|
Items in cart [0] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| ||||||||||||
| Copyright © 2009. 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 273
CHAPTER VII
EFFECTIVENESS AND APPLICABILITY OF THE
OPTIONS AND ENHANCEMENTS STUDIED
The previous five chapters describe Me Implementation and use of selected service
options and enhancements by five transit systems in North America. In each case, the
effectiveness of the service options was analyzed using evaluation methodologies developed
for this study. This chapter examines the relative effectiveness of the five transit systems in
promoting integration of services and the most effective combined use of paratransit anc! fixed
route service. Costs, savings, customer acceptance, and other information developed and
presented in Chapters II through VI are compared.
In addidon to quantitative and qualitative measures of effectiveness, this chapter
examines issues such as ease of implementation anci operational concerns. The a~licabilitv of
certain advanced technologies to address operational issues is also discussed. Finally,
conclusions are developed and presented regarding the applicability of the different
option/enhancements studied to various settings and circumstances.
~ ~,
In developing these conclusions, information gathered In the Initial phase of this two
part study was considered. This initial research included a survey of 624 transit systems In the
United States and Canada to determine which service options and enhancements were
currentiv being used or considered. Followed calls to 95 of the 309 systems which responded
J V
to We survey were made to gather general information about the use of the service options
noted. The results of this initial research are presented in a companion document to this report
titled Transit Operations forindividuaZs with Disabilities. A review of the information In mat
TCRP B-lA VIT-1 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 274
report, together with information from the five Lily ~ ace chic :`lln~rc C!~= ~~1
~ ~ ~ w ~ vend Lo all L=1~1
conclusions about the transferability of He service options to be proposed.
RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE SERVICE OPI IONS STUDIED
The goal of this research was to examine service options and enhancements that can:
(if provide integrated service complying with the ADA;
(2)
(3)
facilitate the appropriate use of paratransit service; and
encourage travel on accessible fixed route systems by individuals with disabilities.
In reviewing how well the service options used by the five systems met these goals,
several measures of "effectiveness" were considered. These included quantitative measures
such as the number of trips shifted from paratransit to fixed route service and the net savings
achieved. They also included qualitative measures such as modal integration, community
acceptance, and related benefits.
Table VIl-1 on the foDow~ng pages summarizes key findings for each of the five service
options that were He primary subject of the case studies. Information for each option is
provided for He forgoing five measures:
Customer Integration: This measure considers the degree to which the service option
promotes integration of riders win disabilities with the general public.
System Integration: This measure refers to the do Of int~or~;mn h~tW=P~
-~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~ ---t) ~ ,, __ -,
paratransit and fixed route service Cat is created by He option. This includes integration In
system planning as well as operation.
TCRP B-1A VII-2 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 275
Y ~
· - ~
o ~
·~ ~
o "c
ce ~
ce ~
e .~
Be,
o
a
._
L
r
0
0
0
._
._
0
5- ~
R8 ·t
~ a
c, ~
·t ~
, ~=
an
~ -
- c a., c ~ E
c) ~ 0 v,
0 ~ ~ O _
0 ~ ~ ~ .=
at ~ O ~
0 ~ ~ 0
:s ° ~cam,-
°
·=
o
.~
ct
~ s- ~
~ o ~
^~= o ·~
· - v, ~ u,
~ o x ~
v ~= ~
a~ ~ ~ cd
~ ~ o c
y~ y y ly=>
v ~
cd
>` ·
- ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ o o c
Q
?
