the bus as an alternative mode to access Metro stations, then the potential ridership is 919,500, which covers 10% of the total Los Angeles county population. When both walking and bus riding times are over five minutes, the driving modes could cover an additional 8% of the county population (830,482). However, when analyzing the potential ridership within a 5-minute drive to Metro stations that offers free parking spots, compared to walking and riding a bus to the station that are over five minutes away, then about 5% (506,514) of the county s population has access to the stations. Nonetheless, there still will not be enough free parking spaces (11,046) for 22

26 Alterative Access Modes Potential Zone Zone Area (sq.mile) Ridership % Area % Walking 81,950 1% 6 0.1% Riding Bus Access if Walking is over 5 minutes 919,500 10% % Driving Access (Free Parking) if Walking and Bus 506,514 5% % Riding are over 5 minutes Driving Access (Pay Parking) if Access Mode 323,968 3% % Mentioned above are over 5 minutes All Modes combined 1,831,932 19% 146 3% Total County Population/Area 9,519, % % Map 5 and Table 7: Potential Metro Rail Ridership within Five Minutes by Alternative Access Modes 23

27 all drivers, as there will be 46 riders competing for each parking spot. About 3% of the total population (323,968) could access the station by using the pay parking lot if walking; bus riding and free parking for drivers could not meet their needs. After combining all modes of access, the potential ridership accessing Metro Rail Stations is 1,831,932, which was almost thirteen times larger than the average one-way weekday Metro Rail boarding. Los Angeles area residents are used to the convenience of freeways and the independence provided by automobiles. It is certain that Metro Rail must compete with the automobile which is the most attractive mode of transportation. In order for Metro Rail to be chosen over the automobile, it has to be competitive in terms of cost, time, convenience and flexibility. An alternative for increasing ridership is to increase the amount of bus service in key areas to make it easier for riders to access Metro Rail line. The choice of access modes as well as any improvement of access to the stations is expected to influence the potential ridership levels of Metro Rail. CONCLUSION The growth of the Los Angeles Metro Rail represents both a challenge and an opportunity to improve the quality of life and preserve the environment through less pollution and greater transportation efficiency. Many demographics are served for a variety of reasons and destinations. The decentralized and complex Los Angeles landscape needs many different solutions to work cohesively together to serve the greater social good. Feeder bus service and park-and-rides serve this cohesiveness by presenting the solution of rail travel as integrated with partial commutes by car and bus services. Certainly infrastructure planners may be eager in their pursuits to capture the greatest 24

