Developing a Guide to Bus Transit Service Reliability (2020)

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.

Developing a Guide to Bus Transit Service Reliability 2.0 Summary of Research Findings 4 2.0 Summary of Research Findings The guidebook includes eight chapters incorporating the results of the TCRP A-42 research. The chapters are: 1. Introduction 2. Addressing Bus Transit Reliability 3. Developing a Bus Service Reliability Improvement Program 4. Reliability Measurement Tools 5. Reliability Diagnostic Assessment 6. Reliability Improvement Tools 7. Bus Transit Reliability Menus 8. References The following section highlights major findings and recommendations in the guidebook. 2.1 Addressing Bus Transit Reliability There are three major perspectives on transit reliability: from the customer, agency, and operator points of view. Customer perceptions relate to lost time waiting to catch a bus or delays in the actual service once on board. From the agency perspective, travel time variability affects a route’s cycle time and operating cost, increasing labor costs and even requiring added vehicles to provide the same level of service, thus an added capital investment. From the bus operator point of view, unreliable service can lead to health and safety impacts on operators. For the purposes of the guidebook, reliability was identified as having three components: 1. Short and consistent wait times; 2. Consistently on-time arrivals at the destination; and 3. Consistent travel times. Customer satisfaction surveys consistently list reliability as one of the most critical aspects of transit service. Reliability and the perception of reliability are closely related, but not the same. Whereas reliability can be measured rather precisely, the perception of reliability is difficult to quantify, and is subjective in varying from person to person, and even day to day for a given individual. Treatments addressing both actual and perceived reliability have been included in the guidebook. 2.2 Developing a Bus Service Reliability Improvement Program The transit agency survey conducted as part of the TCRP A-42 research revealed that most agencies do not have a formal bus service reliability improvement program. The guidebook presents a framework for such a program, including eight steps: Define Goals and Objectives Select Reliability Measures Select Reliability Standards Implement the Program/Monitor Performance Review and Update Implement and Monitor Treatments Identify Treatments Diagnostic Assessment

Developing a Guide to Bus Transit Service Reliability 2.0 Summary of Research Findings 5 Define Goals and Objectives – The key to a well-organized set of goals and objectives is to define and involve the appropriate stakeholder, both direct and indirect. Direct stakeholders are the transit system riders. Indirect stakeholders are those impacted by the service, but not direct users (such as transit agency board members and employees, other agencies the agency works with, and the public). A critical part in establishing the goals and objectives will be understanding the data, staff and software available for measuring and analyzing reliability. Select Reliability Measures – Given available resources and constraints considering goals and objectives, appropriate reliability measures should be selected. At an overall level, the measures should address punctuality (schedule vs. actual arrivals), variability (consistency of service) and non-operation (failure to run). The measures should reflect multiple perspectives (customer, agency, operator), and be applied both at a system level and at more detailed levels (corridor, stop, facility) to identify problems. Select Standards – Once measures are chosen, targets within an acceptable range can be set, which can be translated into standards. Other approaches include measuring change over time or using relative standards. Some measures have multiple dimensions to a standard, such as on- time performance, where the range in which a vehicle is considered on time can vary by agency, but agencies can then choose a percentage of service that must fall within this range. These dimensions can differ based on the type of service, time of day, and location of the stop. Implement the Program and Monitor Performance – Once reliability measures and appropriate standards have been chosen, the program should be implemented. This could start through an initial pilot program to test the effectiveness of a measure(s), if the cost of measurement is warranted given the possible gains in performance. A key element of the implementation process is the reporting of reliability measures. Measures should be calculated and compared regularly to the applicable standards, including any external factors influencing the measures in any time period. Diagnostic Assessment – For an agency to address unreliability, the root cause should be identified to better identify the most appropriate treatments. Causes of unreliability can be grouped into five areas:  Non-Operation  Early or Late Start  Inconsistent Travel Speeds  Inconsistent Dwell Times  Inconsistent Transfer Times Diagnostic tools must identify which of these causes is present in the system, on the route, or at the stop. There are also a set of factors that affect reliability, both internal to the agency (bus operators, route planning, bus fleet, fare collection) and external to the agency (traffic, weather, incidents, customer flows). The implementation of diagnostics will require the buy-in from other departments within the agency to ensure timely data is available, with the accuracy and precision of data to be used assessed. Identify Reliability Treatments - In selecting treatments to address unreliability and better achieve targets or standards, multiple things need to be addressed, including the causes of unreliability, treatment tradeoffs, expected effect of the treatment, capital and operating costs, and ease of implementation. Treatments can be divided into four types: operational, physical, technological, and policy. Operational treatments are those that agencies implement at the system, route, trip or stop level through service planning and for real-time control. Physical