) s°-
¢ C ~ ~
~b~ C =.=
1
e G y8 -
- E -- -
' y9
O ~ ~ O
? O ·c;s C
E 2 c ° 0 c
E o o E
c 2 3 ,~ 3 2 ~;: °
CQ
3
=0
~ ~ = s .=
1~= ~ ~ ~ o ~
3 ~, c ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ Y ~ - ~ ~2
~ o
£ ~
~o ~
'c -W C =, ~
~ c., 50 ~ ~ ~
2-y c w c
u'
c
._
_
cd -
0 cd
~O . -
O~ ct
1 Ct
a'
.=
c~ ~
_ .c ~ u)
ct ~ ~ ao
o cn ~ g
O\ ~ ~ ~
0 ~ c,~ v
ct e~
cd ~ ~
d CQ
.o
o
._ _
0
·~
5
_
OCR for page 276
~ - ~
o o o ~
\
-9 ~ ~ ~
~ .~ .~ ~ o
to lo a, ~ Hi
-~ G ~ ~ X
so Ct ~ ~ ~
~ == ~ O
A en.=
° ,r, u, Al
~ ~ ~ .=
,, 4 -
Ct
~0 ~
o 3
to .~
of Cal
00 ~
C
. ~ 5~.=
~ be ~ O
\ ~ ~ .e i
~ Ce ~ ~ ~ ~
~ 1 =4 E_ ~ ~ ~
o
~ O
R R c.' R ~ R o <,,
V C;l ~ ~ ~ V
O ~ ~ ~ ~ =4
-
~ ~3 a~ ~
~ ~ ~ o
E ~= X
3 E_ 3 D
O ~ ~ ~ Ct
V s~
O · ~ 50 V
O ~ ~ V
X ~, ~ ~ ~ C
O ~ ~ ~ ~ ·o
1
e . ? R a R
Z
. V ~ cn
~ .= o ~ .~
· ~ CL, CL, ~ -
V) C~ · _ ~ Ct
~ c - ~ ~ ~ - a E
4- ·U) ~
X R ~ E
·~ ~
~ C~
V ~
C~ ~ ~ ~
° ~ ~ a ~ °
3 ~ ~ o o~
=m ~- ~ ~ ~o ~ 3
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c~
~ ~ o fi ~ ~ ~ ~
> ·~
C . ~
=~ "~.S~
° a.' ~ cn
., . V ~
~V
=
~ V Ct ~
·0 ·t ~ ~
.= cn O a'
.~- =--
O
~ ~ ~ bO cn V ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ == ~
=-= ~ ~ o-~.=
._
a~ R o R R
~ ~ ~ mO ·~m
Do
~I
o
C~
E~
OCR for page 277
Trips Shifted The total number of trips shifted as well as the percentage of all
paratransit trips that were shifted is provided.
Net Cost Savings: This measure considers Me cost associated with implementation and
ongoing operation as well as savings generated from reduced operating costs. Reduced
operating costs are related In large part to the number of trips shifted from the more expensive
paratransit service to lower cost fixect route service.
Community Acceptance: This measure indicates satisfaction of riders with the service
options and enhancements. The reactions and options of ad riders, particularly riders with
disabilities is considered. Issues raised by customers, advocates, ant! local officials concerning
changes in travel fume, quality of service and general level of service are considered. Over key
issues for persons with disabilities include equalibr and independence provided by the service.
Results of the survey analysis and focus group discussions are the primary basis of findings in
this category.
Related Benefits: Other quantitative and qualitative benefits or issues not captured by
the above measures are noted here. Examples Include savings that may accrue to other
agencies, broader benefits to general public riders, or Impacts on the overall mobility of
customers.
Before reviewing We relative effectiveness of each option studied, * is important to note
that the benefits of each option are focused on different segments of the population. Service
routes, route deviation, and feeder services all focus on minimizing (or eliminating) the
distance that must be traveled to and from fixed route stops. These options would therefore
assist persons who could otherwise use fixed route service but have difficulty getting to and
from bus and rail stops. This might include persons with ambulatory disabilities who are
TCRP B-1A VII-S Draft Final Report
OCR for page 278
unable to travel extended distances or who are affected by architectural barriers or terrain. It
would also Include Individuals whose ability to travel Independently is affected by health
concerns or extreme weather conditions. If combined with travel training, these options can
also assist and Integrate persons wit!
Independent travel is limited In unfamiliar surroundings.
~ vision unpairments or developmental disabilities whose
Low-floor buses, on the other hand, reduce the difficulties that riders have boarding and
disembarking from vehicles. Persons win ambulatory disabilities and those who use
wheelchairs and other mobility aids would benefit from this technology. Benefits are not
limited, however, to persons wad disabilities. Seniors and parents traveling with small
children also benefit from easier access, and boarding times for the general public are
improved.
