Cover Image

Not for Sale



View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 39


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 38
38 Appendix A Survey Questionnaire and Results Question 1. Please provide us with the following information: Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Name: 100.0% 41 Position: 100.0% 41 Agency: 100.0% 41 answered question 41 skipped question 0 Question 2. What geographic region does your service area encompass? Please check the largest one that applies: Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Nation 0.0% 0 State 9.8% 4 Region 58.5% 24 County 26.8% 11 City 0.0% 0 Business park 0.0% 0 Other (please specify): 4.9% 2 answered question 41 skipped question 0 Question 3. How would you BEST describe how you operate the ridesharing program? (Check only one) Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Funded by us but contracted out 7.3% 3 Directly operated for the general public by the transit agency 43.9% 18 Directly operated for the general public by MPO/COG, TMA, or DOT 29.3% 12 Other (please specify): 19.5% 8 answered question 41 skipped question 0 Question 4. If you mentioned that the ridesharing program is operated by another agency, what is the name of that agency? Answer Options Response Count 6 Answered question 6 Skipped question 35

OCR for page 38
39 Question 5. Has your agency ever considered but rejected directly operating a ridesharing program for the general public? Response Response Answer Options Percent Count No, we've never considered directly operating a ridesharing program for the general public. 50.0% 1 Yes, but it was rejected. 50.0% 1 answered question 2 skipped question 39 Question 6. Why did you reject directly operating a ridesharing program for the general public? Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Inadequate staffing or budget to support an internal program 0.0% 0 Lack of management support 0.0% 0 Potential competition to transit operations 0.0% 0 Low customer demand 0.0% 0 Not considered central to our mission 0.0% 0 Because role is filled adequately by other agencies 0.0% 0 Other (please specify): 100.0% 2 answered question 2 skipped question 39 Question 7. Comments: Answer Options Response Count 2 Answered question 2 Skipped question 39 Question 8. How involved are you in the ridesharing services provided by another agency? (Check all that apply.) Response Response Answer Options Percent Count We pay some or all of the costs. 66.7% 2 We are involved in the planning and/or design of services. 100.0% 3 We permit or assist in marketing of ridesharing to transit riders. 66.7% 2 We permit carpoolers and/or vanpoolers to use our property for parking and/or pick-up points. 66.7% 2 We support ridesharing but are minimally or not involved in the provision of ridesharing services. 0.0% 0 Other (please specify): 66.7% 2 answered question 3 skipped question 38

OCR for page 38
40 Question 9. Comments: Answer Options Response Count 1 Answered question 1 Skipped question 40 Question 10. To what extent is ridesharing included in transit service planning? Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Ridesharing and transit are separate sections of the agency and seldom or never interface with transit service planning. 26.3% 5 Ridesharing and transit planners collaborate, but ridesharing is not seen as a substitute for transit service. 47.4% 9 We weigh whether ridesharing can substitute for existing or proposed transit service. 26.3% 5 Comments 6 answered question 19 skipped question 22 Question 11. Why is it important for ridesharing and transit to work together? (Check all that apply.) Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Regulations 9.8% 4 Environmental concerns 68.3% 28 Market demand from our customers 82.9% 34 Meet mobility manager policy goals 22.0% 9 Service area gaps not filled by existing transit service 97.6% 40 Improved access to public transit routes, stations or park and ride lots 73.2% 30 Increased access to businesses and services with limited parking 58.5% 24 Other (please specify): 14.6% 6 answered question 41 skipped question 0 Question 12. If you indicated on the above question that regulations are motivating factors for including ridesharing in the mix of transit options, please specify the type of regulations below: Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Local 11.1% 1 State 88.9% 8 Regional 33.3% 3 National 33.3% 3 Comments 5 answered question 9 skipped question 32

