Special Event Transport Management
Transportation Management During Sport and Cultural Events, Construction Projects and Emergencies
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TDM
Encyclopedia
Victoria Transport Policy Institute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Updated
March 7, 2007
This chapter describes ways
of managing transport to special events, and during construction projects and
disasters.
Special Event Transport Management encourages the use of alternative travel modes to occasional events that draw large crowds, such as festivals, games and fairs, or when construction projects or disasters create temporary transportation problems. This can reduce traffic and parking problems, improve safety and security, reduce stress, and improve Transportation Options, particularly for non-drivers.
Special Event TDM includes many specific strategies to improve transportation options, manage transportation resources, and communicate with the traveling public. These can include:
· Special Transit, Shuttle and Ridesharing services. In some cases it may be appropriate to incorporate the cost of transit service or a special shuttle bus into event admission fees, so participants can use these services at no extra cost.
· Pedestrian And Cycling Improvements.
· Parking Management and Shared Parking.
· Commute Trip Reduction programs.
· Marketing of alternative transportation options.
· Smart Growth land-use management, so major activity centers (e.g. fair grounds and sports arena) are located for convenient access to population centers and public transit services.
· Taxi Improvements, such as shared taxis.
· Priority to emergency, service, freight and High Occupant vehicles in traffic and parking.
· Transportation planning that provides appropriate redundancies and efficiencies to accommodate special and unexpected demands.
· Cross-train staff to perform critical management and repair services.
· Produce a Multi-Modal Access Guide, which concisely describes how to reach an event, highlighting efficient modes such as cycling, ridesharing and transit. This information can be incorporated into event invitations and publicity.
To appreciate the potential benefits of Special Event Transport Management, compare what is required to transport 50,000 participants at a major event, such as a game in a sports stadium, as summarized in Table 1. If participants travel by automobile which optimistically carry an average of 4 passengers, it requires 12,500 vehicles, and so needs about 100 acres of parking. Assuming there are four access lanes, each carrying a maximum of 1,000 vehicles per hour, it requires more than three hours to fill and empty. As a result, more time is spent travel to and exiting from the stadium than required for a typical sporting event.
Table 1 Transporting 50,000 Event Participants
|
|
Automobile |
Bus |
|
Vehicles |
12,500 (4/car) |
1,000 (50/bus) |
|
Parking (Acres) |
100 (125/acre) |
20 (50/acre) |
|
Veh./Lane-Hour |
1,000 |
500 |
|
Four Exit Lanes |
3.1 Hours |
0.5 Hours |
This table compares automobile and bus access for transporting 50,000 event participants. Bus transport requires a fifth as much parking area and a sixth as much time.
However, the same number of participants can be transported by bus using a fifth of the parking area and a sixth as much time. As a result, bus transport can reduce costs and support the overall event experience. With good planning, bus transport can be enjoyable, if there are high quality buses, comfortable transit waiting areas with entertainment, priority for buses in traffic and parking, convenient user information (for example, it is easy to find where to catch a from various origins, and entertainment on buses.
Special Event TDM programs are usually implemented by event planners and managers, usually with cooperation from local government agencies. Event organizers, government agencies, or private companies may arrange overflow parking areas (for example, by renting available parking spaces from nearby businesses), and provide shuttle buses and special transit services. Private companies can organize car-free event packages (e.g., a single price for entrance to the event, transportation and meals). Public agencies may develop special transportation management plans for Emergency Response.
Travel impacts depend on the nature of the type and location of the event, the demographics of visitors, the TDM strategies that are implemented, and the types of trips involved. Large travel impacts are possible.
Table 2 Travel Impact Summary
|
Travel
Impact |
Rating |
Comments |
|
Reduces total traffic. |
1 |
Reduces total vehicle travel. |
|
Reduces peak period
traffic. |
3 |
Reduces traffic during peak
seasons and times. |
|
Shifts peak to off-peak
periods. |
0 |
|
|
Shifts automobile travel to
alternative modes. |
3 |
Encourages mode shifting. |
|
Improves access, reduces
the need for travel. |
0 |
|
|
Increased ridesharing. |
2 |
May include rideshare
encouragement. |
|
Increased public transit. |
3 |
Often includes transit
encouragement. |
|
Increased cycling. |
1 |
May include cycling
encouragement. |
|
Increased walking. |
3 |
Often includes walking
encouragement. |
|
Increased Telework. |
0 |
|
|
Reduced freight traffic. |
1 |
May include some freight
management. |
Rating from 3 (very beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.
