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.
CHAPTER II SERVICE ROUTES INTRODUCTION AND MAJOR FINDINGS Service routes, known as community bus routes in Canada, are fixeci-routes designed to reduce the distances that elderly persons and persons with disabilities must travel to get to and from bus stops. Typically, smaller vehicles are used, and vehicles win travel on neighborhood streets or to man or hospital doorways to recluce walking distances. While routes are designed to better meet the needs of persons with disabilities and elderly persons, they are open to the public. Services can be planned as feeders to other f~xed-route services and can include a "route deviation" option. Service route planning typically considers demographics, housing for the target population, topography, and important destinations such as care centers, clinics, hospitals, shopping, and connections to regular fixed-route service. Consideration is - O also Even to the vattem of travel requests coming from paratransit services. This chapter provides a summary and comparison of the results of five case studies conducted to evaluate service routes. The case study sites are: Ajax, Ontario Richmond Hi, Ontario Madison County, IL · Madison, Wl · Margate, FL While Be main purpose in studying these sites is the service routes, many of these sites make use of options and enhancements such as the use of low-floor buses TARP B-IA II-1 Draft Final Report
and travel training. Therefore, it was not possible in aB cases to separate the effect of the service routes from these other options and enhancements or from sunultaneous service changes. Since two of the case study sites are In Canada, the analysis results for these cases were converted to US doDars and miles. The foDow~g conversion factors were used: $1.00 Canadian = $0.73 US ~ kilometer = 0.62137 miles Key findings from the case study research include: . . Service routes In each community hack their own unique personalities, which varied by the clientele served. Ajax served the general public, including elderly persons, persons with disabilities, students and young people, and mothers with young cniiaren. Madison County, AL also served the general public, but emphasized service to the developmentally disabled community. Richmond Hills emphasized elderly persons and persons with disabilities, and particularly catered to the less mobile elderly. Margate served the general public, but was dominated by elderly persons, particularly the more mobile elderly. Madison, Wl began with a service for the general public which was aimed at elderly persons and persons with disabilities. In its final configuration, however, Madison, Wl served mostly people otherwise qualified for the ADA paratransit service. Service routes were very successful In attracting ridership In 4 out of the 5 case study locations. The routes either contributed to growth In fuced-route TCRP B-1A lI-2 Draf! Final Report
ridership (3 cases) or greatly increased He capacity of He specialized systems aimed at elderly persons and persons with disabilities. · Service routes appeared to be highly successful In reducing paratransit demand. In Madison County, TE, where paratransit users were forced to use service routes where appropriate, paratransit demand declined 40 percent. Richmond Hid, where users were encouraged, but not forced to use the service route, paratransit demand declined around 30 percent. ~ Margate, where there was little coordination between paratransit and fixed-routes, paratransit demand still appears to be 30 percent below what might otherwise be expected. In addition to impacting paratransit service, service routes Impacted fKed route ridership In three out of five cases. In Richmond HiD it appears that the Community Bus service diverted some demand from elderly users of the fixed-route system; In Madison County, TE the fixed-route system was eliminated altogether; and In Margate, the service route system replaced a f~xed-route bus route which had been operated by Broward Counter Transit. Service routes appeared to save money In Hose communities where they are used to substitute for either fixed-route service or for paratransit service. However, when they were added to existing services, Hey did not save . . . money. Development of service routes required a new type of transit planning. This planning focused more on individual needs rather than on general planning concepts such as the use of population densities to design services. The planriing focused on ways to bring riders to He front door of shopping areas, TCRP B-IA II-3 Draft Final Report
. . . grocery stores, hospitals, etc. It also looked at Me trip patterns of the paratransit service. In ad five of the case stucly sites, the routes were changed significantly from the time the routes were first ~ntroducect to the most recent configurations. This flexibility is necessary for the systems to respond to changes In local community programs with parapet changes to the service route system. · Small low-floor buses were the vehicle of choice for service routes. Free systems used Orion II buses, while another used a Elf bus (economical low floor). The low-floor macle for quick and easy access and egress by We clientele of elderly persons and persons with disabilities. The smaller vehicle she allowed for maneuverability in parking lots as the buses approached front doors of mans, hospitals, and community residences. Madison County, IL was the largest service route system, ant! this system was successful In Tuning around a continual decline ~ f~cecI-route bus service. The success of the service routes is probably due to a number of different features, which Include the use of low-floor buses, good coverage of the county, extensive use of tone transfers, close coordination between the fixed route and paratransit services, and travel training. Loss of any of these features is likely to adversely impact the success of the Madison County service routes. The unique cooperation of human service agencies in Madison County also was critical to the success of the system. Although skeptical at first, these agencies became convinced that the service routes were Important to mainstreaming their clients and In helping their clients to become TCRP B-IA II-4 Draft Final Report
independent. The human service agencies are currently strong supporters of the service route system. . . Travel Pairing was used more extensively In Madison County than elsewhere. Agencies cooperated In providing training for their own clients, and transit supervisors also provided travel trancing. The experience in Madison Counter would indicate that cooperation from human service agencies and travel training could gready increase diversions from paratransit. Ridership response to the service routes was generally favorable. In the Canadian sites riders specifically commented on the great sense of _ _ c~ "community" that they felt when riding the community bus, and comments from Margate riders were similarly favorable. There was a more mixed review for Madison County, IL and Madison, Wl where paratransit users were forced to use Me systems. Some riders liked the service, and others complained Mat it took too long or lacked adequate assistance as compared with paratransit. CASE STUDY SITES Table II-1 below provides a summary of key service and demographic information for the five case study sites. A variety of service route applications were examined. Two sites (Ajax and Richmond HiD) operate single route services. Margate is a four route system. Madison County, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin are extensive applications of the concept. Following is a brief description of each service studied. TCRP B-IA II-S Drap Final Report
Table Il-~. Characteristics of Case Stucly Sites . SITE l POPULATION NO. SERVICE | NO. | SE VICE DAYS/HOURS I HEADW ~Y I YEAR [ OF SERVICE ROUTE | SERVICE | | (minute ) I SERVICE [ l AREA | VEHICLES | ROUTES | I I INITIATED Ajax, Ontario I 60,000 1 I I I M S: 9:03am-5:53pm 1 90 1 1992 1 Su~ 11:33arn-5:23pm 1 1 1 Richmond 1 95,650 1 I 1 I M-: 9:30am- 5:30pm 1 90 1 1993 1 Hill, Ontario adison 1 226,643 33 1 16routes 1 M-: 5:28am-6:59pm 1 60 1 1989 County, IL l l | Sat Limited service l l l Madison, WI 1 191,262 10 1 9 1 M- 8:00arn-5pm L 60 1 1992 11 argate,FL 1 42,985 5 1 4 1 M- 7:35am-6:50pm 1 60 1 1994 1 I I I Sat Limited service I weekda~s I 1; l l | | Saturda' s TCRP B-1A II-6 Draf! Final Report
Ajax, Ontario Ajax Transit operates conventional fixed-route, paratransit (known as Handi- Trans) and community bus (Flag Bus) service in Ajax, Ontario. Ajax has a population of 60,000. It is part of the Durham region, which consists of Ajax, Brock, CIarington, Oshawa, Pickering, Scugog, Uxbridge and Whitby. The Durham region covers 954 square miles and a population of approximately 600,000. Ajax Transit's f~xed-route service is not currently accessible. The 20 vehicle fleet is made up of sixteen 40-foot buses, three 30-foot buses, and one 35-foot bus. The service operates eight fixed-routes Monday through Friday between 5:13 am and 9:07 pm, and Saturday between 7:15 am and 9:07 pin Service is provided from the Government of Ontario (GO) rail station after 9 pm until 1:30 am Monday through Saturday. Headways vary among routes, with some routes having Monday through Friday rush-hour service. Almost ad routes begin and end at the GO rail station in Ajax. GO provides commuter rail service to and from Toronto, as wed as providing local bus service. Adults fixed-route fares are $~.50 Can., while those over age 55 pay $0.65 Can. Handi-Trans, a paratransit service, operates primarily in Ajax, but includes Durham Region and selected locations outside of He local area. Reservations can be made up to 14 days ~ advance, although same-day service may be available. 30% of Handi-Trans total riclership is clemand response/same day. The Handi-Trans fleet is comprised of three low-floor Elf buses. Fares are $~.50 Can. Ajax Transit ~ntrocluced the "Flag Bus" In September 1992. The goal of the Flag Bus was to create a fixec3-route serving He most common destinations of the Hancti- Trans system and the elderly. The service was designed to serve six senior residences, a TCRP B-IA II-7 Draft Final Report