OCR for page 38
41 Question 13. Comments: Answer Options Response Count 4 answered question 4 skipped question 37 Question 14. Are you a transit system operator? Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Yes 68.3% 28 No 31.7% 13 answered question 41 skipped question 0 Question 15. Which of the following does your agency operate? (Mark all that apply.) Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Regular local fixed route buses (including shuttles and trolley buses) 85.2% 23 Express/limited/commuter buses 85.2% 23 Bus rapid transit 25.9% 7 Other (please specify): 33.3% 9 answered question 27 skipped question 14 Question 16. Paratransit vehicles Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Demand-response or flexible route service, including ADA paratransit 100.0% 26 answered question 26 skipped question 15 Question 17. Trains Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Commuter/passenger rail 57.1% 8 Heavy rail (e.g., subway, elevated railway) 21.4% 3 Light rail 35.7% 5 Streetcar, trolley or other fixed guideway rail service 14.3% 2 Other (please specify): 7.1% 1 answered question 14 skipped question 27

OCR for page 38
42 Question 18. Regarding ridesharing, how do you coordinate with regional planning entities (e.g., Metropolitan Planning Organization [MPO], Council of Government [COG], Transportation Management Association [TMA], Department of Transportation [DOT])? (Check all that apply.) Response Response Answer Options Percent Count The regional entity runs a complementary ridesharing program in our area. 28.6% 8 We run the ridesharing program for our agency, and a regional entity representative sits on our Board. 10.7% 3 We report the results of our ridesharing program to the regional entity. 39.3% 11 We attend regional rideshare meetings to plan and/or coordinate. 60.7% 17 We participate in activities sponsored by the regional entity, such as regional events and/or information tables at businesses. 46.4% 13 Our coordination is limited to occasional feedback on documents or programs. 10.7% 3 Not applicable 3.6% 1 Other (please specify): 32.1% 9 answered question 28 skipped question 13 Question 19. How do you prove that ridesharing is cost-effective compared to a transit route? (Check all that apply.) Response Response Answer Options Percent Count By comparing the operating and capital cost of transit versus the cost of a ridesharing program (e.g. cost per hour and subsidy per hour) 20.0% 5 With ridership measurements, actual or projected, for a transit route (e.g. riders per hour) 16.0% 4 We don't attempt to prove it is cost-effective, because it is considered part of our mix of mobility services. 68.0% 17 Other (please specify): 24.0% 6 answered question 25 skipped question 16 Question 20. If possible, please elaborate to help us understand the cost/benefit evaluation of ridesharing to your agency. Response Answer Options Count 9 Answered question 9 Skipped question 32 Over the past 3 years [our agency's] Rideshare Program has increased its fares charged to van riders three times and we are beginning to see signs that our fares are a deciding factor in choosing rideshare. So our Board has adopted a new policy on rideshare fares that attempts to maximize both operating and generated capital grant revenue (long-distance vans generate significant federal capital funds for [our agency]). We are testing our rideshare fare elasticity in an attempt to find the "sweet spot" where we maximize fare revenues AND federal capital dollars. We don't attempt to prove ridesharing is cost-effective, but if we want to reduce bus service, we measure ridership and cost to calculate subsidy per hour. The figure is generally obviously more than marketing a ridesharing program, less so in

