Evaluating Transit Operations for Individuals with Disabilities Final Report (1997) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
CHAPTER III FEEDER SERVICE
CHAPTER III FEEDER SERVICE
Pages 83-124
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 83... ...
Feeder services can enable ~ndivicluals with disabilities to use fixed route service by providing paratransit to and/or from the nearest stop. Passengers are usually picked up at their homes (although the trip could originate from any location)
|
From page 84... ...
Another 10% can use it for some of their trips. Feeder trips were shorter than direct paratransit trips In Vancouver where frequent light raid service is available and the comparable direct trip would need to use inconvenient and very congested bridge crossings.
|
From page 85... ...
. At BC Transit and Pierce Transit, feeder trips cost less than half as much per trip as direct paratransit service for comparable origins and destinations.
|
From page 86... ...
a Revenue passengers April 1,1995 - March 31,1996 Ad fleet data pertain to the time of We case studies. TCRP B-IA III-4 Draft Final Report
|
From page 87... ...
Transfers between operators are common The paratransit operators provide about 800 feeder Dips per months, primarily to SkyTra~n and SeaBus, out of about 67,000 total handyDART trips per month. Feeder service was not estabIished as a formal program Rather it has evolved, primarily as a way to provide long trips between Me suburbs and central Vancouver which would overwise be too expensive or tone consuming due to traffic congestion.
|
From page 88... ...
:': - ? ~ _~.:', ..,~ TCR~ B-IA III-6 Draft Final Report
|
From page 89... ...
Sea_ ad Sinus Selves ^ f ~: i ~6 7 ~ID-7 ~
|
From page 90... ...
However, most operators find it supper to forgo the paratransit fare and have riders pay the discount ACRE B-IA III-8 Draft Final Report
|
From page 91... ...
Changes implemented during 1995 included a rigorous ADA certification process, a reduced service area, hours comparable to fixed-route service hours, a travel training program, and mandatory feeder service for riders who, based on the ADA certification process, are capable of using the service. Fares were Increased from $.35 to $.45, matching an increase In the local bus discount fare.
|
From page 92... ...
Dime "I-~. sniff Rider lransfe~ing to Plxed Dome Bus ~1II~ ~.
|
From page 93... ...
As of April 1996, nine months after the start of feeder service, SHUTTLE was providing about 600 feeder trips per month out of a total 40,000 paratransit trips per monk. Pierce Transit's ADA certification a~ninistrator estimates that at least 900 people will have been designated 3B eligible once ADA eligibility screeriing is complete.
|
From page 94... ...
Detailed analysis by dispatchers and Me consulting team of frequent feeder trips made by 24 individuals who account for half of Me feeder trips provided. A mail-back survey sent to ah 77 feeder participants served by the four operators; 49 responses were received.
|
From page 95... ...
Implementation issues and rider concerns were also Investigated. Characteristics of Feeder Trips Differences In the way that feeder service has been unplemented at BC Transit and Pierce Transit have produced markedly different trip characteristics.
|
From page 96... ...
The great majority of feeder trips provided at BC Transit are standing order, repeated trips. No statistics are available on the precise percentage.
|
From page 97... ...
Source: Estimates by paratransit dispatchers from samples trips by 24 frequent riders at BC Transit and 16 frequent riders at Pierce Transit. TCRPB-IA III-IS Draft FinalReport
|
From page 98... ...
Respondents estimated similar wait times for the SHUTTLE portion of their feeder trips. Waiting and transfer dines are not known for BC Transit.
|
From page 99... ...
Flunky, most feeder Hips are for standing orders, so operators and passengers have an opportunity to learn to time transfers between SkyTra~n anct paratransit to reduce wait fume. The trip ciata were also used to compare feeder trip lengths to: the estimated length of the same trip if it had been made using direct paratransit service; the estimated length of the same trip if it had been macle entirely using fixed-route transit (for Pierce Transit only)
|
From page 100... ...
Direct paratransit length and duration account for detours due to shared riding at Pierce Transit but not at BC Transit. Average paratransit trip for Pierce Transit from FIA Section 15 data for FY 1994 (prior to reduction in service area)
|
From page 101... ...
This comparison shows that feeder service is in compliance with ADA guidelines to be comparable to fixed-route service, and that direct paratransit far exceeds the ADA guidelines. Delays to Vehicles and Passengers Depending on how feeder service is implemented, it could result in delays for vehicles and passengers, both on paratransit and on fixed-route service.
|
From page 102... ...