Fare Incentives, without other support services and enhancements, impact only those
persons able to sometimes travel by fixed route. ~ systems operating ADA paratransit
services, dLiS would include Dose persons considered "conditionally" ADA paratransit eligible.
Research suggests that about 20-30% of aD ADA paratransit eligible individuals can sometimes
use faced route service.
Customer Integration
Service routes and route deviation services were found to have significant potential for
promoting customer Integration. In both cases, Hey represent modified fixed route services
that can be used not orgy by persons with clisabilities but by the public at large. Both also
provide integrated service for the fun length of like hip. Feeder services promote integrated
~ Federal Transit Administration, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Paratransit
Eligibility Manual,
Washington, D.C., September, 1993.
TCRP B-lA VIl-6 Drap Final Report
OCR for page 279
service for a portion of the trip. Unlike service routes and route deviation, We faced route has
not necessarily been changed to accommodate the travel needs of persons with disabilities.
Paratransit service is still required to get riders to and from established stops.
The effectiveness of ah three of these options In integrating service delivery obviously
depends on the way in which they are implemented and the proportion of the overall system
that they affect. In the case of Madison County, service routes were very successful in
promoting customer Integration because they were used to replace much of the prior fKed
route system. The entire service area benefited from the changes made. Service routes would
have less of an impact if limited to certain neighborhoods, or if operated as a supplement to the
fKed route system, as was the case In the other study areas.
Similarly, the degree if customer integration achieved by route deviation services will
depend on the limitations placed on deviation requests. In York, Pennsylvania, deviations
were limited to certain rural routes. In Eugene, Oregon, deviations were primarily to human
service agency program sites where groups of riders could be picked-up up or dropped-off.
Feeder services In Vancouver were limited to the light rail and ferry systems due to the
relative inaccessibility of the bus system and accounted for only 1-2% of all paratransit trips.
Even where feeder is provided to all parts of a bus system, however, as in the case of Pierce
Transit, integration is only achieved for those trips not appropriate for direct paratransit service
(i.e., longer, ~nter-reg~onal trips).
It is also important to note that customer integration can be negatively affected if the
transit system is changed to such a degree that it loses significant numbers of past riders and
becomes viewed as a service primarily for persons with disabilities. This appears to be
particularly true for service routes and route deviation programs. Both of these options attempt
TCRP B-1A VIl-7 Draft Final Re~por!
OCR for page 280
to minimize walling distance to bus stops for riders with disabilities. To accomplish ~is,
travel time on the route is often Increased. The service becomes more convenient for riders
with disabilities but my be less attractive to hme-sensitive passengers.
For example, In York, Pennsylvania, the fixed route accommodated a large number of
deviation requests in the morning and afternoon. A significant number of former paratrans*
trips were served. General public ridership was m~nirnal, however, due to the longer travel
time. By comparison, the limited "site specific" deviations planned by the Lane Transit District
had less of an impact on general public ridership and did not significantly alter the nature of
Me fixed route service.
In Madison County, the longer travel times caused by the new service routes Aid ::'nn==r
to result In a loss of some former fixed route riders. During the three year period of
implementation of service routes, total systemwide eldership actually decreased. Over time,
however, Madison County Transit was successful in marketing the service to riders who were
interested more in service convenience than with travel time. They also added separate express
runs for commuters. The combination of this marketing effort and supplemental service
aBowed MCT to not ordy achieve the former level of systemwide ridership but to increase it by
about 16%.
~ ~rr-~-
Low-floor buses promote fixed route use by persons win disabilities and greater
customer integration by making access to vehicles easier and by nmproving equipment
reliability. This option appears most effective when used in conjunction with other programs
and improvements. In Ann Arbor and Champaign-Urbana, where low-floor bus use was not
supplemented with other enhancements such as travel training or marketing, there was little
additional fixed route use by persons with disabilities. In Madison County, however, low-floor
TCRPB-1A VII-8 Draf`FinalRepor!
OCR for page 281
buses were seen as an important part of the service route design and probably made that
system more effective In serving customers with disabilities.
In an of the fare Incentive case study sites, the offer of free fixed route service
encouraged additional bus travel by customers with disabilities. These "induced" trips
typically far outnumbered trips that were shifted from the paratransit service to the fixed route
system. Fare incentive programs also increased the effectiveness of travel training recruitment
efforts which were responsible for significant fixed route use and customer integration.
