The Portland Experience

gatecircleMobile - Wireless

Dec 10, 2013 (3 years and 9 months ago)

84 views

OpenTripPlanner
:

The Portland Experience

Transit GIS Clearinghouse
Webinar Series

National Center for Transit Research

Thursday, May 31, 2012

1

Presentation Overview


Project Background


Building the Open Source Community


Solving the Data Question


Testing & Evaluation


RTP Beta Launch and Reception


Future Directions

2

Project Background

3

About
TriMet


Provides bus, light rail,
commuter rail, and
paratransit

service to
Portland, Ore. region


Over 250,000 weekday
boardings

in 2011


Recognized leader in
open data and
innovative rider
information delivery

4

About
OpenPlans


NYC
-
based technology
organization founded in
1999; 50 people today



Focus on Livable,
Sustainable Communities;
Open Government; Open
Technologies



Contracted by
TriMet

to
support MMTPS Project


5

Livable

Cities

Gov

2.0

“Open”

MMTPS Project Overview

P
r
o
j
ec
t

T
a
sks

E
s
t
i
mat
e
d


C
o
m
p
l
e
t
i
o
n

Da
t
e

A
c
t
ua
l


C
o
m
p
l
e
t
i
o
n

Date



P
r
o
j
ect

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
ent

P
lan



Se
p
t
e
m
b
er

2
0
0
9



Se
p
t
e
m
b
er

2
0
0
9



Soft
w
a
r
e

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
ent and
i
m
p
l
e
m
ent
a
ti
o
n

o
f

w
o
r
ki
n
g

pro
t
o
t
y
p
e



J
a
nu
ary

2
0
1
1



Fe
b
r
u
ary

2
0
1
0



E
v
al
u
at
i
o
n

s
tu
d
ies

f
o
r

data

efficacy

and
OTP

pl
ann
ed trip r
e
su
l
ts



M
ay

2
0
1
1



Ju
ly

2
0
1
0


Jun
e

2
0
1
1

6


MMTPS: Multimodal Trip Planning System


Funded by Regional Travel Options (RTO)
grant from Portland Metro

Trip Planners, Circa 2009


Primarily single
-
mode (e.g. bike
only, transit only)



Most transit
agency planners
relied on
proprie
-

tary

technology
outside of
agency’s control

7

Multimodal Trip Planners


Support planning integrated trips across
multiple modes (e.g. bike, walk, transit)


Several active, emerging projects as of
2009, but no framework for cooperation

8

Why Open Source?

9


Proprietary solutions
often cost
-
prohibitive



Early innovation in
multimodal routing
driven largely by open
source projects



Challenge: build
unified multimodal
routing platform with
strong user/developer
community


MMTPS Project Goals


Develop
a complete open source, multi
-
modal trip planner building on existing open
source trip planning and routing tools


Build a healthy development community to
ensure long
-
term growth and support


Deploy a working trip planning system using
TriMet's

datasets for use in Portland


Test usability and accuracy of trips planned
using the new system


10

Building the Open Source
Community

11

Kick
-
Off Workshop: July 2009

12

Key Workshop Take
-
Aways


OTP
would use an open source
development method


OTP would use open architecture


Open
data would be explored as an
option


An appropriate open source software
license would be explored


13

The Open Source Approach


Code available under agreed
-
upon open
source license (GNU Lesser General
Public License)


Collaborative
method
for
tracking work
and
progress using online issue tracker


Established system for proposals and
voting by project contributors


Active project mailing lists and chat room

14

Typical OTP Workflow

15

Data Inputs

OTP

Graph

Builder

Graph

Object

OTP

Tomcat

Server

API

Third
-

Party

Apps

Main OTP

Webapp

Progress in Year 1


Established
project name, domain, and basic
project infrastructure (e.g. issue tracker)


Designed trip
planner Application
Programming Interface (API
)


Initial implementation of core modules:


Core
routing engine


Narrative
engine


Data
store and manager


Front
-
end
user interface


Administrative
user interface


Initial documentation and packaging






16

2010: One
-
Year Anniversary


“Sneak Preview” event held in July 2010,
one year after kickoff workshop


Initial wave of positive publicity helps
build anticipation for launch

17

Progress in Year 2

Wide Range of OTP Bug Fixes and Enhancements, Including:


Overall speed
/ performance / memory usage
improvements


Improved transfer support (
minimum
transfer times;
transfers now routed on walking network)


Improved wheelchair accessibility support


Support for traffic circles / roundabouts


Better slope visualization and slope override for bridges


Preferred/non
-
preferred/banned routes


Better Code documentation, tutorials and user guides


Translations from English into
seven
languages

18

Solving the Data Question

19

Multiple Data Sources Required


Transit Data
: General Transit Feed
Specification (GTFS) feed, already
maintained by
TriMet


Elevation Data
: National Elevation
Dataset (NED)
rasters
, open data
maintained by USGS


Street Network Data
: Open Question at
outset of MMTPS project

20

Street Network Considerations


Does
it have the necessary attribution to
support multi
-
modal
routing
in the Portland
Metro area? Can it support driving directions
for a future phase?