hospital and two medical centers, four shopping plazas and two shopping centers including an Indoor mad In the neighboring town of Pickering. Service is provided using a low-floor Elf bus with a seating capacity of 19 ambulatory and three wheelchair positions. Drivers are Handi-Trans trained, therefore, passengers receive door-to-door driver assisted service. Handi-Trans riders are encouraged to use the Flag Bus. The Flag Bus schedule is based upon timepo~nts, which are located at designated destinations shown on He schedule. The 90 minute headway allows ample time for wheelchair boardings and stops for people who have flagged down the bus between regularly scheduled route stops on the circular route. The primary transfer point to and from the fixed-route system is Ajax Plaza (see Figure II-1). Fares on the Flag Bus are the same as for regular fixed-route buses. Thus for elderly Flag Bus users, the fares are less on the Flag Bus ($0.65 Can.) than on the Handi-Trans ($~.50 Can.~. Richmond Hill, Ontario Richmond Hill is a fast growing suburban community In the South York region, norm of Toronto. Its population in 1995 was around 95,650 people, which is over three fumes what it was In 1975. Richmond Hid is around 2.3 miles by S.7 miles or 20 square miles in area, implying a density of around 4,800 persons per square mile. It has contrasts of open fields across He street from new developments with large homes on small lots. Transit service within Richmond Hid is overseen by He Transit Department. Conventional bus service within the community is provided on eight routes wad 40 foot flyer buses. The service is operated and maintained by a private contractor. The service is available six days per week from around 6:00 AM to 7:15 PM. Richmond HiD is also TCRP B-IA II-8 Draft Final Report
Figure Il-~: The Flag Bus at Ajax Plaza .. TCRP B-1A II-9 Draft Final Report
served by GO Transit bus routes and a commuter raid station which provide service into Toronto. Specialized service for elclerly persons and persons with disabilities is operated anct maintained by the Transportation and Works Department of Richmond Hid. This service inclucles one Orion II vehicle (Iow-floor) used for a demand responsive Mobility Bus, and one Orion I] vehicle used for the Community Bus, which is a service route. The drivers are employees of this department but are supervised by the Transit Department. The dispatch operation for the service is done from the Transit Department. The Mobility Bus and Community Bus both operate between 9:30 AM and 5:30 PM. There also is an accessible taxi service available, with two accessible vehicles. For this service passengers pay He regular bus fare. The taxis use the meter to determine the appropriate fare, and bid the Transit Depardnent the meter amount less the fare. The subsidized service is available five days per week between 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM. The Community Bus, Mobility Bus, and subsidized accessible taxi service are available 5 days per week. The accessible taxi service is always available outside of these hours for anyone wanting to pay the meter rate. Service on the Mobility Bus and subsidized taxi service must be requested at least 24 hours In advance. Richmond HiD Transit started their Community Bus service In 1993. This service was Implemented in addition to their existing fixed-route and parat:ransit services. It was designed to relieve the growing demand for door-to-door service. The Community Bus serves many high rise residences for elderly persons, shopping facilities, and medical facilities. The Community Bus provides service every 90 minutes on a fixed TCRP l9-IA II- 10 Draft Final Report
route which travels north and south on Yonge Skeet, with detours to elderly housing complexes, condominiums, hospitals, shopping center, and Yonge Street businesses (see Figure II-2). Although the service is a fixed-route, it was intended only for persons with disabilities and elderly persons. Indeed, this is Me population it serves, and it is quite popular with people using walkers as well as wheelchairs. Drivers assist people in going door-to-cloor, thus the level of assistance is the same as for the Mobility Bus. The fares are We same for conventional transit, the Community Bus, the Mobilizer Bus, and the taxi service. Elderly persons paid $~.00 Can. in 1996, while younger persons wad disabilities paid $2.00 Can. The Orion II bus is very Important to the Community Bus. The low-floor makes its use by wheelchairs and walkers feasible, and often it fills to capacitor. However, a larger bus would not be able to maneuver in the tight parking areas which are part of the Community Bus Route. Madison County, Illinois Madison County Transit (MCT) operates a service route system (known as the MCT Shuttles) and paratransit service (known as the ACT Door-to-Door serviced in Madison County, IL. MCT also contracts with Bi-State in St. Louis for bus service from the county into St. Louis. Altogether the MCT service area covers 54 percent of Madison County and 90 percent of the population of 226,643 persons (as of Me 1990 census). Most of tibe county is rural, with the population concentrated In Tree subareas which are covered by the transit service. These population centers are separated by large tracts of primarily agricultural land. The Alton-Wood River small urbanized area and adjacent communities comprise the northwest sub-area. Included are t he cities of Alton, TCRP B-IA II-11 Draft Final Report
Figure Il-2: Map of the Richmond Hill Community Bus Route _ I__ _. LEGEND 1 Richmond Heights 2 Sunnybrook Food Market 3 Dunlop Residences 4 Rosetown Apts. 5 York Central Hospital 6 York Med {250 Harding) 7 Weston Produce Plaza 8~9 Marshall ~ Observatory Residences 10 Bait Blvd. Residences 11 Hillcrest Mall 12 South Hill Plaza _ Community Bus Route ~ · - ' : ~ I . BEDfORO?~ ...... . . .. . .... . . ... ... ..... ...... . .. .. . - . ; ,. ............. .. ·','''.;' Yotrk'Cen~l.~' ,'|,. /2,''.' .'''., ;' '"I:' '''4:''''' . , v`,.,,,. ~OPST ~; ; ~ . . :- -: .-, ': . iL~..'\., ' :''' ;.,,.:' ': . 16~ AVER : . . . : . ~: ; : TCRP B-IA Il-12 t Draft Final Report
South Roxana, and Wood River. The northwest sub-area contains approximately 75,000 residents. The Tri-Cities sub-area ~nclucles Me communities of Granite City, Madison, and Venice, and is located In the southwestern portion of the district. This sub-area has a population of 65,000 residents. The central county subarea ~nclucles me cities of CoUinsviBe, EdwardsviDe, MaryviBe, and Troy. These communities are located along a north-south corridor clefined by Illinois Rt. 159, and have an approximate population of 60,000 residents. Bi-State provides express bus service for commuters between Madison County and St. Louis ant! also provides some limited local service. Fares In 1994 were $~.00 on local service and $~.30 on express. Fares for elderly and persons with disabilities were $0.50 and $0.65. The ACT Door-to-Door service operates throughout the counter with a fleet of 25 raised roof vans. Reservations must be made a day In advance, although some same day service Is available. Foes are $~.00 with a $2.00 ``are to St. Louis. The heart of the MCT transit system, however, is the MCT Shuttle, which is a system of service routes. MCT has developed the service route concept further than most other transit systems in Norm America. MCT began implementation of the MCT Shuttle In 1989, and it currency covers most of the service area. Service routes were developed to replace a local fixed-route bus service which had been operated almost exclusively by Bi-State In St. Louis. The MCr Shuttle is 100 percent accessible, and is made up of 20 Orion IT low floor buses and 13 body-on-chassis buses with lifts. The service was designed to minimize the wading distance for likely users of Me buses. For example, routes were TCRP B-IA II-13 Draft Final Report
designed so buses pull into Me parking lots of every grocery store, senior center, hospital, and similar sites. Trip request of paratransit users are cont~nuaDy analyzed to determine if these people could be served by the MCT Shuttle. Shuttle routes and schedules are adjusted as needed to serve other customers. For example, the service was adjusted to serve group homes and to bring developmentally disabled persons to sheltered workshops. This means Mat riders need to look carefully at the schedule to read special notes which may indicate the bus win be taking a different path than shown on the schedule map. The MCT Shuttle service is scheduled based on "time points," which are located at designated street corners or other destinations shown on the schedule map. There are five transfer points where the bus schedules are coordinated. One is In Alton Square, a shopping mall, where seven local routes meet on the hour. A second one is in Granite City at the transfer center where five local routes, a regional route, and an express route meet at 25 minutes after the hour. A Gird point Is at the Sou~em ruinous University at Edwardvide where two local and one regional routes meet. A fourth Is In downtown CoLinsviDe, where two local routes, one regional route, and a route from a neighboring county meet. P~naDy, two local routes meet at Wood River. Figure IT-3 shows the MCT Shuttle system. The operation of the MCT Shuttle service and Me ACT Door-to-Door service are closely tied together. The original drivers of Me MCT Shuttle service came from the ACT Door-to-Door service, and many Divers have served on both of the services. The ACT reservation operators are well aware of Me MCT Shuttle, and win encourage those requesting Me ACr Door-to-Door service to try Me MCT Shuttle service whenever feasible. They win often insist that Me MCT Shuttle service be used if it has been TCRP B-IA II-14 Drafl Final Report ?