28 ridership per each mile of rail. However, it is a good idea to accept that because there are inherent limitations due to the Los Angeles landscape, therefore the measure of success may not lay solely within the framework of rail travel to be a sole solution within itself. Public transportation is just one solution among many other alternative solutions, that include driving, riding the bus, telecommuting, and in some cases, relocating within walking distance of an employer. If rail travel takes cars off the road and improves the quality of driving, then rail is not only a competing alternative to driving, rail is also a cooperative effort to improve the overall commute throughout Los Angeles, regardless of the mode of travel. If solution works, then other solutions will work as well. By every solution working together, this collaboration serves both the individual s needs as well as the collective needs of the greater Los Angeles community. Hopefully, in the not too distant future, Metro Rail will be able to cover the whole map, like Tokyo or Shanghai s network in order to provide everyone with an easy way ride between home and work. ACKNOWLEGMENTS Sincerely appreciation to the ESRI and Census Bureau for providing Census Tiger data layers, the Systems Analysis and Research team of Long Range Planning and Coordination Department of LACMTA for the data layers of bus routes and bus stops as well as actual Metro Rail ridership information. Kudos to Dr. John Kirchner, Dr. Hong-Lie Qiu, Dr. Ali Modarres and Dr. Jesse Simon for their positive reviews and support. Finally, recognition extends to Gene Manley, PhD, Mark Gerardy, Paul Burke and Stewart Cheslers, for their insightful comments on this paper that greatly improved its quality. 25

29 REFERENCES Belkin, D. Commutes Speed Up as Fewer Drive. (access November 19, 2009). Brady, R., Gutierrez, R., and Hoose, W Gold Line System Analysis. California State Polytechnic University, Pomona. (access November 22, 2009) Briggs, R. Analysis and Modeling in GIS The University of Texas at Dallas. Chang, M., and Herman, R An Attempt to Characterize Traffic in Metropolitan Areas. Transportation Science, Vol. 12, pp Flowler,W., and Neilson, G Relation between Transit Ridership and Walking Distances in a Low Density Florida Retirement Area. Highway Research Record No.403: Kumar, Ranjit Research Methodology. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage Publications. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority FY 2002 On-Board Rail Weekday Survey Report. Rea & Parker Research, San Diego, CA Metro Rail On-Board Survey Report. Strategic Consulting & Research On- Board Survey Results Gold Line Transit Rider Survey. NuStats Metro Facts at a Glance. Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Retrieved October 1, Ridership Statistics. Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Retrieved November 1,