Developing a Guide to Bus Transit Service Reliability 2.0 Summary of Research Findings 6 treatments are those that that alter vehicles or infrastructure and often require more time and higher cost to implement. Technological treatments involve the use of technology to improve actual or perceived reliability through technology such as signal priority, real-time information, or fare payments. Policy treatments change the rules or behavior of customers or other policies that are enforced by the agency. Implement and Monitor Reliability Treatments - For a reliability improvement program to succeed, multiple departments within a transit agency need to coordinate and buy-in on treatments to be applied, and the monitoring of their effectiveness in improving reliability. For a typical agency, this would include planning, scheduling, capital budgeting, maintenance and bus operations. Often treatments must be implemented in coordination with outside agencies, and multiple jurisdictions, to implement certain physical improvements such as bus lanes and technological improvements such as signal priority. One of the key aspects of the program will be continuously monitoring and reporting changes in reliability performance at the different geographic levels noted earlier, with associated data requirements. Three example applications are provided in the guidebook on how to use the Reliability Improvement Program framework presented. This includes examples related to: 1) A New Reliability Improvement Program 2) Revision of a Reliability Improvement Program in Conjunction with a New CAD/AVL System and 3) Addressing a Reliability Issue Identified in Variable Travel Speeds. 2.3 Reliability Measurement Tools Selecting the most appropriate reliability measure for a specific situation requires an understanding of the measures available, how they differ, and for what purposes they are most useful. Most definitions of reliability appear to address one or more of three commonly cited aspects of reliability, each of which leads to its own set of measures. • Punctuality refers to the actual time a bus arrives or departs compared with its scheduled or expected time. • Variability considers the degree of consistency of service. • Non-operation refers to whether a service is provided on a particular day. Reliability measures can be applied at four different levels: • System-level measures are calculated across all services (or those of a particular type) and useful as an overall “report card” for management and the public. • Route-level measures are calculated separately for routes and are useful for comparisons across routes and for targeting poor performance for further action. • Trip-level measures are calculated separately for each trip on a route over multiple days and are useful for identifying specific times of day where delays occur and used to identify specific bus operators having difficulty with maintaining service reliability. • Stop-level measures are calculated separately for a particular stop on a route over multiple trips and are useful in comparing reliability at different points along a route and can be used to identify at what point along the route reliability begins to decline. Reliability measures can be computed from a given set of data in different forms. This includes units of time, percentages and distributions, variability measures (variance, standard deviation, and coefficient of variation), and indices (often based on 90-percentile or 95-percentile value). The TCRP A-42 research identified a comprehensive list of measures from the literature review, transit agency survey, and case studies. However, the list can be consolidated to a smaller number

