Embracing Change in a Changing World -- Case Studies Applying New Paradigms for Rural and Small Urban Transit Service Delivery (2004)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

1 INTRODUCTION There is a natural aversion to change among most organizations and this is no less so among transit systems. For exam- ple, TCRP Report 53 states that “Little has changed fundamentally in how transit ser- vices have been designed and provided in the last half of the 20th century” and that “The world in which transportation needs arise and are accommodated has changed dramatically.” These two statements de- scribe transit organizations as standing still while the world around them changes. While rural transit has only been in opera- tion for the past 20 years, it too is at risk of becoming outdated. Rural areas have been transformed in many ways. The evidence of a changing rural world includes a number of demographic, land use, economic, communications, and attitudinal changes. For example, almost 100% population growth on the urban fringes of areas such as Northern Virginia and Austin, Texas, have transformed these areas from rural places into large subur- ban sprawl communities with major em- ployment bases. Yet during the 10 years of this phenomenal growth, federal transit funding for these areas did not change— the areas were still considered rural. The societal changes have been rapid and dramatic, requiring the transit systems serv- ing these areas to adapt to the new para- digms. How do the rural systems that serve these communities adapt to meet the new paradigms? That is the primary question that was examined in these case studies. Study Purpose The purpose of this research is to identify and examine four systems that have adapted to the new rural paradigms. This research examines how and why these sys- tems adapted to the new paradigms. Each case study will be examined with the intent of serving as a guide for other systems to adapt to the 21st century and its new para- digms. It is hoped that these case studies will inspire managers who read this docu- ment and then spur them to action. The New Paradigms— A New Way of Thinking The new paradigms constitute a different way of thinking about the business of rural transit. “These paradigms suggest that what rural operators really need to change is how they view themselves and the strate- gies they employ to provide ser- vices” (CUTR, 2003). The underlying theme is that adapting to the new para- digms requires thinking differently about how they operate service. Each of the sys- tems reviewed in the case studies thinks differently, as is demonstrated by the sys- tems’ unusual approach to the provision of service and their successful adaptation to change. The systems changed not because they wanted to, but rather because they had to change in order to maintain their rele- vance in the community. Each changed in reaction to new paradigms in the service area (often demographics), in technology, and/or in funding. New ways of providing transit are neces- sary as new commuter patterns develop in response to (1) businesses moving to the urban fringe and (2) growth consequen- tially pushing even farther into rural areas. In the initial TCRP Project B-22 work, sev- eral new paradigms were identified for ru- ral transit. These paradigms were based, in part, on paradigms developed for urban ar- eas and reflect attributes of innovation at rural and small urban areas. They include themes reflecting the community context as well as attributes of innovative transit or- GENERAL OVERVIEW ganizations. They were modified slightly

2 for the case studies. The new paradigms reflecting the changes faced by rural transit systems are as follows: 1. Serving as Community Agents of Change As we will see in the case studies, pro- found changes to these communities, often demographically influenced, drove these transit systems to adapt to their new envi- ronments. TCRP Report 70 notes that the key to serving as community agents of change is to understand the changes in the community and to be able to change itself. TCRP Report 70 also notes that an essen- tial ingredient to change is active involve- ment in the communities being served. Representation and participation in com- munity activities and organizations, look- ing for an opportunity to address a group, and being present and visible at community functions all help a transit system serve as a community agent of change. 2. Optimizing Rural Resources To provide transportation in rural and small urban areas with modest resources, it is essential that transit organizations squeeze the most out of every dollar. Stretching dollars, sharing costs, and con- tracting when feasible are all common ac- tivities. TCRP Report 70 highlights a sys- tem that takes this paradigm much further than most, using some very innovative ap- proaches to getting more vehicles into the community, thus ensuring that residents in need get service—not always directly from the transit system. 3. Adopting Technology Research has indicated that there have been few successes in adapting intelligent trans- portation systems (ITS) for rural areas due to high cost, relatively low benefits, and complexity. Adopting ITS requires signifi- cant expertise. This research will look at how one system, Capital Area Rural Trans- portation System (CARTS), has success- fully adopted multiple technologies to benefit both the system and its riders. 4. Acting as Entrepreneurs The entrepreneurial spirit is alive and well among some rural and small urban transit systems. These systems operate as busi- nesses even when they are a part of a gov- ernment. A number of rural operators have become much more businesslike. Instead of expecting government support, these en- tities seek to sell a variety of services to the private sector (as well as the public sector), in order to bring in additional funding, thus reducing dependency on a governmental source of funds. 5. Providing Effective Service Called “state-of-the-art service” in TCRP Project B-22, this paradigm was renamed to get to the heart of the matter. Efficiency has been described as doing things right, while effectiveness constitutes doing the right things. Effective service can be ser- vice that attracts a healthy ridership, brings in significant revenue, or is seen as enhanc- ing the quality of life. In many communi- ties, the services of these transit systems are sought after and supported by the busi- ness community. These are all examples of GENERAL OVERVIEW effective service. Transit systems that pro-