OCR for page 38
43 the case of vanpools, which for a short time longer will be subsidized at $500/month (thereafter $350). We did make this comparison recently upon elimination of an express route, and vanpool subsidy expenses for the existing riders was still substantially less (although the fares were higher, too). Cost-effectiveness of the vanpool program is measured by the passenger trip subsidy compared to other transit options, VMT reduction and passenger trips. In addition, the program cost is measured against the increased federal allocation from 5307 funding. Cost/benefit evaluation for rideshare promotions compares the cost to the reach. Bus system monitors operating costs covered by passenger fares, so the same thing is done for vanpool service. It is a given that ridesharing options are cost-effective options where transit is not cost-effective, particularly in unserved communities and to suburban/rural destinations. As a transit agency, we look at the available funding sources and demand for services to see that vanpool is better suited to much of our market. We had done, for more than 20 years, an annual market survey to assess effectiveness of ridesharing efforts, but funding for this activity was removed last year. Lower cost of van, volunteer driver and no deadhead trips make unit cost for vanpool trips much lower than traditional transit. Comparing the op and cap cost of transit vs. ridesharing program cost would make sense, of course... Ridesharing is a very difficult process to get an ROI on, but we do measure self reporting mode use. Question 21. What is your transit system's annual operating budget? Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Under $500,000 0.0% 0 $500,000$999,999 0.0% 0 $1,000,000$99,999,999 68.0% 17 $100,000,000$249,999,999 4.0% 1 $250,000,000$499,999,999 16.0% 4 $500,000,000$999,999,999 8.0% 2 $1 billion or more 4.0% 1 answered question 25 skipped question 16 Question 22. What amount of your agency's current operating budget is devoted to ridesharing? Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Under 1% 38.5% 10 Between 1% and 4% 11.5% 3 Between 4% and 7% 7.7% 2 Between 7% and 10% 0.0% 0

OCR for page 38
44 10% or more 0.0% 0 Not applicable: We do not use operating funds for ridesharing. 26.9% 7 Don't know 15.4% 4 answered question 26 skipped question 15 Question 23. You indicated that you do not use operating funds for the ridesharing programs. How do you fund the ridesharing programs? Response Response Answer Options Percent Count We use staff time only, not direct operating funds. 14.3% 1 Other agencies bear the cost 42.9% 3 We only use targeted grant funds as they are available: Average grant size: 57.1% 4 answered question 7 skipped question 34 5 mil x 2 years We use rider fees and various grants and rideshare subsidies. We have begun using some FTA funds that come to our UZA due to the reporting of vanpool passenger trips and miles through the NTD program. The amount we have generated is a little over $600,000 annually. We make a point of not using any traditional funding. There is approximately $500k annual set-aside of CMAQ funds for TDM projects, including ridesharing. Next year budget $15,000, not including staff salary. We are funded from multiple grant sources - all are through MPO, county, or state. Question 24. How do you coordinate with other entities regarding ridesharing? (Check all that apply.) Response Response Answer Options Percent Count We report the results of our ridesharing program to another entity. 73.3% 11 We meet with public transit agencies in the area to plan and/or coordinate. 66.7% 10 We attend rideshare meetings with other kinds of agencies to plan and/or coordinate. 66.7% 10 We participate in activities sponsored by others, such as regional events and/or information tables at businesses. 80.0% 12 Our coordination is limited to occasional feedback on documents or programs. 6.7% 1 Not applicable 0.0% 0 Other (please specify): 20.0% 3 answered question 15 skipped question 26

OCR for page 38
45 Question 25. How do you determine if the amount spent on ridesharing is worthwhile? (Check all that apply.) Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Through customer satisfaction surveys or other customer feedback 42.5% 17 Through the number of people subscribed to/ signed up for the ridesharing program 65.0% 26 Through the number of successfully matched rides 47.5% 19 Through achievement of our goal to increase mobility in our service area 42.5% 17 Through environmental measurements, such as decreased carbon emissions 40.0% 16 Through adherence to regulations 5.0% 2 By closing a service gap 32.5% 13 By avoiding the need to add another bus or train 10.0% 4 Through cost savings to the agency 2.5% 1 Other (please specify): 27.5% 11 answered question 40 skipped question 1 Question 26. If you indicated in the above question that ridesharing fills a service gap or avoids adding another bus or train, please tell us how. (Check all that apply.) Response Response Answer Options Percent Count We use ridesharing to serve people who live in an area not dense enough to justify transit service. 84.2% 16 We use ridesharing to pilot a route as a test for potential ridership on transit. 21.1% 4 We substitute ridesharing for a transit route as a cost-saving measure. 31.6% 6 Other (please specify): 36.8% 7 answered question 19 skipped question 22 Question 27. The ridesharing program is located in the following department: Response Answer Options Count 39 answered question 39 skipped question 2 Service development We do not have ridesharing program, other than the paratransit program. Service planning Marketing N/A Planning and special services Transportation/operations It is located in our 511 Traveler Information program, which is managed from the "Operations" side of our MPO. (The other "side" is Policy.)