Developing a Guide to Bus Transit Service Reliability 2.0 Summary of Research Findings 7 since some measures (schedule adherence and on-time performance, for example), are synonymous, and others (such as running time variability and distribution of running times) are just different calculations from the same set of data. Table 2.1 presents a consolidated list of measures grouped by the aspect of reliability addressed and data needed to evaluate. Table 2.1 - Common Bus Service Reliability Measures Aspect of Reliability Data Needed Reliability Measure Perspective Punctuality Arrival and Departure Times On-Time Performance/Schedule Adherence Agency Variability Trip Start and End Times Running Time Agency Dwell Time at Stops Dwell Time Agency Customer Travel Times Travel Time Passenger Buffer Time Indices Passenger Time between Buses Headways Agency Customer Wait Times Wait Times Passenger Non-Operation Records of Missed Service Pullouts Missed Operator Missed Hours of Service Operator Scheduled Trips Cancelled Operator Counts of Service Disruptions Number of Crashes Operator Mean Distance Between Failures Operator Employee Attendance Operator Multiple Customer Surveys Passenger Ratings of Reliability All For reliability measures to be useful, they must relate to standards or targets to measure whether a specific goal is being accomplished. These can be agency-set fixed targets, or a benchmark value derived from actual reliability data for that agency, or from peer agencies. An agency may also set threshold values, below which corrective actions are required that may differ from more aspirational target values. To develop a comparison of the various measures of reliability, a set of comparison criteria is needed. Several criteria were identified for comparing measures for assessing bus service reliability:  Address the definition of reliability  Accurately represent the impact on customers  Involve low cost data collection, take advantage of existing data and resources, and be easy to calculate  Allow comparisons with other transit agencies and across transit modes  Allow multi-modal comparisons  Be useful in identifying and targeting corrective actions  Be easy to communicate to customers, the public and elected officials  Measures should relate to the agency’s goals and objectives There is currently a wide range of traditional, emerging, and innovative data collection techniques available to assemble the necessary raw data for calculating reliability measures:

Developing a Guide to Bus Transit Service Reliability 2.0 Summary of Research Findings 8 • Agency Operations Reports • Manual Data Collection • Agency Reports, Logs and Observations • Automated Vehicle Location (AVL) Data • Automated Passenger Counter (APC) Data • Automated Fare Collection (AFC) Data • New Technology Data Sources (such as through cell phone usage) • Customer Surveys • Complaints and Social Media Input • Reports from Other Transit Agencies In terms of transit agency department responsibility for reliability data, most transit agency survey respondents indicated that either the “Transportation” or “Planning” departments are responsible for collecting, reporting and analyzing reliability data, with some involvement from “Information Technology” and “Other” departments. 2.4 Reliability Diagnostic Assessment An analysis framework has been developed for understanding the root causes of unreliability so that reliability improvement treatments can be identified based on such causes. The measures identified in the guidebook each capture the different aspects of reliability and each point to a different set of elements of unreliability that can be addressed to improve performance. Table 2.2 identifies which elements of unreliability may be the cause of unreliability as observed by different measures. The TCRP A-42 research identified numerous internal and external factors cited as affecting reliability. Internal factors are those entirely or primarily under the control of the transit agency, and thus can be modified to improve reliability. These factors relate to 1) operations and maintenance staff, 2) service design and scheduling, 3) bus type and fleet maintenance, and 4) fare payment. External factors are not under the direct control of the transit agency and thus can only be mitigated by agency actions or be directly impacted only by partnering other agencies. These factors relate to 1) traffic congestion; 2) traffic signals; 3) temporal factors, such as weather, detours ad incidents; and 4) customer activity, including uneven or unpredictable boardings and alightings. Table 2.3 relates these different factors to specific reliability elements. There is currently a wide range of traditional, emerging, and innovative data collection techniques available to assemble the necessary raw data for calculating reliability measures:

Developing a Guide to Bus Transit Service Reliability 2.0 Summary of Research Findings 9 Table 2.2 - Relationship of Reliability Measures to Elements of Unreliability Measure with Poor Results Element of Unreliability No n- Op er at io n Ea rly /L at e S ta rt Va ria bl e T ra ve l S pe ed Va ria bl e D we ll T im e In co ns ist en t T ra ns fe r T im es Terminal Departure Times ● Arrival Times ● ● ● Bus Running Times ● ● Dwell Times ● Customer Travel Time ● ● ● ● Buffer Time ● ● ● ● Headways (Terminal Departure) ● Headways (Mid-Route) ● ● ● Customer Wait Times ● ● ● ● Missed Service ● Service Disruptions ● Customer Survey Data ● ● ● ● ● By applying Table 2.2 and Table 2.3, a framework has been provided to identify possible factors affecting reliability for a given measure of poor reliability, and then the list of factors to examine. It begins with examining reasons why service fails to operate and moves to examine why service does not start on time before moving to why service fails to stay on time. It also allows agencies to look first at internal factors under their control and moves to factors where the agency has little or no control and may need to collaborate with other agencies to development improvements. The approach asks four basic questions:  Are there enough buses and operators available to provide the scheduled service?  Are vehicles and operators available to start each trip on time?  Are operators starting each trip on time?  Are operators able to meet scheduled time points?