System Integration
In terms of system integration, feeder services by definition promote the greatest degree
of operational integration between paratransit and fixed route. Paratransit is used for that
portion of the trip that poses a barrier to the customer. Travel continues on fixed route when
this option is appropriate for the customer and cost-effective for the provider.
Route deviation can also fully integrate para~ansit and fixed route if deviation requests
are accepted from the general public and are permitted at all hours and in all areas. If operated
In this manner, route deviation becomes a general public demand responsive service.
Complementary paratransit is no longer required by the ADA. The route deviation system
"integrates" paratransit and fixed route by incorporating demand responsive features in fixed
route operation.
It appears that relatively few systems, however, permit unconstrained requests for
deviations. The unpredictability of such an operating plan would make it clifficult to provide a
consistent, reliable, and understandable service. Most route deviation programs limit
deviations to certain areas, certain times, or specific groups of riders. Others provide deviations
on a first-come, first-served basis and do not guarantee that all requests will be met. In these
TCRP B-1A VII-9 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 282
situations, paratransit service is still provided to accommodate those customers who cannot be
served by the deviated fixed route. A fair degree of service integration can still be achieved,
however, if the plan for deviations is carefully coordinated with local human services agencies
and designed using existing paratransit trip data. The case studies in York, Pennsylvania and
Eugene, Oregon showed that carefully designed route deviation service, coordinated with local
agencies and assisted with a travel training effort, can meet a substantial percentage of the
paratransit service demand.
Several successful route deviation programs also coordinate fixed route and paratransit
scheduling and control. In these systems, if a request for a deviation cannot be accommodated,
the trip is referred to the paratransit office or operator. Similarly, paratransit trip requests
which are close to a fixed route are sometimes referred to the fixed route system for possible
deviation. This integration of the operation of both modes allows requests to be served by the
most appropriate system. In addition to York, Pennsylvania, successful Integration of route
deviated fixed route and paratransit was discovered In Idaho Falls, Idaho; Abilene, Texas;
Fa~rmont, West Virginia; and Fort Worm, Texas.2
Service routes do not necessarily ante "rate We operation of paratransit and fixed route
service. Unless they incorporate deviation features, service routes are considered fixed routes
under the ADA and complementary paratransit service must still be provided. They do,
however, provide a more responsive type of fixed route service. This gives transit systems the
opportunity to serve a greater number of paratransit eligible customers with fixed route
programs. Madison County Transit reported that the introduction of service routes permitted
2 Transit Cooperative Research Program' Transit Operations for Individuals with
Disabilities, Report No. 9,
National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1995.
TCRP B-1A VII-10 Dra#Final Report
OCR for page 283
them to refer paratransit riders to these new Fred routes - something Mat had not been
considered practical with the more traditional fixed route operation.
Neither low-floor buses or fare incentives affect the basic type of paratransit and fixed
route service that is provided. To the extent that they encouraged use of the fixed route system
they promote integrated service delivery. The modes remain separate, however, with fixed
route service designed for the general public and paratransit for persons with disabilities,
seniors, and other particular groups of riders.
Shifting Trips prom Paratransit to Fixed Route
As shown In Table VU-1, the case studies Indicate that service routes and route
deviation programs can be very effective options for shifting trips from paratransit to fixed
route. A shift of between 7% and 45% of total paratransit demand was documented in the five
service route case studies. A greater shift was experienced In systems that used the service
route concept to redesign the entire fixed route network. Madison County, Illinois and
Margate, Florida showed 40% and 30% shifts respectively. Significant shifts also appear to be
possible by adding routing flexibility to service routes. In Madison, Wisconsin, where initial
service route designs only attracted 7% of paratransit riders, a change to more of a point
deviation scheme resulted in a shift of 45% of paratransit trips. A 30% shift was documented in
Richmond Hid, Ontario and a 15% shift estimated In Ajax, Ontario.