30 Murray, A., Davis, R., Stimson, R. and Ferreira, L Public Transportation Access. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 3(5): Elsevier, Australia. Nyerges, T Geographical Information Systems Support for Urban/Regional Transportation Analysis. Geography of Urban Transportation : Guilford Press, New York. O'Sullivan, S., and Morrall, J Walking Distance to and From Light Rail Transit Stations. Transportation Research Record 1538 : National Research Council (U.S.). Transportation Research Board. Stringham,M Travel Behavior Associated with Land Uses Adjacent to Rapid Transit Stations. ITE Journal, Vol 52 No.4: Zahnister, David What s Smart about Smart Growth. Retrieved October 1,

31 ANZA LA BREA WESTERN GARFIELD ATLANTIC SAN GABRIEL PIONEER NORWALK FAIRFAX NORMANDIE CARMENITA TYLER VAN NUYS BEVERWIL HAWTHORNE LAUREL CANYON VINELAND CAHUENGA VINE CABRILLO HOOVER 54 LA MIRADA CENTRAL BRAND COMPTON SANTA FE CANADA PACIFIC DALY LOS ROBLES VALLEY VIEW FREMONT FAIR OAKS DEL MAR BLOOMFIELD STUDEBAKER EASTERN GARFIELD LINCOLN FAIR OAKS DEL MAR NORWALK BLOOMFIELD MYRTLE RESEDA WHITE OAK VICTORY 2009 LOS ANGELES COUNTY BURBANK BALBOA BRAUDE, MARVIN GATEWAY PARK WESTRIDGE CANYONBACK PARK TOPANGA STATE PARK 7TH OCEAN LINCOLN SAN VICENTE SANTA MONICA NEILSON PACIFIC %&l( SEPULVEDA METRO RAIL SYSTEM BUNDY SANTA MONICA OCEAN PARK ABBOT KINNEY Pacific Ocean Metro Station Station Parking No Parking Pay Parking Free Parking Metro Rail Blue Line Red Line Purple Line LEGEND Highways!"^$ KË?Õ VENTURA BEVERLY GLEN GATEWAY WOODMAN WESTWOOD CENTINELA U.S Interstate U.S Route California Route Others Commuter Station Commuter Rail Airport Green Line Major Road Gold Line Lake River Park µ Owen Bin Mo Miles 02/01/2010 BEVERLY GLEN MAR SANTA MONICA WASHINGTON CULVER JEFFERSON MANCHESTER MAGNOLIA IMPERIAL HIGHLAND PALOS VERDES COLDWATER CANYON MOORPARK BEVERLY HILLS SEPULVEDA BEVERLY BURTON NATIONAL CULVER CULVER CITY Los Angeles International Airport %&d( Mariposa CATALINA ROBERTSON LA TIJERA AIRPORT EL El Segundo SEGUNDO Douglas MANHATTAN BEACH HERMOSA BEACH HERMOSA Aÿ KË Aº ANITA AVIATION CREST MULHOLLAND LA CIENEGA LANKERSHIM CENTINELA INGLEWOOD EL SEGUNDO RODEO MANHATTAN BEACH REDONDO BEACH RIVERSIDE OLYMPIC VENICE PRAIRIE ROSECRANS TORRANCE HAWTHORNE CAHUENGA STOCKER MADRONA BARHAM SAN VICENTE TORRANCE RANCHO PALOS VERDES BURBANK HOLLYWOOD Hollywood/ Highland WEST HOLLYWOOD!"`$ %&l( Aviation/ LAX Redondo Beach North Hollywood INGLEWOOD BUENA VISTA WILSHIRE Hawthorne HAWTHORNE CRENSHAW TORRANCE 190TH SEPULVEDA LOMITA OLIVE Aà Universal City KË LAWNDALE ROSSMORE MANCHESTER ALAMEDA FRANKLIN HOLLYWOOD JEFFERSON MELROSE BEVERLY CENTURY REDONDO BEACH SOUTH COAST BOTANIC GARDEN WASHINGTON GLENOAKS Downtown Burbank VICTORY PICO SLAUSON GARDENA LOMITA Hollywood Sign MAR GRIFFITH PARK 25TH LOS FELIZ SANTA MONICA LOS ANGELES EXPOSITION