Benefits include reduced traffic congestion and parking problems, increased Transportation Options (particularly for non-drivers), consumer savings, increased transportation system Resilience and Security (particularly when used during Emergencies and Disasters), increased community Livability (reduced impacts on nearby residents), and a more enjoyable and unique experience for visitors.
Costs are primarily the financial expenses associated with developing a TDM program and providing services such as shuttle buses. Some event participants may be discouraged if restrictions on car use are considered burdensome or confusing.
Table 3 Benefit Summary
|
Objective |
Rating |
Comments |
|
Congestion Reduction |
3 |
Reduces peak-period vehicle
traffic. |
|
Road & Parking Savings |
2 |
May avoid the need to
expand roads and parking capacity. |
|
Consumer Savings |
2 |
Can increase affordable
transport options. |
|
Transport Choice |
3 |
Increases transport choice
for non-drivers. |
|
Road Safety |
1 |
Reduces vehicle traffic. |
|
Environmental Protection |
2 |
Reduces vehicle traffic and
pavement requirements. |
|
Efficient Land Use |
1 |
Reduces road and parking
requirements. |
|
Community Livability |
2 |
Reduces traffic impacts. |
Rating from 3 (very beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.
Special Event Transportation Management increases Transportation Options, particularly for non-drivers, which tends to benefit lower-income and transportation-disadvantaged people, and benefits just about everybody by reducing traffic and parking problems. Such programs may involve subsidies for program management and shuttle buses, but these are often no greater than subsidies for road and vehicle parking. They can improve Basic Access.
Table 4 Equity Summary
|
Criteria |
Rating |
Comments |
|
Treats everybody equally. |
2 |
Services are generally
available to anybody. |
|
Individuals bear the costs
they impose. |
0 |
Requires subsidy, but often
less than for motor vehicles. |
|
Progressive with respect to
income. |
3 |
Usually improves affordable
transport options. |
|
Benefits transportation
disadvantaged. |
3 |
Increases transport options
for non-drivers. |
|
Improves basic mobility. |
1 |
May improve basic
transport. |
Rating from 3 (very
beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.
This strategy can be appropriate in both large urban areas, where traffic problems are chronic, and in towns and rural areas where a major event can create significant acute, short-term traffic problems. Programs are usually planned and implemented by regional or local governments, or by developers and private companies that manage events.
Table 5 Application Summary
|
Geographic |
Rating |
Organization |
Rating |
|
Large urban region. |
2 |
Federal government. |
1 |
|
High-density, urban. |
3 |
State/provincial
government. |
1 |
|
Medium-density,
urban/suburban. |
2 |
Regional government. |
3 |
|
Town. |
2 |
Municipal/local government. |
3 |
|
Low-density, rural. |
2 |
Business Associations/TMA. |
3 |
|
Commercial center. |
2 |
Individual business. |
2 |
|
Residential neighborhood. |
2 |
Developer. |
2 |
|
Resort/recreation area. |
3 |
Neighborhood association. |
1 |
|
|
|
Campus. |
2 |
Ratings range from 0 (not
appropriate) to 3 (very appropriate).
TDM Program
Event transport management can include a variety of specific TDM strategies, including Transit Services, Shuttle Services, Ridesharing, Pedestrian and Cycling Improvements, Marketing, Parking Pricing, Parking Management, Vehicle Restrictions, and Commute Trip Reduction for event employees. This strategy overlaps Tourist Trip Management. It is a way to increase Transportation System Resilience, particularly when applied to emergencies and disasters.
Stakeholders can include event organizers, government agencies, travel services, visitors, participants, and employees.
Program funding is often a major barrier. Success usually requires support of event organizers, businesses, local organizations, and government agencies.
· Transportation management
should be considered in event siting and planning.
· Special Transit,
Shuttle and Rideshare services
can be part of event planning. Tour packages can be organized, such as a dinner
and bus transport to sporting or cultural events.