OCR for page 38
46 Service delivery (note: was previously part of communications and marketing/customer service) Planning Business services are a separate department that reports to the chief of staff (deputy executive director). Strategic services/ business development Transportation development Again, there are no ridesharing programs at [our agency]. There is a dedicated regional program at the MPO. Marketing/communications Just moved from transportation planning to transit services Service development Transportation demand management [State] department of transportation [Our agency's] ridesharing department reports to our chief development officer in charge of planning & customer service. Ridesharing is a separate budgetary cost center. Planning Planning and operations The rideshare program is a service of the regional travel options program, which is housed in the regional transportation planning program, which is housed in [an agency's] planning and development department. Transportation Operations Vanpool program Customer care and planning Transportation demand management department Customer service It is in the same department as the transit department. All costs are split through tracking of hours worked on each program. Overhead costs are divided between the two functions. State department of transportation, bureau of public transportation, office of transit and ridesharing [A county] department of transportation, transit division, paratransit/rideshare operations section Marketing Administered statewide by [a specific] council of governments, funded by [a state DOT] and [state] turnpike authority Transit system Planning and customer service Operations [A state] regional planning commission in [a city] Administration Question 28. How many person hours per week are devoted to the ridesharing program? Response Answer Options Count 38 Answered question 38 Skipped question 3 Less than 1 3 FTE 100

OCR for page 38
47 25 0 60 One person, 40 hours Here at the MPO, there is one full-time staff person and two part-time managers. This would equate to approximately 60 person hours per week. Our contractor staff totals approximately 14 FTEs. Between agency and contractor, about 18 FTE's 160 The vanpool program is contracted out to VPSI but is housed within our south terminal and the rideshare program has been recent gone regional in District 5, a state--operated program. We have 9 full-time staff members and one intern. 60, not counting vanpool administration 80 80 40 manager hours; 30 hours from two support staff 4 200 Unknown 90 About 5 45 3035 360375 There is not one person who handles this service. The schedulers handle all of the requested services, there is no division made based upon service types. 1 40 140 hours 20 hours for the vanpool program manager, 20 hours for the vehicle service and maintenance staff Approximately 27 On-staff? About 200. By contractors? Maybe 1,000. 2,000 160 3.5 FTEs, 140 hours per week or less 30 20 20 hours Average of eight Question 29. Is the ridesharing program marketed cooperatively with transit? Response Response Answer Options Percent Count No, the ridesharing program is marketed independently from transit. 37.5% 15 Yes, ridesharing and transit are marketed together. 62.5% 25 answered question 40 skipped question 1

OCR for page 38
48 Question 30. Who markets the ridesharing program? (Check all that apply.) Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Our agency 85.4% 35 Other (please specify): 61.0% 25 answered question 41 skipped question 0 Question 31. Does the ridesharing program include any of the following components? (Check all that apply.) Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Provide carpool and vanpool matching 87.8% 36 Help establish vanpools with vehicles our agency owns or leases 58.5% 24 Form vanpool through a third-party provider 53.7% 22 Provide parking for vanpools and carpools 39.0% 16 Provide guaranteed ride home 85.4% 35 Subsidize vanpool fares 51.2% 21 Market ridesharing to businesses 78.0% 32 Market ridesharing to transit riders 46.3% 19 Provide incentives (e.g., loyalty programs, Commuter Checks, prizes, recognition) 51.2% 21 Other (please specify): 17.1% 7 answered question 41 skipped question 0 Question 32. If you indicated in the above question that the rideshare program provides incentives, please check all incentive programs that you provide: Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Direct cash subsidies 37.5% 9 Loyalty programs 20.8% 5 Commuter Checks (e.g., vouchers used for multiple transit providers and vanpool service) 20.8% 5 Prizes 66.7% 16 Recognition in print or web publication 37.5% 9 HOV parking 16.7% 4 Parking discounts 4.2% 1 Transit fare discounts 25.0% 6 Other (please specify): 45.8% 11 answered question 24 skipped question 17