a, up Mu In · e ·= I ran_ Ha' t1 '1' ' T~] In _ 1 _ _ lIt _ ~L W_ . 1` . ~ \ - ~ -I ~ ~ ~1 . ~ ~ -1 1' L _ 1 BILL l 1 -1 ~ ~ _ , ELF . ~ ~ ,.. . _ . . ..: ilk - ...= :.::, en..:.. . ::: ::: ~ 11 -a ~ :;:
determined Trough the eligibility process Mat Me person requesting Me service can use Me accessible fixec3-route buses. Madison, Wisconsin The City of Madison, Wisconsin Is an attractive, medium sized city which is the capital of the State of Wisconsin and also the home of the University of Wisconsin. In 1990, the population was 191,262 -- and Me population continues to increase. With a land area of 57.S square miles, the average population ~lensitr of Madison was around 3,300 in 1990. Madison operates its own bus service, caned Madison Metro. Conventional bus service is provided on fixed-routes which require 144 buses In Me peak hours. Service is provided seven days a week, and operates late into the evening on many routes. Madison Metro has 58 lift equipped fuR size buses. For five routes, 80-90 percent of the hips for ADA eligible persons are accessible, and Me lifts are very wed utilized. The fare is $~.25 with a $0.60 half fare for elderly persons and persons with disabilities. Madison Metro currently provides paratransit service through contracts win taxi companies and their own "service route" system known as Local Motion. Local Modon consists of nine "routes" which provide service hourly from 8:15 am until 5:30 pm on weekdays. The service is built around Tree transfer centers and where many routes meet hourly, and a series of tune points. The Senior Center (see Figure IT~) is a major transfer point. Over important points are a my, Me University of Wisconsin Hospital, elderly housing, and sheltered workshops. Ten Orion II buses provide the T~ocal Motion service, and eight over low-floor ~runi-vans provide backup, should Local TCRP B-IA II- 16 Draft Final Report
Figure Aim: Local Motion Buses Meeting at the Senior Center ...... :, ~ , I , ~.,.~.~.~.~, ~ I ,. : TCRP B-IA II-17 Draft Final Report
Motion be unable to handle the demand. Local Motion is also feet by Me taxi service, which is used outside of Me central service area and also on weekends when Local Motion is not operating. Fares on T~ocal Motion are 60 cents. Taxi fares are $2.50 with an additional 50 cents for cloor-to-door service. Because this service supports employment of members of the Developmentally Disabled community, persons with Developmental Disabilities make up 25 percent to 33 percent of the ridership. Madison Metro has had paratransit service for 20 years. This service used to include Metro+ operated by Madison Metro, supplemented with taxi service. In addition, Madison Metro operated a group ride service (GAS) for the elderly through a private contractor, and GAS+ which took 135 developmentally disabled persons to sheltered workshops. In 1992, Madison Metro began operation of its service route system, Local Motion. The original purpose of the system was to handle some of the ciemand carried on its paratransit service. It began as a strictly fixeci-route service with four buses on two local routes. The service did not replace conventional f~xeci-route service, and there was no requirement for paratransit customers to use Local Motion. Also, since much of the travel demand went beyond the area of the local service route, ridership was disappointing. I ocal Motion was revised each year to try to improve ridership. In November of 1992, buses were interlined between the two routes to make it easier to get from one service area to another. In September of 1994, Local Motion was switcher} to four routes with four buses and a transfer area. Finally, In 1995, Madison Metro discontinued most of its Metros paratrans* service and made Local Motion the main provider of ADA TCRP B-IA II-18 Draft Final Report
paratransit service. Also, GASH was eliminated In July of 1995. GAS+ riders now have to use Local Motion to reach their sheltered workshops, and this trip may require several transfers. F~naDy, many taxi trips now feed into the T~ocal Motion System, so that the average length of a taxi trip has been reduced. The current Local Modon Service Is operates more like a point deviation service than a true service route. Margate, Florida Margate is a suburb of Fort Lauderdale, located In the northwestern portion of Broward County. It receives fixed-route bans* service and paratransit service from Broward County Transit (BCt3. Margate also operates its own bus service called Margate Inner-City Transit, a service route system. Margate had a population of 42,985 in 1992 living In S.S square miles, with a population density of 4,885 persons per square mile. As in the rest of Florida, Margate has a large senior population; in fact, persons age 65 and over make up 30 percent of the population. The population of Broward County was 1,31S,373 permanent residents in 1990. Broward County is the second most populated county In Florida, surpassed ordy by Dade County. In addition to the permanent residents, Were were another 89,748 seasonal residents in Me County. Also, the populations of Margate and Broward County have been increasing. Between 1990 and 1993 in Broward County, the number of residents grew by 4S,570, or about 3.5 percent. Important BCt bus routes operating In Margate include routes 18 and 83. Route 83 provides service every half hour Monday Trough Saturday between Pompano Square to the east and Coral Springs to the west. Limited Sunday service is provided as well. Route 18 provides service south to Hollywood, Tri Rail, to several malls, and to TCRPB-IA II-l9 Draft FinalReport
two hospitals. Operating hours are from 5:10 am to 10:20 pm weekdays and Saturday, and from 9:00 am to S:25 on Sundays. prior to We start of Margate Inner-City Transit BCt operated Route SS which provided strictly local service. Regular fares are $~.00 win half fares for the elderly and persons win disabilities. Transfers cost $0.15. BCt has a long history of providing extensive paratransit services. Prior to the implementation of ADA paratransit service In 1994, paratransit was provided under two programs, the Social Service Transportation Program (SST) and the Community Transportation Coordinator Grant Program (CTC). ADA paratransit service officiary began on January 3l, 1994. Because of the extensive paratransit service that already existed, BCt also was able to fully comply with aD ADA service criteria from the outset. The ADA paratransit service area is defined in Broward Counter to be corridors that include ah areas within 3/4 of a mile of fixed-routes. Paratransit is provided to any origin or destination throughout this area for any hip purpose. Trips are accepted up to the close of the administrative offices me day before service and requests can be placed up to 14 days in advance. Fares for pre-scheduled ADA trips are $~.50 each way. The Margate Inner-City Transit service consists of four routes on weekdays, Tree routes on Saturdays, and two routes on some holidays. Three transfer centers have been established to facilitate connection between these routes and BCt regional bus routes. The major transfer location is the Margate Terminal, which is also at the Margate Senior Center. The local service is therefore wed designed to support the senior nutrition program and over activities at the Center. The service is designed to serve many elderly condominium complexes, shopping centers, shopping plazas, and the hospital. Indeed, elderly ridership dominates the system, although there is ridership TCRP B-IA II-20 Draft Final Report
from young people, women with children, and others who do not have cars. Figure Il-5 is a picture of riders on a Margate bus. The routes and schedules for Margate Inner-Ci~ Transit have been evolving, A, and extensive route changes occur around every six months. Service operates hourly for most destinations on weekdays, and every two hours to some destinations. There is half hour service between 7:15 am and 9:40 am to serve work trips. Fares are $0.25 with no free transfers. Vehicles used are body-on-chassis minibuses with 16 seats, high roofs, and a wheelchair lift. The Margate service began In 1993 when Broward County Transit decided to streamline three regional bus routes that provided significant service In Margate. However, it became clear from public meetings that a significant number of residents relief! on Routes #be, 83 and SS for Edacity transportation. The routes connected the local senior center to major shopping and medical facilities. BCt therefore decided to supplement changes In the regional fv~eci-route system with a local community bus service. Final outcomes of the planning process included the elimination of BCt Route #be, and the implementation of a relatively extensive, community bus service operated by the community. BCt supports the service by proving vehicles and a yearly grant of $~S,000 per bus for operating assistance. METHODOLOGY ~v The evaluation of the effectiveness of service routes in the five case study sites was based upon the foDow~g: Interviews with transit management Interviews with schedulers and dispatchers TCRPB-IA [I-21 DrafiFinalReport
Figure II-5: Elderly Passengers Dominate the Ridership of Margate Inner-City Transit .1 TCRP B-IA II-22 Draft Final Report