3 vide effective service gain respect in their communities. 6. Maintaining Multiple Functions and Fiscal Diversity This element was not on the TCRP Project B-22 list, but our research indicates that service and fiscal diversity are critical to the ability to change and move forward. Merely running buses up and down streets is no longer sufficient for generating funds—in fact, in many cases (empty buses), it can destroy the credibility of a system. Transit systems must do more and tailor service to address specific needs. Transit systems may sell advertising to businesses, maintain other organizations’ vehicles, or even operate street-sweeping services. The systems that adapt do not de- pend on one source of funding and/or one type of service. They consider the govern- ment as just one source of funding. Adapting to New Paradigms The new paradigms reflect the direction that a rural transit system should go in or- der to accommodate the changing rural world. Change is difficult for many organi- zations. Adapting to a changing world, however, is a constant. Like any other or- ganization, if a transit system does not change to adapt to the changing world, as described by the new paradigms, then the system is in danger of becoming outdated. THE CASE STUDIES The study team selected three case studies for review. In addition, the study team con- ducted a technology review of a fourth case study. In each case, the principal investiga- tor conducted a detailed site visit to verify the data provided and to make first-hand observations. The case studies were se- lected based on the following: • Geographic diversity—including sys- tems in Vermont, Texas, and Washing- ton state. • Rural and small urban—so that one system is an isolated rural system; an- other is rural, but has some advantages of small urban service areas; and the third includes rural isolated areas and two small urban systems. • Types of services—including para- transit, fixed-route, long-distance medical, sponsored service, and other unique approaches. • Innovative skills—so that each of these systems adapts to new para- digms. The systems that were reviewed included the following: 1. Advance Transit (AT)—Based in Vermont, this independent nonprofit agency provides most of its service in the Lebanon/Hanover area of New Hampshire. AT recently transformed itself by promot- ing the system as the solution to parking and traffic problems at Dartmouth College, in the town of Hanover, and at the Dart- mouth-Hitchcock Medical Center (DHMC). Because of the provision of ser- vice at the college and medical center, much of the funding is supported by the private sector. AT is very careful about its selection of services—the proposed ser- vices must make business sense. AT also works closely with two states. 2. COAST—This small system in eastern Washington and western Idaho has taken a unique approach to the provision of transit. Realizing that the traditional transit re- sources were too thin to adequately meet needs (similar to most rural transit sys- GENERAL OVERVIEW tems), management came up with new

4 ways to share available resources to pro- vide more service in two states. COAST has a decidedly different mission than AT in that it never says “no” to requests for service. 3. Hill Country Transit District (HCTD)—Based out of rural central Texas, this transit system metamorphosed from serving primarily remote senior cen- ters to an 80-bus system providing true public transportation to nine rural counties and two separate small urban areas. The urbanized areas saw explosive growth, while the rest of the service area remained very rural. HCTD transformed itself as the demographics transformed part of its ser- vice area. The focus of this case study was on how HCTD identified this area of growth and how development and imple- mentation was accomplished. 4. Capital Area Rural Transportation System (CARTS)—In addition to the three systems reviewed in detail, we will focus on how CARTS addresses the Adopting Technology paradigm, because CARTS has embraced this paradigm as few other rural transit systems have. The following sections discuss each case study in detail. They provide a brief over- view of the system, discuss how the system has embraced the new paradigms, and re- view how the necessary changes came about. The case studies also examine how each system meets the key elements of in- novation. For each case study, the follow- ing aspects are reviewed: • How is the system different? • What is the progression from the previ- ous role? • Why did the system change? • How does the system adapt to new paradigms? • How did change happen? • What is the result? • What is in store for the future? GENERAL OVERVIEW