· Marketing for special events
should include information on alternative transportation. For example, people
who prepurchase tickets can receive information on how to reach the event by
transit.
· Give HOV
Priority for access and parking.
· Pedestrian
and Cycling Improvements may help provide access for people who arrive
without a car.
· Transportation systems
should be designed for Resilience, with diversity,
redundancy, efficiency, autonomy and strength in their critical components.
|
There
was this man in a red convertible driving down the highway with two penguins
in the backseat of his car. A cop pulled him over and said, “Hey, did you
know that you have two penguins in the backseat of your car?” The
man replies, “Yeah, I know! What should I do with them?” The
police responds, “Well, I think that you should take them to the zoo.” The
next day the policeman sees the same car driving down the highway, and it
still has the two penguins in the back seat. The policeman pulls it over again
and says to the driver, “Hey, didn’t I tell you to take these penguins to the
zoo?” The
man replies, “We did. And today we’re going to the movies!” |
Through
a massive advertising campaign, the San Francisco Giants convinced half their
fans to forsake cars when traveling to the new ballpark. This for a team that
moved to
How
did they do it? Public relations, says Giants ballpark transit director and
former Allan Jacobs student Alfonso Felder. The Giants embarked on a mission to
drill the pro-transit message into the soul of every single fan.
“Really,
no matter how you interacted with the Giants, whether it was with our Web site,
our broadcasts, whatever, it would have been hard not to have been touched by
the message, which was that there were a number of ways to get to
|
“Franchise
Owners Are Finding New Life in Old City Centers” Peter
Keating, ESPN Magazine, 1 March 2004, p. 110. Downtown
homes are better for teams than suburbs. From the From
1965 to 1985, the number of major league franchises in suburbs rose from five
to 29. Since then, 58 of 87 new major league stadiums or arenas have been
built in or near central business districts of cities. Falling crime rates is
one explanation, but there are others. Population density in cities lets
urban teams (and advertisers) reach more fans than they could in suburbs.
Downtown teams can also sell local entertainment besides sports, which has
obvious appeal to anyone who has sat in a parking lot outside The Pond
wondering what to do after a game. And well-developed systems of mass transit
let fans reach teams more easily than they can in the suburbs. Finally,
cities generally inspire stronger ties than do suburbs. “Teams can develop
loyalty through allegiance to a well-defined location,” says Pilson. Playing
in a city is an ideal way to build community identify and value.” |
King
County Metro has incorporated special event ridematching into its regional
rideshare program (www.rideshareonline.com).
To
use the service, visit the website and select an event from a list that
currently features more than 30 picks. Then, enter some basic information,
including your name and home address or a nearby intersection. If others who
live near you are also looking for a buddy for that event, their e-mail
addresses will pop up. You can even check a map to see who's attending and lives
closest to your home. People then e-mail one another privately, screening
potential buddies for the right match.
In
coming months Metro plans to launch a similar effort organizing rides to
private events. In a region where traffic worsens by the year, the ability to
go online and find a car pool fast can revolutionize the way people get around,
according to Metro Planner Park Woodworth, or helped establish the program. The
possibilities are endless, including business meetings, little League games,
industry events, weddings. Neighbors on their way to the grocery could even get
online to check whether a nearby senior citizen needs a lift, producing social
benefits in addition to environmental and cost-saving benefits.
MOST
is a European partnerships to encourage sustainable transportation, with
special programs dealing with travel related to tourism, medical services,
education and special events. It's main aim is to develop and evaluate Mobility
Management (MM) strategies. It is a combined research and demonstration
project. MOST is sponsoring a number of case studies and examples of mobility
management at temporary sites, including festivals, fairs and other large
sports and cultural events, and when transportation facilities are under
construction. Two examples are described below.
A
mobility management program was developed to facilitate the efficient movement
of the thousands of visitors in
The
city of
The city of
During
a 3-year freeway widening project on Highway 101 in
The Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo (HLSR) is the largest
livestock exhibit in the world. It attracts two three million visitors and
generates more than a quarter billion dollars in revenue during two weeks of
operation at the Astrodome each February. To address the huge traffic and
parking problems created by these huge crowds, in 1988 HLSR officials and
regional transportation agencies organized the Rodeo METRO Express, a park-and-ride
shuttle bus service which averages 16,000 patrons per day, representing more
than 15% of rodeo attendance. Buses are given priority access to the Astrodome,
resulting in significant time savings to those who use the shuttle. Adults pay
a $2 per round-trip fare, and children are free. This service has reduced
traffic and parking problems, allowing the rodeo to expand and attract new
patrons. The program is considered cost effective, with 77% of expenses paid by
users, and the remainder funded by sponsorships and the HLSR.