On-board observations Interviews with consumers through consumer advisory groups or on-board the vehicles Analysis of financial and operating statistics as provided by bans* management In the case of Madison County, ITS, evaluation also included a survey of 311 paratransit users to Vermin their n.C.a~e of service routes as well as the* evaluation of ,~<,_ the quality of service compared with that of the paratransit service. The Madison County case study was undertaken in 1994 while the remaining four case studies were completed in 1996. Services are described as of the time of observation. FINDINGS This section of the report will first provide an overview of the ridership impacts and basic operating measures, and then review the economic analyses completed for each case study site. To assess Ace economic impacts from service routes, the following components were reviewed for each location: Me initial cost of sewing up service routes, the annual operating cost of service routes, annual savings from replacing fixed-route service and/or from paratransit service avoided or diverted to service routes and, finally, net new revenue from service routes. Following this, Implementation issues are reviewed. Ridership Impacts Ridership Trends Service routes were very successful In attracting ridership In 4 out of Me 5 case study locations. The routes either contributed to growth in fixed-route ridership (3 TCRP B-IA II-23 Draft Final Report
cases) or greatly increased the capacity of the specialized systems aimed at elderly persons and persons with disabilities. :~ Madison Counter, TE, the changes In transit service have led to increases in total bans* ridership. There was an initial decline In fixed-route ridership during the implementation years for the MCT Shuttle, following on years of ridership decline with the Bi-State service. However, as the MCT Shuttle ridership began to grow, overall transit ridership in Madison County turned around. Figure Il-6 shows the changes in ridership in Madison County, IL. In Ajax, the growth ~ dership In the Flag Bus has caused overall transit ridership to reach a new high of 1,425,142 passengers in 1995. The conventional fixed route bus service was actuary below its high riclership year In 1990, and the Handi Trans service remained mostly {ever, so the Flag Bus is the cause of new ridership. Figure H-7 shows the ridership trends for tibe Flag Bus and the Handi-Trans service. In Margate, where one BCt route was eliminated by the service route system, ridership also has grown more than the original fixed-route (See Figure H-~. Note that in the case of Margate, we do not have Margate paratransit ridership. In Richmonc! Hid, He Community Bus certainly increased the capacitor of the paratransit service. Ridership on two vehicles In the Mobility Bus paratransit service was around 10,000 per year before the Community Bus, then grew to over IS,000 per year when one vehicle was changed to the Community Bus service route. Overall, it appears that the Community Bus may have also drawn elderly ridership from the conventional f~xed-routes, however He fixecI-route ridership has been generally TCRP B-IA II-24 Draft Final Report
Figure Il-6: Ridership Trencis in Madison County, IL, 1 800000 1 600000 1 400000 1 200000 ~1 000000 If 800000 600000 400000 200000 o - a, ' . . , ~I- --do ~ , , , , , T r- 0 0 0 a, 0 ~0 0 O ~N CV) ~0 0 0 CD 0 0 0 Year · Bi-State · MCT Shuttle ACT Paratransit X Total Ridership TCRP B-IA II-25 Draft Final Report -
Figure Il-7: Ridership Trends in Ajax, Ontario 60000 50000 40000 30000 ._ 20000 1 0000 o 1992 1993 Year 1994 1995 I ~ Flag Bus · Handi-Trans TCRPB-IA II-26 DraStFinalReport
Figure II-~: Ridership Trends in Margate, FE 1 00000 90000 80000 70000 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 1 0000 O' . 1991 TCRP B-IA / / / / 1992 1 993 II-27 1994 1 995 ~ BCt Route 88 · Margate Dray Final Report
growing In Richmond Hill. Figure II-9 shows how ridership changed In Richmond Hill for the Community Bus and the para~ansit services. In Madison, Wl, Local Motion service was assumed to have no impact on the fixed-route seance. Local Motion ridership as well as the paratransit ridership grew steadily from 1992 to 1994. However, when the final configuration of Local Motion was mplementect in 1995, annualized total Eldership decliner! on these services. Remember that after May of 1995, ah GAS+ riders began using the Local Motion Service, or a combination of taxi and Local Motion service, since He GAS+ service was discontinued. Likewise, an of the prior users of Metro+ service began using Local Motion, taxies, or a combination of taxi and Local Motion service. Figure IT-10 shows these trends. Paratransit Tnys Diverted or Avoided It is clear in most of the case study sites that implementation of service routes prompted a significant shift from paratransit riders to service routes. In Madison County, IL, information on likely trips diverted from He ACT door-to-door service to the MCT Shuttle was developed by examining the ridership trends on the ACT service, and from the surveys of those registered for the ACT service. Both of these indicate considerable diversion to He MCT Shuttle. Altogether, the paratransit ridership was 56,611 lower than in 1988. Lois reduction implies that 40 percent of the paratransit trips were diverted to the MCT Shuttle. In Richmond Hid, Ontario, the diversion from the Mobility Bus to the Community Bus is significant. In He first four months of He Community Bus, around 56 percent of the riders were eligible for He Mobility Bus. Not ad of these trips were diverted from paratransit, because the Community Bus probably encouraged new trip TCRP B-IA II-28 Draft Final Report
Figure Il-9: Riciership Trends in Richmonc! Hill, Ontario 30000 25000 20000 1 5000 - 0000 5000 o - 1 - 1990 1 991 - - 1992 1993 1994 1995 Year ~ Mobility Bus - · Taxies ~ Community Bus X Total TCRP B-IA II-29 Draft Final Report
Figure Il-10: Ridership Trends in Madison, W] 250000 200000 1 50000 ~ ~1 00000 1 50000 0= 1992 _ 1 993 Year 1 1994 1 99~6 - ~ Metro+ 18 Taxi ~ -- Gas+ X Local Motion | 3K Total TCRP B-IA Il-30 Draft Final Report
making. However, based upon a trend analysis of the para~ansit ridership we can esthete an average annual diversion of around 5,775 trips per year. This would represent a 30 percent diversion from paratransit service per year to the Community Bus. ~ Madison, WI, during the first years of l.ocal Motion (when it operated as a traditional service route), a survey of riders found that around 50 percent were eligible for paratransit service. As with Richmond HiD, it is likely that some of these trips had been diverted from paratransit service, however, there is no evidence of this from the paratransit riciership trends. If we do assume that 50 percent of the Local Motion riders In 1994 represented paratransit trips diverted, that would equal around 7 percent of the total paratransit ridership. After May of 1995, ad of Me GASH riders began using the Local Motion Service, or a combination of taxi and Local Motion service, since the GAS+ service was discontinued. Likewise, aD of Me prior users of Metro+ service began using Local Motion, taxies, or a comb~nabon of taxi and Local Motion service. The overall effect of these changes has been to reduce ridership of the combined Local Motion and paratransit services combined by around 9 percent. This reduction could be due to the 25 percent increase In taxi fares, the loss of Local Motion riders not eligible for paratransit, and a demand reduction for paratransit service due to longer ride times with the new system. The annualized ridership on Local Motion after May of 1995 represents a diversion of 45 percent of the para~ansit riders In 1994. In Margate, we were unable to isolate data on paratransit ridership Bends for Margate residents. However, we were able to compare ridership rates per registered rider using data for a week In May In 1995. Margate, with its extensive service route system, had a tripmal<ing rate 28 percent below that for Broward County as a whole, TCRP B-IA II-3 1 Draft Final Report
and 35 percent below municipalities with no community bus service. Therefore we estimated that Margate might be experiencing a diversion to its service routes of around 30 percent of its paratransit ridership, which would be around 25,700 Hips per year. There were no data available for estimating trips diverted from paratransit service In Ajax. However, an early estimate from Ajax staff of likely diversions was around 15 percent of the paratransit ridership. Figure IT-~! shows the percentage of paratransit trips cliverted due to service routes. Companson of Service Route Travel Times with Paratransit Travel Times Me impact ort travel dine for Hose persons switching from paratransit to service routes clepended upon Me extent to which ridesharing is used in paratransit, and the service route configuration. In the case of Madison County, IL, where we obtained opinions from a paratransit rider survey, both the MCT Shuttle and the ACT Door-to Door service rated similarly win respect to travel time. Comparing riders assessment of travel times specifically, the MCT Shuttle trips were judged to be shorter than the typical ACT paratransit trips, however, the typical trip may differ for an individual rider between the services. ~ Richmond Em, riders on the Mobility Bus were scheduled Into 20 minute time slots, and most aD rides were completed In 20 minutes or less. The Community Bus service route, on the other hand, could take 45 minutes from end to end, so it is likely that trips using it take more time. In Madison, Wl, Madison Metro staff as wed as consumers felt that most trip times were longer after the restructuring of service In 1995. Whereas paratransit trips on Memo+, GAS+, or the taxi service had been fairly direct, the new Local Motion service routes often required one or more transfers. TCRP B-IA II-32 Draft Final Report