The case study of Community Transit showed that route deviation can accommodate a
significant percentage of paratransit trips in specific corridors that are amenable to this type of
service. Approx~nately 15,138 one-way paratransit trips per year were shifted from paratransit
vans to the route deviation program. For Me corrtclor In which Me cleviation service was
TCRP B-1A VIl-11 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 296
floor buses are significantly different In Interior design and because purchase of these buses
will in most cases involve a manufacturer that transit agencies have not worked with in the
past, attention to detail in the development of specifications is important. The experiences of
peer systems should also be sought.
Prevalent Industry concerns about low-floor bus operation were not observed. Ground
clearance was not identified as an issue even in the locations selected, which experienced
snowy winters. The interior level change and step to the rear seating area was not reported to
be a problem for passengers. Seating loss was not a problem in the systems studied but may be
a concern in systems with higher load factors and/or longer trips where standing during travel
is not desirable.
The reviews found that fare incentive programs can also be Introduced quickly and
inexpensively. Public involvement in the decision to adjust fares is required and targeted
marketing of the new program (to paratransit riders) Is recommended.
Fare incentive programs which are linked to paratransit eligibility will probably cause
more customers with disabilities to seek eligibility for paratransit In order to qualify for the
reduced fare benefit. Additional staff time for eligibility certification may be required. If
eligibility determination is contracted to an outside organization, the cost of this contract will
likely increase. In the long-run, an increase in paratransit demand is possible as the number of
eligible persons increases. Before embarking on a program to provide deep discounts for fixed
route service, transit agencies should review their paratransit eligibility process. A thorough
review process will help to minimize fixed route revenue loss and target benefits to those
customers who would otherwise be served by paratransit.
TCRP B-1A
VII - 24 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 297
Fare incentive programs are also likely to result In some shift from half-fare to free fare
by riders with disabilities. Targeted marketing and innovative policies which limit eligibility
for free fares (as in Miami) can help to m~nize this impact. While revenue losses were not
nearly as great as the paratransit savings in the sites studied, this impact can be politically
unacceptable. If high priority is placed locally on farebox recovery, free fare programs may be
more difficult to Implement and sustain.
The case study of feeder service in Vancouver showed that this service option can be
used in conjunction with rail and ferry systems with little difficulty. The high frequency of
service on these modes and the existence of stations and other facilities helped to minimize
ntermodal coordination and transfer issues.
Observations made In Tacoma, however, suggest Mat paratransit feeder to buses
requires more detailed planning. Transfer locations need to be carefully selected. Paratransit
on-time performance standards may need to be revised to avoid long wait times and long
overall travel times. The selection of trips considered appropriate for feeder will also need to be
carefully considered.
In Vancouver, issues that may be associated with requiring customers to transfer to
fixed route for a portion of their hip were also avoided because the system limited the
availability of direct inter-regional paratransit service. In systems that provide unconstrained
inter-regional travel, the operational and customer relations issues associated with requiring
transfers to fixed route will be more complex. Information concerning the ability of the
customer to use fixed route service would need to be gathered and made available to
schedulers. Guidelines on the types of trips for which feeder service would be cost-effective
would also need to be developed.
TCRP B-lA
VII - 2s Draft Final Report
OCR for page 298
Implementation of pure route deviation in York, Pennsylvania was found to require
more involved service planning. Community Transit worked closely win riders and local
human service agencies to develop a plan for route deviations that could meet frequent trip
needs within a reasonable schedule. Introduction of this service was also aided by the fact that
fixed route and paratransit operations had been combined and by a travel training program.
Deviation requests which could not be accommodated by the fixed route service could easily be
referred to the paratransit program. With the support of local human service agencies and with
some assistance to customers, the route served the needs of former paratransit riders with few
problems.
Even with this advanced planning and operational coordination, Community Transit
did, however, report problems with the on-time performance of the route. General public
riders also indicated that developing an understanding of the route could be difficult and that
at peak deviation times it was not an attractive travel alternative.
Fewer problems appear to exist wad "site specific" route deviation. Lane Transit
avoided on-time performance impacts by carefully evaluating requests for deviations and
limiting the number of deviations per route. Group trips to human service agency programs
were targeted and planning was done in close cooperation with local agencies.