Developing a Guide to Bus Transit Service Reliability 2.0 Summary of Research Findings 10 Table 2.3 - Relationship of Reliability Measures to Elements of Unreliability Reliability Elements and Factors Internal/ External Factor Category Non-Operation Operator availability Internal Staff Vehicle availability Internal Fleet Breakdowns Internal Fleet Early/Late Start Insufficient recovery time Internal Planning Operator restroom breaks Internal Staff Holds for late connections Internal Service Poor operational control Internal Staff Mechanical issue Internal Fleet Variable Travel Speed Insufficient/excess scheduled time Internal Planning Too few/too many time points Internal Planning Overly long route Internal Planning Lack of adherence to time points Internal Staff Operator skill/behavior Mixed Staff Delays merging into traffic from stops Mixed Traffic Incidents, special events, construction Mixed Temporal Traffic congestion External Traffic Signal delay External Traffic Weather External Temporal Too many stops/poorly located stops Internal Planning Poor transfer connections Internal Planning Uneven loading due to variable headway Internal Service Demand in excess of capacity Internal Customer Variable passenger demand Mixed Temporal Fare payment delays Mixed Service Access for cyclists Mixed Customer Access for mobility impaired Mixed Customer Inconsistent Transfer Times Insufficient recovery time Internal Planning Poor schedule coordination Internal Planning Poor route connectivity Internal Planning

Developing a Guide to Bus Transit Service Reliability 2.0 Summary of Research Findings 11 A more in-depth step-by-step framework to identify causes of unreliability related to these four basic questions is presented in the guidebook. This includes a data analysis process complemented with a communication strategy with operators, supervisors, dispatchers, and maintenance staff who have direct and detailed knowledge of how service is provided and thus can help focus the effort to identify causes of unreliability and potential reliability improvement treatments. 2.5 Reliability Improvement Tools As discussed earlier, treatments for improving bus service reliability can be divided into four categories: operational, physical, technological and policy. The TCRP A-42 literature review identified more than 100 different treatments that have been cited to improve reliability. The most- cited treatments were transit signal priority (a technological treatment) and exclusive transit right- of-way (a physical treatment), with the remainder largely operational improvements. The clear majority of the transit agency survey respondents reported treatments that would be categorized as physical (although one of the most reported treatments was schedule changes, an operational treatment), transit agency survey identified. Among the ten case study agencies, several common themes emerged regarding treatments employed to improve reliability. These agencies generally assign supervisors to monitor routes with reliability problems and the supervisors make real-time service adjustments and suggest schedule changes to the Planning and Scheduling departments. Most have standby buses available to insert into routes as needed to maintain reliable service. Both survey respondents and case study agencies appear to have had greater success with operational treatments, despite survey respondents applying more physical treatments. This may be because agencies are most familiar with operational treatments and have been employing them for years. Some survey respondents provided comments on the limits to success of some treatments, particularly bus priority treatments such as bus lanes and signal priority. Some of the problems encountered included resistance to bus priority from local agency traffic engineers, interference with right turning vehicles and general lack of enforcement of bus lanes, and the lack of good “before” data from which to assess improvement. The industry could benefit from more extensive and more widely distributed documentation of success rates and best practices with respect to reliability improvement treatments. Table 2.4 lists reliability improvement treatments in each of the four categories. Each improvement is evaluated against the causes of unreliability addressed, treatment tradeoffs, expected effect, capital cost, operating cost and ease of implementation. Specific summaries of 31 potential treatments are presented as well in the guidebook. Table 2.5 groups the treatments into four tiers based on ease of implementation: • Tier 1 – Treatments under the direct control of the transit agency, easiest and fastest to implement, and lowest cost • Tier 2 – Administrative actions that are easy to implement but typically involve increases in operating costs • Tier 3 – Involve significant expenditures, increase operating costs, have significant lead times, and may require securing federal grants • Tier 4 – Treatments that require the concurrence, assistance, and financial participation of host municipalities to achieve infrastructure investment or new policies