Figure Ho-: Estimated Percentage of Paratransit Trips Diverter! to Service Routes 45% 1 1~1 ~ 35/ l~ ~ -~ 30% ~ J%~ 5°;~9 ~1 I l[~: ] I ~ 1 ~ owl ~ L ~ [ I.l~ l : ] ~ ~A ~ o Ajax Richmond Madison Margate Madison, Madison, Hill County, WI (1994) WI (1995 IL 6) TCRP B-IA II-33 Draft Final Report
Rider Opinions Rider opinions were gathered by surveying the ACT paratransit users In Madison County, id; by meeting with consumer advisory groups for the services; and by talking with riders. In general, riders responded positively to the service route systems. In Ajax, for example, most everyone with whom we spoke felt that the service was very valuable in terms of providing greater mobility and travel flexibility, and that the route was excellent. Also, there was a great sense of community on the bus between the riders and between Me riders and He driver. Many regular riders know each other, even if they do not live In the same complexes. Riders on the Richmond ~ Community Bus were likewise very positive about it. Riders who used walkers said it really helped Hem to stay independent. Others who used to take conventional fixed- route buses said Hey liked the sense of community on He service route. Margate riders especially appreciated He bus Eking Hem to the front door of the hospital and mans. However, some complained about the circuitous routing on some trips. Despite the additional travel time experienced on Local Motion, riders seem to fee} the service provided is of high qualitr. Most of He drivers take special care of the riders, and most choose Local Motion because they like working with the Local Motion passengers. Local Motion does receive 1-2 complaints per month, and these are usually complaints regarding He schedule inflexibility or long travel lime. At the focus group meeting win He users of Madison County's MCT Shuttle, there were many good things said about the reasons for choosing service routes. These Included: TCRP B-IA II-34 Draft Final Report
The service is always on time. It is convenient to my home and convenient to my destinations. It allows me to be independent. ~ don't need to can ahead. On the other hand, many of those attending the focus group meeting had reasons for not using the MCT Shuttle. These were: Me securement device in Me MCT Shuttle was not adequate to hold me. got left by one bus and my transfer bus never showed up. ~ am blind, and was stranclec3 when ~ needed to transfer. We need more assistance than is available on the MCT Shuttle. ~ the survey of riders of the ACT Door-to-Door service, respondents rated the MCT Shuttle highly. In fact, it received a higher percentage of "Excellent" ratings man the ACT Door-to Door service In aD categories. The most "Fair" or "Poor" ratings were "Comes on Schedule" for the ACT Door-to-Door service (around 20 percent), and "Effort Required to Make a Trip" for the MCT Shuttle (around 20 percent). In answer to the question, "How unportant are Me following features of the MCT Shuttle In your decision to use it rather than Me ACT Door-t - Door service?", the most popular reason was "No Need for Reservation" (91 percent said this was important or very important3, ~ J ~ )' followed by "I Can Travel When ~ Want" (~8 percent said this was important or very mportant3. Other important reasons were "Driver Assistance on the MCT Shuttle" (85 percent) and "Lower Fares" (84 percent). When asked why respondents used the ACT TCRP B-IA II-35 Draft Final Report
Door-to-Door service rawer Man Me MCT Shuttle, responses depencled upon the respondents characteristics. Those who were ADA Category ~ eligible responded that they required more assistance Man was available on Me MCT Shuttle (39 percent), and that transfers were difficult (28 percent). ADA Category 2 and 3 respondents responded that the MCT Shuttle did not go where they wanted (24 percent), Mat it was too far to walk (21 percent), and Mat more assistance was required (20 nercenti. Basic Operating Measures Unit Costs of Service Routes Compared to Fixed-Route or Paratransit Service Table Il-2 shows the costs per revenue hour for the various case stucly locations, and Table Il-3 shows the costs per revenue mile. The relative costs of the various types of services vary by the way In which those services are operated. For example, In Madison County, IL, the locally operated MCT Shuttle and the ACT Door-to-Door service are both significantly less costly than the fixed-route buses operated by Bi-State. The ACT Door-to-Door service is slightly more expensive than the MCT Shuttle, since me paratransit service also has the cost of call taking, scheduling, and dispatching included. Both the MCT Shuttle and ACT Door-to-Door service are operated by Me same entities. A similar cost relationship is seen In Richmond Hill, where the Community Bus and the Mobility Bus are both operated by the municipality. These costs are lower than the fvced-route hourly costs which are operated by a private contractor. Note that the costs shown In the tables do not ~nclucie Me subsidized taxi service. Including this service would lower Me average paratrans* unit cost. In Margate, the cost of the fixed TCRP B-IA II-36 Draft Final Report
Table Il-2. Costs per Revenue Hour I SITE LATEST YEAR SERVICE PARU\TRU\NSIT FIXED OF DATA ROUTE COST COST PER ROUTE COST PER OVERDUE RUEVE~RJE PER HOUR HOUR OVERDUE l HOUR Ajax 1 1995 32.08' 1 32.08 1 34.45 Richmond Hill 1995 27.49 35.35 48.29 Madison 1 1993 26.69 1 32.05 103.02 | CounW, IL Madison' WI 1995 83.24 83.24 a 63.73 M=gate 1 1995 24.94 1 22.25b 1 61.43 ~ aIn-house paratransit only. Does not include taxies. Note that these figures are still under discussion win Madison Metro bl994 Figure Accounting for Handi-Trar~s arid the Flag Bus is done together. TC8P B-IA II-37 Draft Final Report
Table Il-3. Costs per Revenue Mile , . _ . SITE LATEST YEAR SERVICE PARATRANSIT FIXED-ROUTE OF DATA ROUTE COST COST PER COST PER PER REVENUE REVENUE REVENUE l MILE MILE MILE . _ . Ajax 1995 2.29 2.29 3.14 : Richmond Hill 1995 4.23 4.69 3.85 . Madison 1993 1.65 1.60 5.00 County, IL . . Madison WI 1995 N/A N/A N/A , Margate 1995 1.74 1.83a 4.46 . a 1994 Figure TCRP B-1A II-38 Draft Final Report
route service operated by BCt is much higher than the locally operated service route, or . . the paratransit which is based on taxi service. Ajax operating costs are similar for each of its services. Since the Flag Bus and Handi-Trans budget figures are not kept separately, these costs cannot be easily distinguished. However, if dispatching were accounted for, He Flag Bus should be less costly on an hourly basis than Handi-Trans. Madison, Wl is similar to Ajax, in that Local Motion is currently part of the paratransit operation, so that costs are not easily distinguished in 1995 between Metro+ and Local Motion. The paratransit unit and the regular fixed-route operating unit are bow operated by the city, thus driver costs are similar. The higher paratransit unit costs are due to the dispatching operation. As in Richmonc! HiD, including He subsidized taxi service would lower the unit cost of Madison Metro's operation. Service Route Produclivity The productivity in passengers per vehicle-hour for the service routes varied quite a bit by system, and depended upon the type of clientele served as well as the system configuration. Table Il~ shows the productivities of He service routes, the paratransit service, and the conventional fixed route services. The service routes had lower productivities than conventional fixed routes, but higher productivities than He paratransit services. Those service routes win broader clientele had higher ridership than those serving more specialized clientele. Ajax's Flag Bus, serving a general public ridership in a tight urban configuration, had the highest productivity of IS.6 passengers per hour. Madison Counly's MCT Shuttle, also with a general public ridership but with several TCRP B-IA II-39 Draft Final Report
Table ITS. Passengers Per Revenue Hour , SITE LATEST YEAR SERVICE PARATRANSIT FIXED-ROUTE OF DATA ROUTE PASSENGERS PASSENGERS PASSENGERS PER HOUR PER HOUR PER HOUR Ajax 1995 18.60 2.93 30.33 Richmond Hill 1995 6.46 3.01 16.90 Madison 1993 12.72 1.80 18.42 County, IL Madison, WI 1994 3.74 1.90a N/A Madison, WI 1995 3.45 N/A N/A . Margate 1995 11.78 N/A l5.29b Meow only bRoute 88 only TCRP B-IA II-40 Draft Final Report