Of the five options studied, introduction of service routes required the most intensive
up-front planning and expense. Madison County Transit (MCT) spent considerable staff time
reviewing existing service and demand. A consultant was also engaged to assist in the
plar Ding process. Approximately $200,000 was expended in the three year phase-in period as
existing routes were gradually adjusted and changed to service routes. Major attractors and
generators were considered and common para~ansit trip origins and destinations were
TCRP B-1A
VIl- 26 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 299
identified. Because service throughout the entire area was redesigned, several transfer centers
were identified and detailed scheduling work was conducted to provide for timed-transfers at
several "pulse" points.
Madison, Illinois went through several designs and redesigns of its service route
program to make it more effective. As noted above, extensive local planning efforts were also
required In Margate, Florida.
Single route community bus programs which supplement rather than replace fixed
route service are less difficult to plan and implement. The implementation of programs in Ajax
and Richmond Hid was less involved Man at the other sites studied. Still, careful consideration
of current demand, appropriate routes and stops, and innovative marketing efforts were
needed to make these programs successful.
While not a major issue In the sites studied, some systems which have implemented
service routes noted that malls, medical centers, and other locations at which buses were to
"pull in" must be carefully identified and access rights negotiated with property owners and
managers.
Several ongoing operating issues were also noted by Madison County Transit. Given
the personal level of service provided by community bus programs, schedule adherence was a
challenge. Ongoing work was required to adjust schedules. The new method of operation had
to be marketed to existing riders. Recruiting and training operators for the service has also
been an ongoing issue. Finally, because the system operates as a flag stop service, problems
were experienced by customers with vision impairments.
Based on the findings from these case studies as well as on information collected from
the survey of North American transit systems conducted as part of the Initial work, there
TCRP B-1A
VII - 27 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 300
appear to be certain settings and circumstances that are best suited to each service
option/enhancement. Table VII4 on We following page summarizes applicability and
transferability of the five options that were studied In detail.
Most transit systems which unlike service routes do so to supplement regional fixed
route bus service in specific parts of their service area. Often, service routes are implemented in
suburban communities where the regional bus service provides minimal access. To provide
access to the broader transit system, these routes are sometimes designed to feed into the fixed
route network. Of Me 10 transit systems which reported using service routes, eight operated
from one to four separate routes In this manner.3
~ addition to supplementing fixed route service In suburban areas, seance routes are
also appropriate in urban areas where there is a sigruficant amount of local paratransit travel.
Even if the concentration of traditional fixed route service is high, it may be found that this
service does not meet local travel needs effectively. By linking together common paratransit
origins and destinations, a regular route can be created that can serve existing paratransit
demand, offer expanded spontaneous mobility for these paratransit customers, and provide
ntra-community circulation for other residents.
Two of the systems identified In this study, Madison County Transit, and Pecos Trails
Transit In RosweD, New Mexico, redesigned significant portions of their total transit system
around Me service route concept. Such a redesign may be applicable in other small urban and
rural areas where Mere is a desire to refocus transit efforts on meeting the needs of older
3 Throughout this section, reference is made to the summary of systems in North America
which have implemented the various options/enhancements. This sublunary is
contained in Appendix B of Transit Operations for Individuals with Disabilities,
which contains findings from the first phase ofthis research project.
TCRP B-lA
VII - 28 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 301
Table VII4. Transferability and Applicability of Options Studied
. . .. . _ .
Optior,/Enhancement Settings and Circumstances where Use Seems Appropriate
_ _. .. ..
(1) In suburban and urban areas as a complement to traditional fixed
Service Routes route services.
(2) In small urban and rural areas where refocusing the fixed route
system to serve transit dependent riders may be appropriate and
desirable.
(3) Where a significant portion of paratransit trips and riders could be
served by a more regular route.
(1) In larger service areas where a significant portion of the total trip
Feeder Service could be made on fixed route.
(2) Where fixed route services have short headways and convenient
transfer points.
(3) In rural areas where long routes between communities are
operated.
(4) Where fixed route services have achieved a high level of access.
(1) Where both traditional fixed route and ADA paratransit is not
Route Deviation economically viable.
(2) In rural areas and less densely populated portions of service areas.
(3) Where route length and headways are longer and the impacts of
deviations can be accommodated.
| (4) Site-specific and/o tim~specific rouse deviation can tee applied |
to more densely populated areas.