MARTIN LUTHER KING JR 9TH GAFFEY VERMONT GAFFEY PACIFIC VERNON FIGUEROA FRONT MAIN SAN FERNANDO SILVER LAKE HARBOR BRAND PARK LA Zoo ALVARADO WILMINGTON GRAND SAN PEDRO AVALON ANAHEIM RIVERSIDE 6TH SAN PEDRO HARRY BRIDGES CHEVY CHASE CENTRAL CENTRAL 4TH VICTORIA 223RD SEASIDE COLORADO 9TH TEMPLE 3RD 7TH 103RD WILMINGTON VERDUGO 6TH EAGLE ROCK SPRING 26 1ST 37TH ALAMEDA SANTA FE CENTURY COMPTON WARDLOW SOTO YORK MARENGO LORENA VERNON CALIFORNIA FIRESTONE TWEEDY COMPTON LONG BEACH FIGUEROA LORENA Rms Queen Mary Rose Bowl BANDINI FLORENCE ABBOTT OLYMPIC BELL SOUTH GATE Memorial Park LA LOMA CESAR E CHAVEZ ALAMITOS ALHAMBRA 3RD WASHINGTON GAGE CUDAHY OCEAN Del Mar CHERRY EASTERN 7TH CALIFORNIA MONTEREY PARAMOUNT PARAMOUNT SOUTH REDONDO LAKE RIGGIN POMONA LAKEWOOD WHITTIER LIVINGSTON ORANGE GROVE Commerce DEL AMO BELLFLOWER MAIN DOWNEY COLORADO ALLEN THE HUNTINGTON SAN MARINO Glendale Highland Park Hollywood/ Hollywood/ Mission Vine Western South Vermont/Sunset SUNSET Southwest Museum Vermont/Santa Monica Heritage Square ELYSIAN PARK Vermont/Beverly Lincolh/Cypress Whilshire/ ALHAMBRA!"`$ Whilshire/ Western ROSEMEAD Vermont Chinatown Westlake Cal State Los Angeles Whilshire/ Union Station Normandie Civic Center 7th St MONTEREY PARK Pico Pershing Square Crenshaw RANCHO PALOS VERDES!"^$ Vermont %&e( Grand %&e( Harbor Freeway 103rd Street %&l( Slauson Avalon?c Aà Vernon Florence Firestone San Pedro Compton?Õ Washington HUNTINGTON PARK Imperial/ Wilmington Long Beach Artesia Anaheim Street Pacific Transit Mall LOS ANGELES RIVER LYNWOOD LOS ANGELES RIVER Del Amo Willow Pacific Coast Hwy Wardlow 5th Street 1st Street Fillmore %&q( AË SIGNAL HILL COMMERCE BELL GARDENS Lake VALLEY POTRERO GRANDE MONTEBELLO Lakewood BEVERLY BELLFLOWER Montebello!"^$ %&d( A» Long Beach Airport WILLOW ATHERTON LONG BEACH Allen?q MONTEBELLO LOS COYOTES ALTADENA SPRING STUDEBAKER 2ND HILL PICO RIVERA Norwalk LAS TUNAS RUSH PARAMOUNT NORWALK SAN GABRIEL RIVER PASSONS %&o( GARVEY TELEGRAPH ROSEMEAD Sierra Madre Villa A SAN ANTONIO HUNTINGTON ARTESIA SOUTH WARDLOW EL DORADO REGIONAL PARK SIERRA MADRE TEMPLE CITY ARCADIA BALDWIN TEMPLE CITY EL MONTE El Monte DURFEE SANTA FE SPRINGS SANTA FE SPRINGS ARTESIA HAWAIIAN GARDENS?æ SAN GABRIEL RIVER SIERRA MADRE %&g( Norwalk ALONDRA DUARTE SANTA ANITA GREENLEAF MULBERRY PECK PAINTER MILLS DURFEE LIVE OAK PECK HELLMAN WILDERNESS PARK CERRITOS Ventura WORKMAN MILL LEFFINGWELL MONROVIA WHITTIER LA MIRADA Pacific Ocean Angeles National Forest RAMONA Orange County Kern IRWINDALE BALDWIN PARK SUNSET TURNBULL CANYON HACIENDA Los Angeles PUENTE AMAR DUARTE BALDWIN PARK Orange BADILLO IRWINDALE ARROW CYPRESS SAN BERNARDINO Baldwin Park GLENDORA GLENDORA AZUSA FOOTHILL WEST COVINA CAMERON HARBOR PUENTE AZUSA COLIMA SCHABARUM REGIONAL COUNTY PARK LA HABRA HEIGHTS San Bernardino SHEPARD