rural routes, had a productivity of 12.72 passengers per hour. Margate followed closely behind with a productivity of 11.78 passengers per hour. Richmond HiD's ridership was more focused on seniors and persons wad disabilities, Including many riders who use walkers and wheelchairs. Its buses often fired to capacity because each wheelchair position replaced several ambulatory positions. Still, its productivity of 6.46 passengers per hour is impressive compared with the paratransit productivity of around 3.01 passengers per hour. Although Madison WI was disappointed with the ridership and productiwhr of Local Motion, it still had a higher productivity than t he in-house paratransit service Metro+. Productivity declined somewhat when T~ocal Motion was reconfigured In May of 1995, but still remains higher than Metro+. Boarding and! AZighNng Times The boarding and alighting times were variable across the five case study sites. On the Flag Bus in Ajax, for example, the loading of wheelchairs took as long as five minutes because of the securement systems, and because of the location of the wheelchair securement positions on the bus. Often, riders using wheelchairs are located very close to the seats, malting it clifficult for Me driver to go around] the wheelcha~r user when securing and unloading them. At the other end of the spectrum, we observed Community Bus riders using wheelchairs In Richmond Hid who took around 2 minutes to load through the front floor; riders with walkers took about ~ minute. It took 3 minutes for one electric wheelchair to board using He back door. In going from a more traditional fixed-route network to a service designed for customers who are ADA eligible, Madison Metro probably experienced an increase In TCRP B-IA II-41 Draft Final Report
boarding and alighting time per passenger. This is particularly true because the drivers assumed more responsibility for Me passengers--drivers watched until riders were successfully inside their destination. We observed that it took around two minutes for most riders to board and disembark from the vehicle. Drivers felt that three minutes should be aBowed. Madison County's MCT Shuttle service requires less boarding time than in Richmond HiD, Ajax, or Madison, Wl, because the service is cur~to-curb, and riders need to be reasonably independent In using the service. For example, one minute was sufficient to allow a person using a wheelchair to leave Me MCT Shuttle; this included around nine seconds for the ramp to move out and another rune seconds for Me ramp to move back Into place. In planning route schedules MCT allows 10-15 seconds for a person who is not using a mobility aid to board or leave Me bus and 20 seconcis for an older person, including the time for opening and closing the doors. Operahug Speeds Table Il-5 shows comparative operating speeds for Me various case study services, where these were obtained. Although the service routes buses were expected to be slower than the fixed-route buses, the speech differences were less than expected. For the most part, the service routes ranged from 9 mph to 14 mph. Faster speeds were observed In Madison County, TE on some of the rural MCT shuttle routes with few diversions. ECONOMIC IMPACTS The economic impacts of service routes include the initial cost of setting them up as wed as the change In ongoing operating cost. Operating costs can decline if enough TCRP B-IA II-42 C, Draft Final Report
Table Il-5. Operating Speeds SITE LATEST YEAR SERVICE FIXED-ROUTE OF DATA ROUTE OPERATING OPERATING SPEED (MPH) SPEED (MPH) Ajax 1995 Richmond Hill 1995 9-11 15-17 Madison 1993 12 22 13-28 County, IL Madison, WI 1995 9 12 Margate 1995 14 13-17 TCRP B-IA II-43 Draft Final Report
paratransit riders switch to service routes and/or fKed-route service is eliminated. However, cost win increase if the routes do not replace any existing services. The following sections describe our findings with regard to costs. Initial Cost of Setting Up Service Routes/Community Bus Routes The initial cost of setting up service routes is estimated to range from a low of $3,000 per route to a high of around $15,000. Total costs ranged from as low as $7,300 in Ajax, Ontario for a single route to a high of close to $224,700 In Madison County, IL for a county-wide system. Table Il-6 shows the unit cost and total cost per case study site for setting up service/community bus routes. In the case of Margate and Madison, Wl, this cost Included the original planning effort and subsequent planning efforts as the service route system evolved into the current configuration. As mentioned earlier, the implementation costs for developing initial service varied depending on the size of the transportation system, the staff time required, the marketing strategy used to advertise the service and, depending on the location, the cost of a private consultant to assist in the planning effort. Madison Count, IL and Madison, Wl used consultants to help develop the nutial service route systems. Ajax and Richmond HiDs did their own service planning. Margate's service planning was a collaboration with BCt staff and city staff. Richmond HiD spent $10,000 for a marketing consultant to develop a brochure wad a map and schedule. Madison County hired a consultant for a total of $6,400 to handle two different marketing campaigns. In addition they spent $500 per map for artwork and $1500 per map to produce 10,000 copies. Ajax spent $2,600 to print brochures for the Flag Bus. The Madison, Wl staff spent roughly $2,359 on print ads, TCRP B-IA II-44 Dray Final Report
Table Il-6. Cost of Setting Up Service Routes/Community Bus Routes . l SITE l UNIT COST (per route) TOTAL COST 1 l I (US collars) | (US dollars) 1. A~jax,Ontario I $7,300 $52,925 1. Richmond Hill, Ontario l $14,600 | $14,600 \dadisonCounty,lL I $8,600-$14,000 1 $139,000-$224,700 | \ladison,WI I $13,000-$16,000 1 $120,000-$140,000 VIargate,FL I $3,000-$5,000 1 $10,0000-$15,000 TCRP B-IA II-45 Draft Final Report
$200 on flyers provided on the fixed-route and paratransit services, and $500 to $1,000 on Tree color bus stop signs. Operational Cost Impacts The basic economic measure for service routes is the total cost savings gained from service ~mplementabon. To evaluate whether or not a route is saving money, the following evaluation framework was utilized: 1 ---- 1 OPERATIONAL SAVINGS OVER TIME = (Net New Revenue Tom service routes ~ + (Annual savings Mom paratransit patronage diverted to service routes or avoided) + (Annual savings from fixed-route service replaced) - (Annual operating cost of service routes) Each component of this evaluation win be reviewed In Me following sections, and aD factors win be combined to calculate the operational savings from service routes for each site. Net New Revenue from Service Routes Four of the five cases showed new net revenue from service routes once they had been In operation for several years.2 This reflects the ability of service to not only divert Dassengers from paratransit service, but to encourage more people to ride transit in general. In the case of Madison County, IL, there was a net revenue loss from service routes. Even though the MCT Shuttle system attracted more riders than the Bi-State fv~ed-routes buses which it replaced, Me fare on MCT Shuttles was much less. In 2 To calculate Net New Revenue, He following equation was used: NET NEW REVENUE = (Actual revenue received) - (Ridership diverted from conventional fixed-routes) x (Average fare formerly paid on fixed route) TCRP B-IA II-46 Draft Final Report
Richmond HiDs, Mere may have been significant shifting of elderly riders from f~>cec3 route buses to the Community Bus. In me case of Margate, fixed-route service was eliminated when service routes began, thus there was a loss of fixed-route revenue. In each of these cases, the current trend In fixed-route ridership was assumed to continue, and revenue losses were computed relative to We trend. In Ajax and Madison, Wl, we assumed there was no shift of riders from fixed-routes. Table Il-7 shows the net effect of the revenue changes. Madison, W] is shown for Local Motion as it was before May of 1995 and also after May of 1995 In its point deviation configuration. The years In the table Indicate the years from which the annual figures are derived. Annual Savings from Paratransit Patronage Diverted or Avoided As discussed in the "Ridership Impacts" section of this chapter, Me percentage shift from paratransit to service routes varied from 7 percent to 45 percent. This shift results In savings due to a reduction In the subsidy which would have been required to provide those trips on the paratransit service. Table H-S below shows Me Hips diverted and the savings. More comprehensive systems which also required paratransit riders to take the service routes showed the most savings. However there were some savings for He smaller single route systems as well. Determining the amount of savings was not always straight forward. In the case of Aiax, Richmond HiD, and Margate, we used He subsidy per rider on Handi-Trans, the Mobility Bus, and the BCt Paratransit service, respectively. For Madison, wRs Local Motion (before the May 1995 configuration), we used the subsidy cost for taxi service, since Madison Metro always tried to fully use its in-house paratransit service, Metro+, so a demand reduction would affect taxi service volume rather than Metro+. For TCRP B-IA II-47 Drays Final Report