OCR for page 38
49 Question 33. Comments: Response Answer Options Count 2 Answered question 2 Skipped question 39 Question 34. Do participants in the rideshare program receive vouchers or other credit toward their transit fares? Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Yes 28.6% 10 No 71.4% 25 Comments 14 answered question 35 skipped question 6 Question 35. Do transit riders receive vouchers or other credit toward the ridesharing services? Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Yes 8.1% 3 No 91.9% 34 Comments 10 answered question 37 skipped question 4 Question 36. How does technology play a role in supporting the integration of ridesharing with transit? (Check all that apply.) Response Response Answer Options Percent Count The program has a trip planner that searches for both ridematching and transit options to satisfy a given query. 51.4% 19 The program has a link to ridematching for carpools and/or vanpools on our agency's website. 73.0% 27 Both the ridesharing program and transit operations are promoted on social media (e.g., Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn, etc). 40.5% 15 Customers can obtain carpool and vanpool matches for our program on a social networking site (e.g., Facebook, My Space, LinkedIn, etc.). 13.5% 5 Transit and ridesharing programs are accessible via a mobile phone app. 8.1% 3 Other (please specify): 18.9% 7 answered question 37 skipped question 4

OCR for page 38
50 Question 37. If you indicated in the above question that you use social media in promoting ridesharing with transit, what sites do you use? Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Facebook 84.2% 16 MySpace 5.3% 1 Twitter 63.2% 12 LinkedIn 0.0% 0 Other (please specify): 15.8% 3 answered question 19 skipped question 22 Question 38. How have you incorporated feedback from people who use the ridesharing program? (Check all that apply.) Response Response Answer Options Percent Count The ridesharing program is part of our agency because of customer requests for service. 27.0% 10 The ridesharing program was initially designed through interaction with customers. 16.2% 6 Customers are surveyed periodically for feedback. 43.2% 16 The customer services department of our agency collects comments, which are used to improve the program. 37.8% 14 Not applicable 21.6% 8 Other (please specify): 21.6% 8 answered question 37 skipped question 4 Question 39. If you indicated in the above question that you surveyed customers, how often do you survey customers? Response Response Answer Options Percent Count At least once a year 50.0% 10 Every 2 years 15.0% 3 Between 3 and 5 years 10.0% 2 Periodically--no set time frame 20.0% 4 Other (please specify): 5.0% 1 answered question 20 skipped question 21

OCR for page 38
51 Question 40. If you indicated that you surveyed customers, what survey mechanisms do you use for the ridesharing program? (Check all that apply.) Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Postal mail survey 25.0% 5 Telephone survey 35.0% 7 E-mail survey 75.0% 15 Part of an overall agency survey 25.0% 5 Other (please specify): 25.0% 5 answered question 20 skipped question 21 Question 41. What specific performance measures, if any, do you use to evaluate the ridesharing program? (Check all that apply.) Response Response Answer Options Percent Count We do not set specific performance measures for the ridesharing program. 26.3% 10 Number of participants measured against a goal 36.8% 14 Number of carpools and/or vanpools measured against a goal 42.1% 16 Avoided cost of transit service not required because of ridesharing program 2.6% 1 Number of residents and businesses included 21.1% 8 Increased miles or percent of service area covered because of ridesharing program 18.4% 7 Environmental goals reached, such as decreased carbon emissions 26.3% 10 Other (please specify): 28.9% 11 answered question 38 skipped question 3 Question 42. If you indicated on the previous page that you measure the number of participants as a performance measure, please specify the current number of participants served: Response Answer Options Count 18 Answered question 18 Skipped question 23 986 1,300 7,000 Again, we are not a transit agency, so we are only measuring rideshare participants. Our current database size is 28,000. 119 vanpools in the program and continuing to grow About 5,000 Approx. 3,000 3,540 429 vanpoolers, 4,472 in carpool database, 13,552 families in Schoolpool database 818 current van riders on 91 vans (as of January 2011) took 23,254 trips in January 2011. We make carpool matches but don't track them.