32 BEVERWIL LA CIENEGA ANZA WESTERN VERMONT LA BREA PARAMOUNT GARFIELD ATLANTIC SAN GABRIEL PIONEER NORWALK FAIRFAX NORMANDIE VINE LAUREL CANYON CABRILLO HOOVER CENTRAL BRAND COMPTON SANTA FE 54 LINCOLN CANADA PACIFIC DALY FREMONT FAIR OAKS LOS ROBLES BLOOMFIELD EASTERN GARFIELD FAIR OAKS STUDEBAKER DEL MAR DEL MAR NORWALK BLOOMFIELD BURBANK MOORPARK BURTON ROBERTSON BEVERLY HILLS NATIONAL CULVER SEPULVEDA %&d( HERMOSA Aÿ KË JEFFERSON AIRPORT El Segundo CATALINA LA TIJERA ANITA AVIATION CREST Metro Rail Potential Ridership by Walking Access in Los Angeles County VINELAND LANKERSHIM VENTURA MULHOLLAND CENTINELA INGLEWOOD EL SEGUNDO RIVERSIDE RODEO MANHATTAN BEACH SAN VICENTE HAWTHORNE Blue Line TORRANCE Red Line PRAIRIE ROSECRANS TORRANCE HAWTHORNE VICTORY BURBANK HOLLYWOOD STOCKER MADRONA BARHAM Hollywood/ Highland WEST HOLLYWOOD CULVER CITY Aº Douglas MANHATTAN BEACH %&l( LOS ANGELES INTL AIRPORT Aviation/ LAX Mariposa MAGNOLIA CAHUENGA OLYMPIC WILSHIRE IMPERIAL 190TH OLIVE ALAMEDA MANCHESTER CRENSHAW SEPULVEDA LOMITA HOLLYWOOD MELROSE BEVERLY VENICE CENTURY REDONDO BEACH Downtown Burbank VICTORY SLAUSON SAN FERNANDO GLENOAKS Universal City Hollywood Sign GRIFFITH PARK INGLEWOOD El SegundoHAWTHORNE REDONDO BEACH Metro Rail Metro Station Walking Purple Line Green Line Gold Line North Hollywood!"`$ KË CAHUENGA ROSSMORE FRANKLIN WASHINGTON LOS ANGELES Hawthorne Redondo Beach LAWNDALE Hollywood/ Vine TORRANCE PALOS VERDES ESTATES Major Road 5 Minutes Walk LOMITA River 10 Minutes SOUTH Walk COAST BOTANIC GARDEN Lake LOS FELIZ SANTA MONICA EXPOSITION GAFFEY PICO SUNSET MARTIN LUTHER KING JR VERNON FIGUEROA FRONT BRAND PARK LA Zoo SILVER LAKE ALVARADO MAIN GRAND SAN PEDRO AVALON ANAHEIM RIVERSIDE Whilshire/ Western Whilshire/ Vermont Westlake Whilshire/ Normandie 7th St Crenshaw GARDENA Highways!"^$ U.S Interstate KË U.S Route California Route?Õ Others Aà Commuter Station Commuter Rail Hollywood/ Western Vermont 15 Minutes Walk Park µ Airport Owen Bin Mo Miles RANCHO PALOS VERDES 12/01/2009!"^$ 6TH Vermont/Sunset SAN PEDRO HARRY BRIDGES CHEVY CHASE CENTRAL Glendale CENTRAL 4TH VICTORIA 223RD 9TH SEASIDE COLORADO Vermont/Santa Monica WILMINGTON Vermont/Beverly Pico Grand 103rd Street Harbor Freeway %&e( %&e( San Pedro Avalon KË Vernon Slauson Florence Firestone?c TEMPLE 3RD 7TH 103RD WILMINGTON VERDUGO ELYSIAN PARK 6TH EAGLE ROCK SPRING 26 1ST 37TH ALAMEDA COMPTON SANTA FE CENTURY MAIN WARDLOW SOTO YORK MARENGO Union Station Civic Center Pershing Square Compton Imperial/ Wilmington Artesia?Õ Chinatown Washington %&l( Highland Park LORENA VERNON HUNTINGTON PARK Aà CALIFORNIA FIRESTONE TWEEDY COMPTON LONG BEACH FIGUEROA Lincolh/Cypress LORENA Anaheim Street Pacific Transit Mall Rms Queen Mary LA CANADA FLINTRIDGE OLYMPIC BANDINI MAYWOOD BELL FLORENCE SOUTH GATE ABBOTT Rose Bowl Heritage Square LA LOMA CESAR E CHAVEZ ALAMITOS ALHAMBRA 3RD WASHINGTON GAGE CUDAHY Memorial Park Southwest Museum LOS ANGELES RIVER Long Beach Willow Pacific Coast Hwy LYNWOOD LOS ANGELES RIVER Del Amo AË Wardlow %&g( %&q( Cal State Los Angeles q 7TH 5th Street OCEAN CHERRY Del Mar EASTERN 1st Street Fillmore Mission CALIFORNIA MONTEREY South ALHAMBRA ALONDRA ARTESIA SOUTH REDONDO WHITTIER PARAMOUNT SIGNAL HILL LAKEWOOD LAKE RIGGIN POMONA LIVINGSTON ORANGE GROVE VALLEY Commerce DEL AMO BELLFLOWER MAIN MONTEREY PARK BELL GARDENS %&d(!"