Table Il-7. Net New Revenue from Service Routes (Annual) _ FIXED-ROUTE SERVICE ROUTE NET NEW REVENUE LOCATIONREVENUE CHANCE REVENUE FROM SERVICE ROUTES Ajax (93-95)$0 $14,700 $14,700 Richmond Hill (94-95)-$4,800 $8,900 $4,100 Madison County, IL (92-93)-$223,500 $172,500 -$51,000 Madison, W! (94)$0 $9,100 $9,100 Madison, WI (95)$0 $19,200 $19,200 Margate, FL (94-95)-$19,000 $23,900 $4,900 ACRE B-IAII-48 Draft Final Report
Table Il-~. Estimated Savings from Paratransit Trips Diverted or Avoided LOCATION TRIPS DIVERTED ORSUBSIDY/TRIP SAVINGS FROM AVOIDED PARATRANSIT TRIPS DIVERTED OR AVOIDED Ajax (94-95) 3,000$10.45 | $31,000 Richmond Hill (94-95) 5,800$10.10 $58,300 . Madison County, IL (92- 56,400$11.68 $659,000 93) Madison, WI (94) 14,600$12.22 $178,200 . Madison, WI (95) 75,000 $26.75a $2,0sg,400b~ ~ , Margate, FL (94-95) 25,700 $9.97 $255 800. . ,, a Average subsidy per trip for Metro+ and GAS+. b Also includes savings of $53,500 from taxi trip length reduction. TCRP B-IA II-49 Draft Final Report
Madison, W1's Local Motion after May of 1995, savings came from elimination of over paratransit services, and from the reduced taxi trip lengths. Finally, in Madison Count, IL, where productivity on the paratransit system had been declining, savings were est~nated assuming an average productivity and subsidy per rider diverted. Annual Savingsirom Fixed-Route Service Replaced F~xed-route service was replaced In two communities by the service routes. In Madison County, IL, much of the Bi-State local service was eliminated. In Margate, FE, BCt's Route SS was eliminated. Table Il-9 below shows Me annual savings for eliminating the fixed-route service at these two sites. Annual Operating Cost of Service Routes Overall, Me operating costs of service routes varied among the case study sites. Table Il-10 shows the annual operating costs for the various systems. Final Calculation of Savings Using the figures obtained for Net New Revenue, Annual Savings from Paratransit Ridership Diverted or Avoided, Annual Savings from Fixed-route Service Replaced ant! the figures for Annual Operating Cost, the total Operation Savings over time were calculated for each site. Where Me service routes were added to existing fixed-route anct paratransit service, they added to Me overall cost of service. This appears to be the case In Ajax and In Madison, Wl, win the 1994 service configuration. Where service routes replace existing fixed-route or paratransit service as in Madison County, Margate, and Richmond An, mere is a net savings. In Madison, Wl, with the 1995 configuration of Local Motion reDIac~na existing caratransit service there is also a ~v ~ savings. Table II-~! summarizes the annual oneraUn~ savings for the service routes. TCRP B-IA II-50 ~V V Draft Final Report
Table Il-9. Annual Savings from F~xecI-route Service Replacer! SAVINGS FROM FIXED l ROUTE SERVICE | LOCATION REPLACED Madison County, IL (92-93) $2,323,000 Margate, FL $219,000 TCRP B-IA II-S 1 Draft Final Report
Table Il-10. Annual Operating Cost of Service Routes ANNUAL OPERATING COST OF SERVICE ROUTES LOCATION Ajax (94-95) ~$82,000 Richmond Hill (94-95) $54,000 Madison County, IL $1,656,000 Madison, WI (94) $460,600 . Madison, WI (95) $1,887,400 Margate, FL (95) $203,000 TCRP B-IA II-52 Draft Final Report
Table ma-. Summary of Savings from Service Routes ANNUAL _ ANNUAL _ _ NET NEW SAVINGS SAVINGS REVENUE FROM FROM ANNUAL FROM PARATR\NSIT FIXED- OPERATING LOCATION SERVICE + TRIPS ROUTE COST = SAVINGS ROUTES DIVERTED OR REPLACED Ajax (94-95) $14,700 +$3 1,000 + N/A _ $82,000 _($36,300) Richmond Hill (94- $4,100 +$58,300 + N/A $54,000 =$8,400 95) . _ Madison County, IL -$51,000 ~$659,000 + $2,323,000 $1,656,000 $1,275,000 (92-93) Madison, WI (94) $9, 100 +$ 178,200 + $460,600 -($273,300) Madison, WI (95) $19,200 +$2,059,400 + N/A $1,887,400 _$19 1,200 Margate, FL (94-95) $4,900 +$255,800 + $219,000 $203,000 _$276,700 TCRP B-IA II-53 Draft Final Report
Another way to look at Me value of service routes to the various localities is to see how the net savings or costs due to the routes compare to the annual operating budgets for the paratransit service. Figure II-12 below shows this relationship which compares the annualized savings to the paratransit budgets for the same years. From this point of view, the major impacts are in Madison County, IL and Margate, where fixed-route service was replaced and where there was significant diversion of paratransit riders. Although there was over $191,000 in savings for Madison, WI in the final configuration of Local Motion, the $4.4 minion dollar paratrans* budget is not greatly impacted by this savings. IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES The Conceptual Planning Process Development of service routes required a new type of transit planning. This planning focused more on individual needs rather than on general planning concepts such as the use of population densities to design services. Two approaches were used in most all of the communities. The first was to connect residences, particularly for elderly persons, with shopping, medical facilities, and other community services. The second was to examine the current travel patterns of Me paratransit users, and design a route around those patterns. Madison County, for example, continuously examines the paratransit requests to determine if route adjustments would better accommodate paratransit riders. There is always a tradeoff between number of destinations served and the frequency of service. In Madison County, Madison, Wl, and Margate, most service is hourly, while in Ajax and Richmond HiD, service Is on 90 minute headways. TCRP B-IA II-54 Draft Final Report
Figure Il-12. Es~natecI Savings as a Percentage of Annual Paratransit Expenditures 1 00% 80% 60% 4oo/o 20% oo/o -20% 4oo/o .~ ., .... I:; . I ,, ,., -.; -, ;,;: ,.;,; ;.- , it 'I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :~ ~ 'Gil ''a O'er ~ ~.~:~.~':~i~:~l '; ~ .'.,,,, :'.,' 2 ' ' :' ~ . if, ~ ~ '' ~_~: ~ ~ ~-:::~:~ ~ :: ::: ~::~:~:~:~;~:~IL~:~ A:: ~ -7%~:~ ..:: ~ ~>;~:~ : ~ ~ . ~ . ~ ~ it, ~ ~ ' '? . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'a : ~ ; . . ~ ~; ' ~ ~ .: -, ,:.-:.-- ;;,, -, ;: .: ,\:.: ,.; , -. ~,: .: , .:., :; ; . , . ,' ', ''it ' . .;. : . ; ' ' i: ; ! ; . ~ 'a .~ . ' . ;; ' ~ ~ .,, ! '. . , ' . . , , ' , .,; . ',, ~ '. . ' , ~, ,, ' , 'a . ': I; ~ ~ ~ ~ me'" '' A'''-' i, ""'I '' ' """!'' '' . .,~. ' .. -..:.':~Richmond, ....''` '':''':~Madison '.' :;, '-:;~Madison, I': ".:' .''':'Madison .; ''' ' ':.':'; M'arga' e; ' :: TCRP B-IA II-55 Drap Final Report
Given Mat Me routes are designed to meet individual needs, the ongoing planning process needs to stay flexible in making route adjustments when new needs are identified. However, this sometimes leads to complex route schedules. Elderly riders In Margate take several months to understand route changes, which occur frequency in response to service requests, or in response to observed ridership trends. In Madison County, the MCT Shuttle might have a diversion from the regular route at a particular time of the day. Riders who are not familiar with the schedule might be confused by the footnotes describing the diversion. Ongoing communication with the target ridership is very important for service routes. In Margate, each route and schedule change is preceded by Me Transit Coordinator for Margate attending community meetings at He various condominium complexes to explain the new system. In Madison County, the MCT works closely wad human service agencies In the planning of service. To assist MCT in making special diversions to group homes or work sites, He agencies have sometimes cooperated in making their schedules fit wad the MCT Shuttle schedule. Agencies have also been very cooperative in travel training their clients to use the MCT Shuttle. Route ant! Scheclule Implementation The Madison County, IL service is an excellent example of how routes and schedules are developed. After the initial route design is conceived, MCT uses their road supervisors to cleterm~ne stop points along the route. The service Is clesignect without bus stops, but each route has time points which show the scheduled arrival time at those pouts. The road supervisors have to determine where the buses win lay over, and how much time wig be required to lay over. In driving the routes, the road TCRP B-IA II-56 Draft Final Report
supervisors try to drive two miles per hour under Me speed limit. They simulate stops, and allow 10-15 seconds for ambulatory persons to board, and 20 seconds for older persons or persons win physical disabilities to board. They pay a lot of attention to issues of cycle time and layover time, since on-time reliability is one of the hallmarks of the MCT Shuttle. Generally, they develop routes which accommodate one hour headways and include an eight to ten minute recovery time. They will drive the routes four to five dines In designing ~em. The lime required to design a route once it is Even O O ~ O O to the road supervisors is about one week. Communication and Marketing Ajax Transit's marketing efforts for the Flag Bus have been very successful, along with other marketing efforts, such as Customer Appreciation Day, which was held on June 17, 1996. Naming the community bus service the "Flag Bus" reminds people about Me type of "flag stop" service that is being offered. The service was in~ocluced on Canada's first Raise Me Flag Day, coinciding with Canada's -125ff~ anniversary. This strongly reinforced Me ~ntroduchon of the service. The graphics on the Flag Bus -- a Canadian Flag ~ also gives He service a unique recognition. Finally, when a Handi-Trams customer who lives on He Flag Bus route cans to reserve a Handi Trans ride to a location alone He Flax Bus Route, they are informed about the F1~ Rare ~ --- - O · i, _ service. One day before Raise the Flag Day, Ajax Transit had a ribbon-cu~ng ceremony which was attended by the Mayor of Ajax and Members of Council, Ministry of Transportation dignitaries, staff of surrounding properties, client of the Handi-Trans system and conventional transit users. 5,000 miniature Canadian flags were also distributed to the public for this event. TCRP B-IA II-57 Draft Final Report