OCR for page 38
52 600 program applicants to date FY11. Our database currently has about 11,000 registrants. We have no idea how many of them are actually in carpools or otherwise use the system, again, due to limitations of the current system. 30,000--about 19K are in ridematching and 11 K are in guaranteed ride home Over 4,000 registered Rideshare Operations 2008 2009 2010 20092010 VanPools in Operation 1,031 937 933--0.43% Van Shares in operation 176 151 142--6% total commuter vans in operation 1,207 1,088 1,075--1% VanPool riders 2, 770,711 2,829,104 2,554,353--10% Van Share riders 377,839 358,350 296,647--17% total commuter van ridership 3,148,550 3,187,454 2,851,000--11% RSOnline applicants (month end) 12,148 9,188 11,853 29% 30,000 in database overall 9,000 commuters in statewide database 108 Question 43. What is the goal that you have set for the number of participants served? Response Response Answer Options Percent Count A policy goal 15.8% 3 A quantifiable goal 84.2% 16 Comments 14 answered question 19 skipped question 22 1,200 200 new registrations each year Average annual 10% growth, subject to market conditions We use "Clients placed into car/vanpools". This goal is a smaller subset of the number of people who sign up in our system. Of those that sign up, approximately 36% begin car/vanpooling. We call those successes "Clients placed". We have a "Clients placed" goal of 8,965. 2,000 new users added in 2011 In increase of 15% per year Increase participation by 3 percent or more each year. 100 vans in operation maximizing the combination of fare revenue and federal formula capital dollars 1,300 program applicants in FY11 Provide information and services to support increased use of travel options for all trips For ridematching: 2,370 daily vehicle trips reduced, 62,339 daily VMT reduced, 0.0031 daily tons of NOx reduced, and 0.017 daily tons of VOC reduced. For GRH: 12,593 daily trips reduced, 355,135 daily VMT reduced, 0.177 daily tons of Nox reduced, and 0.097 daily tons of VOC reduced. We also capture PM2.5, PM 2.5 Precursor, and CO2 reductions but there are no goals set. Number of reg. per region served, number of new van pools, different type of contacts with employers 5% increase over previous year end for commuter vans--20% increase in ridematch active registrants 2011: exceed 10,000. Question 44. If you indicated on the previous page that you measure the number of carpools and vanpools served as a performance measure, please specify the current number of carpools and vanpools served: Response Answer Options Count 18 Answered question 18 Skipped question 23 116

OCR for page 38
53 310 vanpools 27 68 carpools 17 vanpools 700 vanpools 119 275 vanpools about 150 carpools percentage increase from previous year typically in the 410% range 94 vanpools in service, estimated 500 carpoolers, 3,930 estimated Schoolpool families carpooling 91 current vanpools. We have provided a peak of 102 in the past 12 months 128 active vanpools 16 vanpools; unknown number of carpools 46 We measure VT, VMT, NOx, and VOC reductions. Carpools estimated from registered....van pools 11 See above--do not monitor carpools formed only active registrants at month end in ridematch system 3,700 car pools 60 vanpools (max. 75) 1,500 carpoolers, 42 vanpools (355 riders) Question 45. What is the goal that you have set for the number of carpools and vanpools served? Response Response Answer Options Percent Count A policy goal 16.7% 3 A quantifiable goal 83.3% 15 Comments 19 answered question 18 skipped question 23 120 3% growth per year 30 20 vanpools and continued expansion of carpools To serve 10% rider growth, average annual We don't measure car/vanpools served. We measure how many we have created. We serve any carpooler, whether we assisted in creating them or not. Between 5% and 10% but a lot is agency vanpools 50 new vanpools, 100 new carpools Percentage increase from previous year typically in the 410% range Increase participation and/or VMT reduction by 3 percent or more each year 100 sustainable vans at current fares. 130 active vanpools Provide information and services to support increased use of travel options for all trips 52 An additional 5 per year. Currently we're satisfied if we can maintain our historical number of ridesharers. See chart in first question Avg. 3,500 carpools and max 75 vanpools See previous statement.