`$ COMMERCE Long Beach Air Port LONG BEACH DOWNEY COLORADO ALLEN THE HUNTINGTON MONTEBELLO POTRERO GRANDE BEVERLY Montebello BELLFLOWER A» Lake Lakewood WILLOW ATHERTON MONTEBELLO LOS COYOTES ALTADENA SAN MARINO Ventura!"^$ SAN GABRIEL?q Allen SPRING STUDEBAKER GARVEY 2ND HILL PICO RIVERA SAN GABRIEL RIVER LAS TUNAS RUSH PARAMOUNT NORWALK PASSONS TELEGRAPH ROSEMEAD SAN ANTONIO HUNTINGTON ROSEMEAD SOUTH WARDLOW EL DORADO REGIONAL PARK Pacific Ocean Kern Sierra Madre Villa %&o( Norwalk HAWAIIAN GARDENS Orange SIERRA MADRE ARCADIA TEMPLE CITY?æ A ARTESIA Los Angeles Angeles Forest BALDWIN DUARTE TEMPLE CITY DURFEE WORKMAN MILL BALDWIN EL MONTE SANTA FE SPRINGS Norwalk CERRITOS Orange County San Bernardino %&g( SAN GABRIEL RIVER

33 BEVERWIL ANZA LA BREA WESTERN CHERRY GARFIELD ATLANTIC SAN GABRIEL PIONEER NORWALK FAIRFAX NORMANDIE HAWTHORNE VINE CABRILLO HOOVER CENTRAL BRAND COMPTON 54 ALLEN CARMENITA TYLER LINCOLN CANADA PACIFIC SANTA FE DALY LOS ROBLES VALLEY VIEW FREMONT FAIR OAKS FAIR OAKS BLOOMFIELD STUDEBAKER EASTERN GARFIELD DEL MAR DEL MAR NORWALK BLOOMFIELD Metro Rail Potential Ridership by Bus Riding Access in Los Angeles County SHERMAN ROSCOE Aÿ WEBB TUXFORD SUNLAND!"^$ Sun Valley Bob Hope Airport SAN FERNANDO LA TUNA CANYON PARK WILDWOOD CANYON PARK HONOLULU LA CRESCENTA OCEAN VIEW LA CANADA FLINTRIDGE %&g( VERDUGO FOOTHILL Angeles National Forest WOODMAN MAR KË VENTURA BEVERLY GLEN SANTA MONICA WESTWOOD SEPULVEDA CULVER JEFFERSON MANCHESTER WASHINGTON CENTINELA IMPERIAL HIGHLAND CULVER Los Angeles International Airport PALOS VERDES VICTORY COLDWATER CANYON q VANOWEN BURBANK MAGNOLIA MOORPARK BEVERLY HILLS BEVERLY BURTON NATIONAL CULVER CITY %&d( HERMOSA JEFFERSON Mariposa EL El Segundo SEGUNDO Douglas AIRPORT CATALINA ROBERTSON LA TIJERA AVIATION CREST VINELAND LANKERSHIM Redondo Beach MANHATTAN BEACH HERMOSA BEACH PIER ANITA MULHOLLAND LA CIENEGA CENTINELA INGLEWOOD RIVERSIDE RODEO MANHATTAN BEACH HAWTHORNE Burbank Airport BURBANK CAHUENGA SAN VICENTE MADRONA HOLLYWOOD BARHAM PRAIRIE WILSHIRE STOCKER 190TH BUENA VISTA CAHUENGA ROSSMORE CRENSHAW OLIVE MANCHESTER SEPULVEDA ALAMEDA FRANKLIN HOLLYWOOD SUNSET MELROSE BEVERLY CENTURY REDONDO BEACH ROSECRANS Downtown Burbank VICTORY PICO EXPOSITION MARTIN LUTHER KING JR SLAUSON EL SEGUNDO 25TH WESTERN Universal City Hollywood Sign GRIFFITH PARK OLYMPIC INGLEWOOD HAWTHORNE LAWNDALE REDONDO BEACH WASHINGTON Bus Stop Metro Rail TORRANCE ") 5 Minutes Stop TORRANCE Metro Station Blue Line ") 10 Minutes Stop Red Line ") 15 Minutes Stop Purple Line Bus Ride Green Line 5 Minutes Ride PALOS VERDES ESTATES Gold Line LOMITA 10 Minutes Ride Others 15 Minutes Ride SOUTH COAST BOTANIC GARDEN Commuter Station Highways Commuter Rail U.S Interstate Airport KË!"