Developing a Guide to Bus Transit Service Reliability 2.0 Summary of Research Findings 12 Table 2.4 - Relationship of Reliability Measures to Elements of Unreliability Improvement Treatments Causes of Unreliability Addressed Treatment Tradeoffs Expected Effect Capital Cost Operating Cost Ease of Implementation Operational Treatments Enhanced Route Operational Control Excessive Running Time, Travel Time Variability Uneven Service with Short Turns High - - Easy Introduce Standby Buses Non-Operation, Early/ Late Start Higher scheduled frequency Moderate - $ Easy Introduce Scheduled Short Turns Excessive Running Time, Travel Time Variability Less service on outer parts of the route High - - Easy, but local concerns will arise Limited-Stop Service Excessive Running Time Service reduced at local stops Moderate - $, if an overlay Easy Bus Stop Consolidation Excessive Running Time, Travel Time Variability Stop, Spacing, Customer Access Low - - Easy, but local concerns will arise Right-Sizing Bus Stops Excessive Dwell Time, Travel Time Variability Difficult to get Curb Space Downtown Medium - - Easy, but local concerns will arise Route Network Adjustments Excessive Running Time, Travel Time Variability Taking Service Away from Customers High - $ Easy, with robust planning support Divide Very Long Routes Travel Time Variability, Uneven route boarding Additional transfers for some customers High - $ Medium, public engagement Schedule and Headway Optimization On-Time Performance, Travel Time Variability Frequency Changes for some customers, Highest - $ Easy Coordinate Schedules at Transfer Points Inconsistent Transfer Times Time Added to Schedules Medium - $$ Easy, with robust scheduling effort Bus Operator Training, Incentives and Monitoring Non-Operation, Early/Late Start Training Costs High - $ Medium, needs support of labor Route Contingency Plans Non-Operation, Weather. Special Events How to Effectively Inform Customers Medium - $ Medium, if done in a meaningful way Increase Fleet Size Frequency of Service Big Capital/Operating Cost Increases High $$$$ $$ Difficult Employ More Full-Time Bus Operators Non-Operation, Early/Late Start Operating Cost Increases Low - $$$ Easy, but costly Coordinate with Roadway Agencies to Anticipate Construction Impacts Excessive Running Time, On-Time Performance, Travel Time Variability Increased Administrative Coordination Low - $ Easy/Medium Coordinate with Traffic and Parking Enforcement Excessive Running Time, On-Time Performance, Travel Time Variability Increased Administrative Coordination Medium - $ Medium Physical Treatments Dedicated Transitways Excessive Running Time, Travel Time Variability High Cost, Highway Agency Opposition High $$$$$ $$ Highway agency Medium-Difficult Queue Jump Lanes Excessive Running Time, Travel Time Variability Could require property takings Medium $$ _ Medium Level Boarding and Low- Floor Buses Variable Dwell Time Added Capital Cost, Lower Bus Capacity Medium $$$$ - Easy (except for cost)