Is the
linework

seamless between
jurisdictions

(including neighboring cities in
OR & WA) and
is it accurate?


Is it
affordable
?


What are the
maintenance and update

issues?


21

Data Sources Considered

1.
Commercial routable street networks
,
such as
TeleAtlas

and
Navteq


22

PROS


Seamless, worldwide
d
atasets


Have necessary
attributes for
multimodal routing



CONS


Very expensive


Proprietary licenses


Agency loses control
over data update
process



Data Sources Considered

2.
RLIS Street Centerline File, m
aintained
by Metro


23

PROS


Accurate
linework

based
on aerial photography


Consistent with regional
base map


No licensing fees



CONS


Lacks some attributes
needed for routing


Not seamless beyond 3
-
county core coverage
area



Data Sources Considered

3.
OpenStreetMap

(OSM)


24

PROS


Free & non
-
proprietary


Designed for routing


Seamless across U.S.


Large community of
maintainers


Aligns with
TriMet’s

open
data policy



CONS


Relies on user
-
maintained
“crowd
-
sourced” data


Not consistent with
regional base map


Linework

needs
improvement in some
cases


Evaluation Process


Preliminary instance of OTP set up for
testing using RLIS street centerline
dataset


Second
instance of OTP
created
for
Portland using OSM
data for comparative
purposes


Further analysis
concluded that the OSM
street network should be used for routing
rather than the local RLIS
dataset

25

OSM Improvement Project

Team of four
TriMet

interns
spent much of 2011 improving
Portland OSM data


Improve street alignment
geometry


Add additional
linework
:
(missing
streets, trails,
bicycle
lanes, etc.)



Add/correct attribution



Verify street directionality
and add
turn
restrictions


26

Testing & Evaluation

27

Preliminary Testing, 2011


Transit Testing



250 trips collected from
call
-
center inquires fed into OTP
-
based
planner;
OTP itineraries were found to be
consistently accurate and
optimal


Bicycle Testing



15 typical bike trip
within
TriMet

service area selected for
testing OTP against two other bike
planners, using both default and
customized weighting configurations

28

Bicycle Evaluation Results


Does
the OTP router choose safe, efficient
bicycle routes
? Yes, assuming OSM contains
complete and accurate data on bicycle
infrastructure and road type, as is the case
in the test area.



Do user specifications (quickest trip vs.
safest trip) generate meaningful results?
Yes, once the specific values selected for
each weight are given careful consideration
and testing

29

Bicycle Evaluation Results


Are
the routes easy to follow
?
Are the
itineraries user
-
friendly?
Not initially,
however, improvements
made
and tested in
preparation for the public
release


specifically, simpler routes with fewer steps
and minimized number of turns



Does the OTP router break up elevation
gain/loss efficiently?
Yes;
OTP results are
comparable to existing bicycle trip planners,
particularly for quickest
trip


30

Bike
-
to
-
Transit Performance

31

Key Insights from Testing


OSM
is capable of storing valuable, routable
information related to bicycle routing


OTP is capable of combining OSM data and
elevation data to produce viable bicycle
routes


Weighting will be critical to generating
optimal bicycle routes in
OTP


Further
development
needed to
generate
user
-
friendly itineraries from OSM
data
--

To
be addressed in advance of beta launch


32

Beta Launch & Reception

33

RTP Beta Launch: Oct. 15, 2011

34

Launch Features


Fully multimodal (bike/
ped
/transit) trip
itinerary planning


Advanced bike preference input via “bike
triangle” widget


Visualization of route topography


G
eocoding support (using legacy
geocoder
)


Support for printing and sharing trips


Support for GTFS
-
Realtime

alerts

35

Live Demo

36

Community Response

37

Future Directions

38

Replacing Call Taker Functionality


Open source geocoding


Group / field
-
trip reservation module


Preferred transfers editor


Customer service call
-
taker interface


Mailable

itinerary templates


Text
-
only interface

39

Next
-
Generation Interface


Migrate to more
modern, lightweight
mapping library


Leaner and more
adaptable UI design


Improved social
media integration

40

Mobile Support


OTP open architecture
supports development of
wide range of native mobile
apps as independent efforts


Native Android app
currently under active
development at USF


Better mobile support in
default OTP
webapp


41

OTP Analyst Package


Leverages OTP routing engine to enable
sophisticated analysis of transit accessibility,
level of service, and related measures

42

Automated Deployment


OTP
Deployer

automates creation
of OTP instance
given GTFS inputs



Option for long
term hosting and
data management
support

43

http://deployer.opentripplanner.org

Thank You!

David Emory

demory@openplans.org


Kevin Webb

kwebb@openplans.org


Bibiana

McHugh

mchughb@tri
-
met.org

44