ACT (2004), The Role Of Demand-Side Strategies: Mitigating Traffic Congestion, Association for Commuter Transportation, for the Federal Highway Administration (http://tmi.cob.fsu.edu/act/FHWA_Cong_Mitigation_11%202%2004.pdf).
APTA (2000), A Winning Team: Transit and Sports Facilities, American Public Transit Association (www.apta.com).
Jodi Carson and Ryan Bylsma (2003), Transportation Planning and Management for Special Events, NCHRP Synthesis 309, Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org); available at http://trb.org/news/blurb_detail.asp?id=1327.
J. Joseph Cronin, Roscoe Hightower and Michael Brady (2000), “Niche Market Strategies; The Role of Special Purpose Transportation Efforts in Attracting and Retaining Transit Users” Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 3, No. 3 (www.cutr.eng.usf.edu), pp. 63-86.
CUTR (2006), Special Event Transportation Service Planning and Operations Strategies for Transit, Center for Urban Transport Research, Office of Research and Special Programs, USDOT and Florida Department of Transportation (www.dot.state.fl.us); available at www.dot.state.fl.us/research-center/Completed_Proj/Summary_PTO/FDOT_BD549_09_rpt.pdf.
Dunn Engineering (2002), Transportation Management Strategies for Special Events: Synthesis of Practice, FHWA, (http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_syn_309d.pdf).
Reid
FHWA (2003), Managing Travel For Planned Special Events Handbook, Office of Transportation Management, Federal Highway Administration (www.fhwa.dot.gov); available at www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/program_areas/sp-events-mgmt/handbook/handbook.pdf.
FHWA (2004), Managing Travel for Planned Special Events: First National Conference Proceedings, Office of Operations, FHWA (www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov); available at www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/program_areas/conf1204/index.htm.
FHWA (2006), Planned Special Events: Checklists for Practitioners, U.S. Federal Highway Administration; available at www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/psechecklists/index.htm.
FHWA (2006), Developing and Implementing Transportation Management Plans for Work Zones, Office of Operations, Federal Highway Administration (www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov).
FHWA (2004), Meeting the Customer’s Needs for Mobility and Safety During Construction and Maintenance Operations: Model Work Zone Traffic Management Program and Self Evaluation Guide, Office of Program Quality Coordination, Federal Highway Administration (www.fhwa.dot.gov).
Chris J. Fornal, Gary F. Rylander and Matthew J. LeTourneau (2006), “Milwaukee, WI, USA’s Summerfest Advanced Parking Guidance System,” ITE Journal, Vol. 76, No. 6 (www.ite.org), June 2006, pp. 34-44.
John M. Frantzeskakis and Michael J. Frantzeskakis (2006), “Athens 2004 Olympic Games: Transport Planning, Simulation and Traffic Management,” ITE Journal, Vol. 76. No. 10 (www.ite.org), October 2006, pp. 26-32.
Genevieve Giuliano and Jacqueline Golog (1998), “Impacts of the Northridge Earthquake on Transit and Highway Use,” Journal of Transportation Statistics, Vol. 1, No. 2 (www.bts.gov), May 1998, pp. 1-20.
Todd Litman (1999), First Resort; Resort Community Transportation Management, VTPI (www.vtpi.org).
MOST (2000), “Mobility Management for Temporary Sites,” MOST News, No. 1 (http://mo.st).
Planned Special Events Traffic Management Website (www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/program_areas/sp-evnts-mgmt.htm), sponsored by the U.S. Federal Highway Administration, provides information on special event traffic management.
T-Rex Project (www.trexproject.com)
includes both light-rail and major highway improvements in
TravelSmart (2004), TravelSmart Special Events Planning Resource Kit, Australian Greenhouse Office Travel Smart Program (www.travelsmart.gov.au/events).