^$?Õ Aº Hollywood/ Highland WEST HOLLYWOOD!"`$ %&l( Aviation/ LAX North Hollywood KË LOS ANGELES Hawthorne U.S Route Major Road RANCHO PALOS VERDES California Route Lake River µ Park Miles Hollywood/ Hollywood/ Vine Western TORRANCE Owen Bin Mo 12/01/2009 Aà GARDENA LOS FELIZ SANTA MONICA 9TH GAFFEY VERMONT GAFFEY PACIFIC GLENOAKS LA Zoo VERNON FIGUEROA JOHN S GIBSON FRONT HARBOR BRAND PARK ALVARADO MAIN SAN FERNANDO SILVER LAKE GRAND SAN PEDRO AVALON LOMITA WILMINGTON RIVERSIDE 6TH SAN PEDRO HARRY BRIDGES CHEVY CHASE CENTRAL Glendale CENTRAL 4TH VICTORIA 223RD FLETCHER 3RD SEASIDE COLORADO 9TH TEMPLE 7TH 103RD WILMINGTON VERDUGO 6TH EAGLE ROCK SPRING 26 1ST 37TH CENTURY ALAMEDA COMPTON SANTA FE WARDLOW MAIN SOTO YORK MARENGO LORENA VERNON CALIFORNIA FIRESTONE TWEEDY COMPTON LONG BEACH FIGUEROA LORENA Rms Queen Mary FLORENCE ABBOTT Rose Bowl OLYMPIC BANDINI BELL LA LOMA CESAR E CHAVEZ ALAMITOS Vermont/Santa Monica Heritage Square ELYSIAN PARK Vermont/Beverly Lincolh/Cypress Whilshire/ Whilshire/ Western Vermont Chinatown Westlake Whilshire/ Union Station Normandie Civic Center 7th St VENICE Pico Pershing Square Crenshaw RANCHO PALOS VERDES Vermont Vermont/Sunset Grand Harbor Freeway %&e( %&e( 103rd Street %&l( Slauson Avalon Vernon?c Aà Florence Firestone San Pedro?Õ Washington Pacific Transit Mall MAYWOOD Memorial Park ALHAMBRA 3RD WASHINGTON GAGE CUDAHY OCEAN Del Mar ANAHEIM Cal State Los Angeles EASTERN 7TH CALIFORNIA PARAMOUNT ALONDRA ARTESIA REDONDO ALTADENA Highland Park Mission South Southwest Museum HUNTINGTON PARK Anaheim Street LOS ANGELES RIVER Imperial/ SOUTH GATE Wilmington Long Beach Compton Artesia LYNWOOD LOS ANGELES RIVER Del Amo Willow Pacific Coast Hwy %&q( Wardlow 1st Street Fillmore AË MONTEREY ALHAMBRA CESAR CHAVEZ PARAMOUNT SIGNAL HILL 5th Street Pacific Ocean BELL GARDENS %&d( SOUTH!"`$ LAKEWOOD LAKE RIGGIN POMONA LIVINGSTON WHITTIER Commerce 2ND ORANGE GROVE DEL AMO BELLFLOWER MAIN MONTEREY PARK COMMERCE Long Beach Airport Lake DOWNEY COLORADO THE HUNTINGTON?q MONTEBELLO Lakewood VALLEY POTRERO GRANDE BEVERLY BELLFLOWER SAN MARINO Montebello A»!"^$ WILLOW ATHERTON LONG BEACH Allen MONTEBELLO LOS COYOTES SPRING STUDEBAKER HILL SIERRA MADRE LAS TUNAS ROSEMEAD RUSH PARAMOUNT PICO RIVERA Norwalk NORWALK GARVEY PASSONS TELEGRAPH ROSEMEAD SAN ANTONIO WARDLOW HUNTINGTON SOUTH EL DORADO REGIONAL PARK Ventura SAN GABRIEL RIVER Sierra Madre Villa %&o( A Pacific Ocean TEMPLE CITY SANTA FE SPRINGS ARTESIA HAWAIIAN GARDENS Kern SIERRA MADRE ARCADIA BALDWIN DUARTE TEMPLE CITY?æ SAN GABRIEL RIVER El Monte EL MONTE SANTA ANITA DURFEE SANTA FE SPRINGS WORKMAN MILL Norwalk GREENLEAF MULBERRY PAINTER PECK PECK MILLS LEFFINGWELL DURFEE HELLMAN WILDERNESS PARK CERRITOS WHITTIER Orange County Los Angeles Orange San Bernardino %&g(