To market Me Community Bus Richmond Hid Transit developed a slide show which they took to various senior housing complexes. They completed Free sessions using I-~/' hour presentation (which included a slide-show). They also placed advertising in the local paper, and produced a pamphlet about the service. Near the start of the service Hey placed the Orion IT bus inside He local mad to make people aware of the service. They also tract a booth In the man in conjunction with other activity. They had a ribbon cutting ceremony attended by He Minister. The schedule for Implementing the Tri-Cities service in Maclison County illustrates MCT's efforts at communication. The plan for the Tri-Cities service was completed In September of 1990. After public hearings, communication with officials, and other formal efforts, the service was implemented In March of 1991. A public relations person was hired for two weeks to do an information campaign, Including the writing of press releases. Newspapers ran colored maps outlining the service, and radio stations cattier public service announcements. Matc sing colored maps and schedules were printed and distributed In several hundred locations. The supervisors spent suc person-days providing the schedules to the distribution locations. Finally, the first month of service on He new route system was fare-free bow for Alton and Tri-Cities. T~ · - rave~ . 1rammg MCT has perhaps the most comprehensive travel training program of the five study sites. MCT began gavel training in earnest on their service in August of 1991. In preparation for this, they started in June of 1991 to meet with human service agencies to convince them of the value of moving Heir clients from the parairansit service to the TCRP B-lA II-58 Draft Final Report
fixed-routes. This was a difficult Wing to seD, and required many meetings with the agencies and the community. MCT used a supervisor and a tranZer to assist with travel training of persons on the MCT Shuttle. The travel training has focused on the developmentally disabled community. Although there was considerable resistance by agencies and parents at first, a breakthrough occurred when permission was received to train one young man. As a result of the tra~rung, this individual began to travel independently. Soon, others In his group home wanted to be trained, and this was the begging of a travel trairung push that continued throughout 1992. MCT travel trained approximately 35-40 persons, and human service agencies gained another 100 persons. Travel training still continues when individuals are identified, or when already trained individuals need retraining for alternative routes or destinations. Other efforts with travel trairung have been more limiteci. BCt conducts some travel training and, as an ~ncen~ve, offers a time limited, free-fare pass to participants, however, this is not necessarily aimed at the Margate service. Madison W! conducts limited training, while Ajax offers no travel training at ah. ARC Industries In Richmond HiB travel trains clients to use He conventional buses, but not the service route. Techniques to Encourage Switching ~ Ajax, customers are informed about the Flag Bus if they live on the route and are traveling to a location on the route. Widely distributed schedules also are used to encourage a switch. In Richmond Em, the approach is somewhat the same. The Richmond Hip dispatch operation for the Mobility bus and accessible taxi service reminds anyone on the Community Bus route that the service is available. They do ask TCRP B-IA II-S9 Draft Final Report
their regular customers to use the service if they can do so, particularly since the Community Bus has Me same door-to-door service as the Mobility Bus. In Madison County, Wisconsin, riders are not given a choice about using T~ocal Motion: if they require service in Me Local Motion area, they must take it. Similarly, Madison County IL may insist Mat riders use the MCT Shuttle service routes if they are able. In Margate, there is no direct referral mechariism the BCt paratrans* service and the service route system. Drivers: Hiring and Training Driving vehicles In some of the service route systems can be clemanc3~ng. This is particularly true In Madison County, IL, where the schedules are tight, and there Is great emphasis on staying on schedule. In addition, the drivers want to be able to make the connections required for transferring passengers. Drivers for the MCT Shuttle were originally recruited from the ACT Door-to-Door service, because it was felt they would be knowledgeable of the needs of persons with disabilities. However, driving the MCT Shuttle seemed to be wearing, and sometimes the drivers' personalities changed for the worse. MCT has determined that finding the right personality types may be as valuable as driving experience, so they search for new drivers who like people, who are not cynical, and who won't be bothered by children. Similar to Madison County, Richmond HiD hired its drivers for the Community Bus and Mobility Bus from the Toronto Transit Commission's paratransit service. In order to keep the drivers fresh, they are rotate between the two services. Richmond Hill's Community Bus route is challenging due to the tight turns, and demanding ACRE B-IA II-60 Draft Final Report
schedule. The drivers consider it more difficult to drive than He Mobility Bus para~ansit service. Vehicles Small low-floor buses are the vehicle of choice for service routes. Madison County, id, Madison, Wl, and Richmond HiD use Orion ~ buses, while Ajax uses an Elf bus. The low-floor vehicles provide quick and easy access and egress for elderly persons and persons with disabilities. The smaller vehicle size allows for maneuverability In parking lots as the buses approach front doors of malls, hospitals, and community residences. Both Margate and Madison County, IL use high-floor buses with lifts. While these pose little difficulty for most observed ambulatory riders, they are not as convenient for persons who use wheelchairs or walkers. TRANSFERABILITY The following issues need to be considered ~ determining how the service route case study results would apply to other transit systems: . The service route concept appeared to work very wed In the small urban and suburban communities seen In the case study examples. Service routes worked best when Hey were designed to meet very targeted needs, even individual needs as identified through analysis of paratransit ridership. Successful design required a set of key origins and destinations which could be provided hourly service, or at least 90 minute service. Given Mat such a design could be developed, there is no reason that service routes could not be successful in larger cities as well. TCRP B-IA II-6 1 Draft Final Report
. . . Madison County, IL was Me largest service route system. The success of Me MCT Shuttle is due to a number of different features, which ~nclucle the use of low-floor buses, good coverage of the county, extensive use of time transfers, close coordination between the fixed-route and para~ansit services, close coordination win human service agencies, and travel training. Also, the MCT system had the advantage of replacing a much more expensive f~xed-route system, so that MCT had sufficient operating funding to develop a comprehensive service. Loss of any of these features would probably have adversely impacted] the success of the Madison County service routes. The key to the Richmond HiD Co~rununity Bus system is that it is aimed at less mobile members of the commuriity, and at health and shopping trips. Its success also depends In large part on the dense development of elderly housing, medical facilities, and shopping areas available along the route. Also, the Richmond ~ bus clepends on He use of low-ffoor buses ant! on He personal assistance given to passengers by He drivers. These factors are critical enough to be considered seriously by over locations looking to unplement a new service route system like the one In Richmond Hip. The success of the Margate service is likely clue to its very high elderly population in a reasonably compact community with many nearby shopping areas and other destinations of Interest. Elderly riders found the service useful to help them cross many busy and wide Marinate roadways and to replace their automobiles which they had given up driving for various reasons. TCRP B-1A II-62 Draft Final Report