(5) Broader applicability if not guaranteed and/or coordinated with
paratransit service.
(1) Small buses: IN conjunction with service route/community bus
Low-floor Buses programs.
(2) Full-size buses: Most small and medium sized cities. Seating loss
may not be acceptable on some urban routes.
(3) Applicable in most climates. Suitability to areas with severe
terrain unknown.
(1) Where current fixed route and pare transit fare structures provide
Fare Incentives a disincentive for appropriate use of modes.
(2) Where Were is high degree of fixed route and community access.
(3) In conjunction with at her service options and enhancements such
as Ravel training programs.
| (4) Where eligibility pr messes are Borough and strict.
persons and persons with disabilities. Such a redesign may be particularly appropriate in
retirement communities or in areas where transit has not successfully competed for commuters
and other automobile users.
TCRP B-lA VIT - 29 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 302
Feeder service is obviously most appropriate in transit systems with larger service areas
and subregional paratransit zones. As ADA requirements for unconstrained areawide service
are met, greater reliance on feeder service may be necessary. To date, feeder service has been
used primarily as an alternative where direct paratransit trips would otherwise not be offered.
This is the case in both Vancouver and in Phoenix, Arizona, the other large urban area where
feeder service has been used to a significant extent In We past.
Based on the review of BC Transit In Vancouver, feeder service can be provided with
relative ease to light rail and rapid rail systems where headways are short and shelter is
provided. Feeder to bus systems (or commuter rail services) with longer headways would
require more involved coord~nabon of operations between file modes.
ceder service has also been successfully introduced in rural areas where fixed route service is
provided between communities over considerable distances. Island Transit in Coupeville,
Washington, which provides fixed route service along a 55 mile island corridor, uses the main
fixed route to accommodate about half of its paratransit trips. Over 3,000 paratransit
passengers per month are transferred to the main fixed route for cross-island travel. Similar
feeder to long rural routes is provided in Susanville, California and between Waterloo and
Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
Finally, it should be noted that a high degree of fixed route access is important for
successful feeder operation. While limited feeder service could be provided to paratransit
customers who are ambulatory, it may not be appropriate for many persons with vision or
cognitive impairments who might have difficulty negotiating the fixed route system even if
transported to and from stops. This would be particularly true in larger urban systems. In
Vancouver, over 60% of the feeder trips were provided to customers who used wheelchairs.
TCRP B-lA
VI! - 30 D rap Final Report
l
OCR for page 303
The survey of North American transit systems identified 22 agencies that employed
route deviation service. This option appears to have gained popularity since the passage of the
ADA. Half of the systems identified had initiated deviation services after 1990. This recent
popularity appears related to ADA paratransit regulatory requirements. Route deviation
service, which is open to the general public, is considered to be a demand responsive service; as
such, complementary paratransit service is not required. Many systems have capitalized on
this stipulation by introducing demand responsive service enhancements in order to
circumvent paratransit requirements. These systems often do not market the deviation option
widely and do not attempt to work with local human service agencies to identify opportunities
to serve rackers by deviating from the route. Without this added effort, only a handful of
deviations are typically be requested per month.
Route deviation can be a reasonable alternative in rural and small urban communities
where both fixed route and ADA-compliant, unconstrained paratransit service are not
affordable. By incorporatir g some demand responsive features into the system design, transit
agencies in these settings can offer a form of regularly scheduled service and still meet some of
the transportation needs of persons who are unable to get to and from stops.
Similarly, by incorporating deviation into the system design and accommodating
existing paratransit trips, transit agencies may be able to expand this form of fixed route service
to areas that otherwise could not support a more traditional system design. Community
Transit's use of route deviation In York, Pennsylvania is a case In point.
Route deviation appears most applicable to longer routes and/or routes with longer
headways. In these situations, the time spent deviating to pick up or drop off passengers has
TCRP B-1A
VIl- 31 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 304
less of an unpact on We overall schedule. Adequate layover time must also be able to be built
into the schedule to accommodate deviations made on the preceding run.