OCR for page 38
54 Question 46. Casual carpooling, also known as slugging, is an informal system for carpooling without prearrangement. Drivers who want to add passengers, usually to take advantage of pricing incentives or commuter HOV lanes, invite strangers who are lined up at a stop to ride with them. Passengers are often picked up at transit stations. What is your agency's practice regarding casual carpooling/slugging? (Check all that apply.) Response Response Answer Options Percent Count There is no casual carpooling or slugging in our area. 69.2% 27 We tolerate the activities but do not encourage them. 15.4% 6 We prohibit these activities on our property. 0.0% 0 We encourage these activities by allowing pick up and drop off on our property. 5.1% 2 We encourage these activities by installing signs to formally designate pick up and drop off points on our property. 2.6% 1 We encourage these activities by promoting them in our written materials and transit announcements. 2.6% 1 We encourage these activities through information on our website. 5.1% 2 Other: 20.5% 8 answered question 39 skipped question 2 Question 47. Dynamic (or flexible) ridesharing, also an informal system for carpooling, involves ridematching in real time, where riders match with drivers over the phone or internet to form same-day or even on-the-fly carpools. What is your agency's practice regarding dynamic ridesharing? Response Response Answer Options Percent Count We do not view it as part of our mission. 30.0% 12 We are interested but not currently involved in dynamic ridesharing. 45.0% 18 We offer or are participating in dynamic ridesharing. 2.5% 1 Other (please specify): 22.5% 9 answered question 40 skipped question 1 Question 48. You indicated that you are offering or participating in a dynamic ridesharing program, please describe it. Response Answer Options Count 1 Answered question 1 Skipped question 40 Daily on-line matching through NuRide Question 49. What challenges have you faced integrating ridesharing as a complement to transit? (Check all that apply.) Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Not everyone considers ridesharing important to our mission. 40.0% 14 Some consider ridesharing as competition for transit riders and resources. 45.7% 16 Customers do not easily accept ridesharing as a substitute for full transit service. 28.6% 10 Staff competency does not include ridesharing. 8.6% 3