Developing a Guide to Bus Transit Service Reliability 2.0 Summary of Research Findings 13 Table 2.4, continued - Relationship of Reliability Measures to Elements of Unreliability Improvement Treatments Causes of Unreliability Addressed Treatment Tradeoffs Expected Effect Capital Cost Operating Cost Ease of Implementation Articulated Buses Excessive Running Time, Travel Time Variability Added Capital Cost for Specialized Buses Low/Possibility Negative $$$$ $$ Medium, training is Required Right-Sized Terminals and Layovers Travel Time Variability Early / Late Start Neighborhood Opposition Medium $ _ Medium Far-Side Stop Placement Variable Dwell Time Very Minor Cost High for Each Stop $ - Easy, with Some NIMBY Issues Curb Extensions at Bus Stops Variable Dwell Time Capital Cost, Highway Agency Support High for Each Stop $$ $$ Highway Agency Medium Coordinate with Roadway Agencies to Incorporate Bus-Supportive Features Excessive Running Time, Travel Time Variability, Variable Dwell Time Increased Involvement in Planning Stages High $$ $$ Medium Technological Treatments More Effective Use of Bus Control Center Bus Bunching, Missed Runs, Early/Late Start Training for Control Center Staff High $$$ New Center $$ Difficult if New Center is Needed Traffic Signal Optimization Variable Travel Speed None Medium - - Easy w/ municipal cooperation Transit Signal Priority Excessive Running Time, Travel Time Variability Concurrence from Highway Agency Medium $ Very Low Difficult Real-Time Information Systems Customer Information None Medium $$ $ Difficult if none exists Fare Innovations for Dwell Time Dwell Time Cost of New Fare Collection System High for Busy Systems $$$ $ Difficult Improved Customer Communications Customer Perceptions None Medium (Perceptions Only) - $ Medium Policy Treatments Yield to Bus Laws Dwell Time None Very Low - - Medium, needs legislation Bus-on-Shoulder Operation Excessive Running Time, Travel Time Variability Operator Training High where there is traffic $$$ - Difficult, must upgrade shoulder Reliability-Based Fleet Maintenance Non-Operation, Late Start Capital/Operating Costs High $$$ $$$ Difficult Boarding Limits Excessive Dwell Time Excessive Running Time Bypassing Customers at Stops Low - - Very Easy Public Education Excessive Dwell Time, Crowding None Medium - $ Very Easy

Developing a Guide to Bus Transit Service Reliability 2.0 Summary of Research Findings 14 Table 2.5 – Summary Treatments by Ease of Implementation Tier 1 – Treatments under the direct control of the transit agency, easiest and fastest to implement, and lowest cost. • Introduce Scheduled Short Turns • Limited-Stop Service (by converting existing scheduled trips) • Bus Stop Consolidation • Coordinating Schedules at Transfer Points • Operator Training, Incentives and Monitoring • Route Contingency Plans • Real-Time Information Systems (with an existing AVL system) • Boarding Limits • Public Education • Coordinate with Roadway Agencies to Anticipate Construction Impacts • Coordinate with Traffic and Parking Enforcement • Improved Customer Communications Tier 2 – Administrative actions that are easy to implement but typically involve increases in operating costs. • Enhanced Route Operational Control • Introduce Standby Buses • Route Network Adjustments • Divide Very Long Bus Routes • Schedule and Headway Optimization • Employ More Full-Time Bus Operators • Reliability-Based Fleet Maintenance • Limited-Stop Service (by adding an overlay service) Tier 3 – Involve significant expenditures, increase operating costs, have significant lead times, and may require securing Federal grants. • Increase Fleet Size • Level Boarding and Low-Floor Buses • Articulated Buses • Bus Control Centers • Fare Innovations for Dwell Time Improvements • Real-Time Information Systems (if a new AVL system is needed) Tier 4 – Treatments that require the concurrence, assistance, and financial participation of host municipalities to achieve infrastructure investment or new policies. • Right-Sizing Bus Stops • Dedicated Transitways • Queue Jump Lanes • Far-Side Stop Placement • Curb Extensions at Bus Stops • Traffic Signal Optimization • Transit Signal Priority • Yield to Bus Laws • Bus-on-Shoulder Operation • Coordinate with Roadway Agencies to Incorporate Bus-Supportive Features 2.6 Reliability Menus The guidebook’s final chapter presents menus to have it easier for the reader to select reliability measures and improvement treatments. Measures relate to the three aspects of reliability (Punctuality, Variability, Non-Operation and Multiple). Treatment menus relate to the five reliability elements and factors (Non-Operation, Early/Late Start, Variable Travel Speed, Variable Dwell Times, and Variable Transfer Times). Separate information sheets related to reliability measures and treatments are provided. For each measure, the category, orientation, calculation, analysis, and standards are provided. For each improvement treatment, the causes of unreliability addressed, companion treatments, treatment tradeoffs, expected effect, capital cost, operating cost, and ease of implementation are provided.