Schedule adherence and other operational issues associated with route deviation can be
minimized if the operation of the service is coordinated with a paratransit program. The most
successful route deviation programs identified, including those in York, Pennsylvania; Idaho
Falls, Idaho; and Fort Worth, Texas do not guarantee that all requests will be met by deviating
the f~xed-route vehicle. Deviations are accommodated on a f~rst-come, first-served basis and
only when there is enough leeway in the schedule to allow the deviation to be incorporated
into the run. Paratransit used in these systems augments the fixed-route service by servicing
Hip requests t hat cannot be met by deviation of the fixed route bus.
Impacts on schedule adherence can also be minimized if deviations are focused on
"standing order" paratransit trips. In York, most of the deviations, particularly during peak
hours, were for standing order trips to day programs and workshops. This focus allowed
Community Transit to more easily predict run times and unpacts on schedules.
As was done by Lane Transit, a number of systems have also had success by offering
route deviation services on a limited basis. Requests may be limited to specific sites or to off-
peak hours. Consideration of this option may be appropriate if tnajor human service agency
programs or other origins and destinations frequented by riders are close to fixed routes but
cannot be incorporated into the schedule for every run. Deviations can be made on a few runs
per day to accommodate clients attending these programs. In addition to Eugene, Oregon, this
approach has been reported to be successfully In Fort Worth, Texas; Abilene, Texas; and
Attleboro, Massachusetts.
TCRP B-1A
VII- 32 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 305
Finally, route or point deviation may be an appropriate enhancement to service routes,
particularly programs in more rural areas. Because these routes are typically less time sensitive
and have longer headways, deviations can be more easily accommodated. As noted in this
report, flexible routing was an important factor in the recent success of service routes in
Madison, Illinois. Route deviation has also been incorporated into service bus designs in
Broward Count, Florida; Lakeland, Florida; and Ottawa, Ontario.
Fare incentives are most appropriate In areas where the relationship between
paratransit and fixed route fares provides a disincentive to use fixed route service. Historically,
paratransit fares in these areas may have been low. In order to create an economic incentive
that promotes the appropriate use of both modes, deep fixed route fare discounts may be
considered.
Fare Incentives appear to be most successful where there is a high degree of fixed route
accessibility and where other support services and enhancements make it possible for persons
with disabilities to more easily take advantage of the fixed route service. The most successful
fare incentive programs studied also implemented travel training programs, low-floor buses,
curb-cut programs, and other enhancements. Fare incentive programs also make these others
efforts more effective. In particular, they can assist in recruiting participants for travel training
programs.
Fare incentives will also be more successful in transit systems which can limit the
impact of ADA paratransit certification, either by using a strict determination process, offering
broader eligibility for free fares, or limiting marketing and/or eligibility to current paratransit
riders.
TCRP B-1A
VII - 33 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 306
Use of full-s~ze low-floor buses, particularly In me United States, has been limited but
growing in recent years. The reviews of Ann Arbor, Champaign-Urbana, and Victoria suggest
that full-size low-floor buses could be successfully and beneficial in most settings. Loss of
seating may make them less suitable on some routes in larger cities (although benefits in terms
of tiIne saved in boarding and disembarking would also be greatest in these settings). There is
also some remaining question about the use of this type of vehicle in very rough and hilly
terrain. While ground clearance has not been an issue in the sites noted above, there is as yet
little experience In areas with severe terrain.
There is more experience, particularly in Canada, with low-floor small buses, which
have been used extensively in community bus and paratransit programs. Given the benefits in
terms of ease of access and egress for all riders, low-floor small buses have become the vehicle
of choice for service routes.
binary, it should be noted that several "support services" were used witch great success
by most of the systems studied. Innovative service programs in Bridgeport, Madison County,
Vancouver, and York were greatly enhanced by marketing efforts, travel training programs,
and/or specific service planning efforts which considered paratransit demand in designing
fixed route services. Marketing efforts increased customers' awareness of the new services and
provided essential information on their use. Travel training assisted in transitioning riders
from paratransit to fixed routes, service routes and route deviation programs. Planning efforts
which involved local human service agencies and persons with disabilities improved the
design of the new programs and helped create local support for changes. These particular
support service options/enhancements appear to be applicable and transferable to all types of
systems and areas.
TCRP B-1A
VII - 34 Draft Final Report
Representative terms from entire chapter:
service routes