OCR for page 38
55 Staff competency does not include transit expertise. 2.9% 1 Another agency provides ridesharing and/or transit services. 11.4% 4 Other (please specify): 28.6% 10 answered question 35 skipped question 6 Question 50. Is there anything else you'd like to add about your ridesharing program or about the general topic of ridesharing as a complement to transit? Response Answer Options Count 15 Answered question 15 Skipped question 26 A rising tide lifts all boats. We promote and facilitate a full menu of TDM options, so commuters and employers can use what works best for them. [Our agency] does not operate a rideshare program itself other than the paratransit program, which is operated jointly with [another transit agency] . We do use the MTC 511 program. If we did operate a rideshare program it would be more focused on getting people to our stations. There is a problem with funding replacement vehicles when the vans get old and need to be replaced. Funding for vehicles seems biased to starting new groups, not to helping replace vans for older groups operating already. We have made a lot of progress in the past 3 years making vanpooling a much more visible service of the transit agency with a more active acceptance of vanpooling as an important service of our agency at management and board levels. Ridesharing and transit should go hand-in-hand. The purpose of ridesharing is to improve air quality, save money and enhance quality of life - just like transit. The notion of integrating services that encourage people to not use an SOV just makes sense from a user's perspective. Users should have a one-stop shop in which to learn about other ways to travel. A small percentage of our vanpool program includes vans that are parked at train stations for groups to complete the first/last mile of their train commute I am a strong advocate of keeping the rideshare program separate from the transit provider. My experience when they are combined and run by the transit agency is that rideshare options like carpool and vanpool are considered secondary options. Most of the money and staff time is directed toward transit. By placing the rideshare program in an MPO or other independent organization, all the modes receive equal treatment and the commuter is able to make an informed choice based on their needs. We have an amazingly good relationship with our local transit agency, which is supportive to the point of including carpool/vanpool in its marketing and providing fare subsid ies to vanpool riders within its boundaries. We greatly appreciate their partnership. Rideshare mode split numbers continue to decline nationally, as well as in our region. The majority of 2+ car trips are comprised of family members. It has proven very difficult to encourage strangers to share rides, for a wide variety of reasons. While ridesharing is important to keep in the mix, it is not the primary regional focus of our program. Ridesharing and transit work together. The notion that ridesharing compliments transit may work in some areas, but it's more efficient to provide all modes and let the commuter decide what's best for their situation. The importance of park and ride facilities should be explained in the study. Funding for vanpools can be generated through the counting and reporting of passenger trips and vehicle miles. The funding comes in the form of STIC funding to small UZA and direct funding to large UZA based on riders and miles. For example a vanpool traveling 90 miles 5 days per week will generate an additional $17,000 per year in FTA section 5307 funding to the agency. Small UZA can receive up to $900,000 a year in 5307 funds based on the number of STIC (Small Transit Intensive Cities) points achieved. A compliment to bus and light rail service that offers another public transportation choice to the public which strengthens transit agency image as providing solutions to congestion and greenhouse gas emissions. An example would be we do not have rideshare signs as other larger agencies, where we see a lot of commuters from our county traveling to the other counties. We need signage for ridesharing as well but do not relieve them. Other than vanpooling works!

OCR for page 38
56 Question 51. Do you have any questions about ridesharing as a complement to transit that we could address in this study? Response Answer Options Count 12 Answered question 12 Skipped question 29 Question 52. How could this or future studies about the interface of ridesharing and transit better help your system? Response Answer Options Count 14 Answered question 14 Skipped question 27 As stated previously, ridesharing seems to be on a decline. Short of paying people, are there other best practices that we should be implementing, both from the U.S., as well as other countries? Is transit really preferable to ridesharing? It seems to be here, but I haven't seen any research that actually addresses this. The mode split numbers seem to bear this out, though. I would like to see other practical applications of this program and suggestions that can improve this type of service in small urban and rural area. I believe this could be of great benefit if we can gather more data. Transit systems need to realize that ridesharing complements transit and is not competitive. We should focus on mobility management, no matter what means the commuter uses to get from point A to point B. Identify other successful or best practices to help us improve Appropriateness of marketing the ridesharing services together with transit--i.e., on the transit website. Should it only be on its own website with a link on the transit site? Identifying what seem to be implemented practices of overlapping rideshare and transit services as well as key coordination techniques with MPOs and TMAs Gaining understanding of other provider's successes, and tribulations. Provide information for business managers to understand how promoting rideshare helps the workforce and community Future studies need to present the possibilities in funding to transit agencies that may want to operate vanpools as a part of their transit fleet. In almost all cases they can provide a cheaper model than private operators. Place resources into educating and promoting to the public the lo w cost associated with carpooling as was done with recycling. Show how minimal funding (compared to transit) invested brings a huge return on investment for the appropriate technology tools needed. Strategies for more effective co-marketing Not sure Same as above Our region has a firm grasp on this topic.