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.
5PROJECT BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Most transit agencies have received requests to implement a circulator route within downtown. The concept of a spe- cial downtown route, especially one that uses a trolley-style or other striking vehicle, appeals to downtown business interests and elected officials as a means to encourage and support downtown revitalization. Many cities have devel- oped and deployed downtown circulators; however, there is no significant literature documenting these programs and covering planning and development, barriers to imple- mentation, funding, performance, and strategies for mak- ing downtown circulators work. The limited information that exists is spread across the public, nonprofit, and pri- vate sectors. The purpose of this synthesis is to document the state of the practice in terms of the development, deployment, and sustainability of downtown circulator systems. Results of a web-based survey of a cross section of transit agencies in North America are used to document the following impor- tant issues: ⢠Why, how, and when the circulator began. ⢠Who are the major stakeholders? ⢠What is the target marketâemployees, shoppers, tourists, convention-goers, or residents? ⢠How is the circulator structured (administratively and operationally)âwho operates, service span and fre- quency, and type of vehicle? ⢠What are the barriers to success? ⢠Funding. ⢠Performance (ridership, productivity). ⢠Reasons for success or failure. ⢠Lessons learned. Survey results included transit agency assessments of the effectiveness of their downtown circulators, benefits and drawbacks, desired changes, and lessons learned. Agencies that have either not implemented or discontinued a downtown circulator were also surveyed to gain an understanding of the reasoning behind these decisions. This report includes a review of the relevant literature in the field. In addition, one chapter documents case studies, based on interviews with key personnel at selected agencies, to pro- file innovative and successful practices and to explore ongoing issues. Findings from all these efforts are combined to sum- marize lessons learned, gaps in information and knowledge, and research needs. This study is particularly timely in light of the FTA announcement in December 2009 regarding the availability of Section 5309 funds as discretionary grants for Urban Circula- tor Systems in support of the U.S. Department of Transporta- tion Livability Initiative intended to enhance communities by investing in healthy, safe, and walkable neighborhoods. TECHNICAL APPROACH The approach to this synthesis included: 1. A literature review. A Transportation Research Infor- mation Services (TRIS) search using several different keywords was conducted to aid the literature review. 2. A survey of transit agencies, described in the follow- ing paragraphs. 3. Telephone interviews with seven agencies selected as case studies. The survey of downtown circulators was designed to solicit information on the origin of the circulator, target market, stakeholders, administrative and operational struc- ture, barriers to success, funding, ridership and productiv- ity, and evaluation. Once finalized by the panel, the survey was posted and pretested. The pretest resulted in changes to the survey structure, placing important assessment ques- tions toward the beginning, as well as minor changes in logic and flow. The sampling plan involved a âcoreâ sample of transit agencies, many of which were recommended by panel mem- bers or other survey participants that operate downtown cir- culators. In certain cases, the sample included the transit agency and another public- or private-sector entity that over- sees circulator operation. The core sample included 42 transit agencies and other entities. An e-mail with an attachment from the TCRP program manager explaining the importance of the survey and a link to the on-line survey site was sent to each of the 42 agencies. A known contact was identified at each agency. Follow-up e-mails were sent approximately four, six, and eight weeks after the original contact to encour- age response. CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
To guard against missing any agencies that have imple- mented downtown circulators and to ensure a broader sample an identical e-mail message was sent to APTA transit agency members inviting their participation in the survey. Thirty-seven completed surveys were received from the 42 agencies in the core sample, an 88% response rate. An additional 41 agencies not included in the core sample became aware of the survey and also participated, for a final sample total of 78 agencies. Of the 78 respondents, 74 were transit agencies, 3 city departments of transportation (DOTs) responsible for operation and oversight of the downtown cir- culator, and 1 a transportation management association (TMA) affiliated with a downtown business improvement district. The 78 agencies operating within the cities in the sample range in size from fewer than 25 to more than 2,000 buses operating in peak periods. Note that this is the overall size of the transit fleet, not the number of downtown circula- tor buses operated. Table 1 presents the distribution of responding agencies by size. In cases where the responding agency was not the primary transit agency, the size of the primary agency was used to measure size. More than 70% of all responding agencies operate fewer than 250 vehicles in peak service. 6 FIGURE 1 Map of FTA regions. TABLE 1 TRANSIT AGENCIES BY SIZE TABLE 2 TRANSIT AGENCIES BY FTA REGION No. of Vehicles Operated in Maximum Service No. of Agencies Responding % Agencies Responding Fewer than 250 57 73.1 250 to 999 14 17.9 1,000 or more 7 9.0 Total 78 100 FTA Region No. of Agencies Responding % Agencies Responding I 3 3.8 II 5 6.4 III 10 12.8 IV 14 17.9 V 10 12.8 VI 7 9.0 VII 0 0.0 VIII 1 1.3 IX 17 21.8 X 8 10.3 Non-U.S. (Canada) 3 3.8 Total 78 100.0 Most of these smaller agencies were not included in the core sample. Table 2 shows the distribution of responding agencies by FTA region. Regions IX (southwest), IV (southeast), III (mid-Atlantic), and V (Great Lakes) had the most agencies responding. Figure 1 is a map of FTA regions. Figure 2 presents the distribution of survey respondents across the United States and Canada. Case study locations are shown by a large dot. ORGANIZATION OF THIS REPORT Following this introductory chapter, chapter two summarizes the findings of the literature review. Chapter three, the first of two chapters to present the results of the survey, focuses on the origin, structure, operation, and administration of downtown circulators. Chapter four discusses the responding agenciesâ assessment of the success of the downtown circulators. This chapter summarizes agency satisfaction with the circulator, potential improvements, and lessons learned. Chapter five reports detailed findings from each of the seven case studies. The selection process for case studies had several criteria: (1) include transit agencies of various sizes in different parts of the country; (2) include agencies at various stages of the implementation and operation of downtown circulators; (3) select a variety of agencies charged with operating or overseeing the operation of downtown circulators, includ- ing transit agencies, municipal DOTs, and a private-sector entity; and (4) include at least one agency that has discontin- ued its downtown circulator to reflect real difficulties facing downtown circulators. Chapter six summarizes the findings, presents conclusions from this synthesis project, and offers items for further study. Findings from the surveys and par- ticularly the case studies provide an assessment of strengths and weaknesses and likely future directions. Appendix A presents a copy of the on-line survey. Appen- dix B provides survey results by question. Appendix C is a list of all transit agencies participating in the survey.
7FIGURE 2 Survey respondents and case studies.