Therefore, feeder trips result In no measurable delays. Service Quality Feeder service results In a different quality of service for those riders who choose to use it or are required to use it.
|
From page 103... ...
. || Service Availability | 45% | 12% | 16, || Comfort Level | 16% | 18% | 475 | Sense of Independence | 39% | 20% | 20°7 Source: Survey of 49 BC Transit feeder users.
|
From page 104... ...
As shown In Table TIl-3, feeder trips take much more time than equivalent direct paratransit trips. In addition, 73% of feeder riders surveyed described their transfer from SHUTTLE to a bus as "difficult." Approximately 80% of riders rated direct service as better than feeder service win respect to ad aspects of service, Including time, convenience, comfort, independence, and safety.
|
From page 105... ...
TCRP B-1A lII-23 Draft Final Report
|
From page 106... ...
resulted In a 17% reduction in overall paratransit demand. Since the 3B riders faced all the same changes as other riders, Me demand reduction due to feeder alone can be calculated as having been approximately s4%.s These results provide a basis for escorting the change in annual demand for SHUTTLE service resulting from the feeder program as follows: Prior to service changes: Reduction due to non-feeder service changes: After non-feeder service changes: After feeder and other changes: Change due to feeder: Pierce Transit's ADA eligibility screening administrator has estimated that there win be approximately 900 registrants certified as 3B eligible by the end of the ADA certification process.
|
From page 107... ...
Since actual feeder usage at this time was about 600 per month, it appears that feeder trips account for roughly a third of total SHUTTLE travel by 3B eligibles. This result is reasonably consistent with the findings of the survey of 3B eligibles in which 41% of those using SHUTTLE said they had been required to use feeder service at some time, and 25% said most or all of their trips require transfers to f~xed-route service.
|
From page 108... ...
fable IIL6. Reasons for No Loner Using Sbu"Ie .
|
From page 109... ...
Usually ride on Pierce Transit buses 9% Do not go out as often as before 45% Ot hers 21% aIncludes "call a cab" and "condition has worsened." TCRP B-IA III-27 Draft Final Report
|
From page 110... ...
Members of Pierce Transit's advisory committee were generally supportive of the concept of feeder service. The Independent Living Center (TALC)
|
From page 111... ...
A full calculation of the economic impact of feeder service requires consideration of the foDow~ng factors: . Implementation and planning cost Continuing added operational cost for scheduling, coordinator, and trip planriing.
|
From page 112... ...
For example, 3B certification was completed as part of a larger program of recertifying aD registrants according to ADA · criteria. Scheduling, Coordination, and Trip Planning At BC Transit, all the schedulers interviewed agreed that, for two-legged trips, feeder trips required no more telephone scheduling time than direct paratransit trips.
|
From page 113... ...
Table ITI-S shows a calculation of the operational cost savings from this reduction In paratransit vehicle time at BC Transit and Pierce Transit, which comes to about $14.44 per trip at BC Transit and $16.41 per trip at Pierce Transit. Since BC Transit provides about 800 feeder trips per monk, the reduced cost per trips results In an annual savings of about $139,000, roughly I.3% of the annual TCRP B-1A III-3 1 Draft Final Report
|
From page 114... ...
TCRP B-IA III-32 Draft Final Report
|
From page 115... ...
At Pierce Transit's estimated feeder trip rate of 750 trips per monk once ADA certification is complete, the reduced cost per trip would result In annual savings of about $147,000. Operational Cost Savines Due to Reduced Demand At BC Transit, feeder service provides travel opportunities that might not exist otherwise, and did not previously exist.
|
From page 116... ...
Therefore, feeder win save money as long at the para~ansit portion of Me average feeder hip is 0.5 miles shorter than the direct paratransit mileage for the same trip. In practice, Pierce Transit achieves an average mileage difference of 5.7 nodes (3.1 miles paratransit portion vs.
|
From page 117... ...
Pierce Transit's program is mandatory. BC Transit's is theoretically voluntary, but riders do not have a direct paratransit alternative for most feeder trips.
|
From page 118... ...
The Critical Role of Wait Times The experience of both systems demonstrates the critical role of wait time at transfer points in creating reasonable feeder trip times. Where fixed route service floes not run frequently, modifications to standard paratransit scheduling practices may be cles~rable to create acceptable wait times at transfers.
|
From page 119... ...
Standing Orders and Single Trips It may be thought that feeder service works best for repeated, standing order trips. Since most of Me feeder trips provided at bow case study systems are for repeated trips, it appears that riders and staff do find feeder more usable for these trips TCRP B-IA III-37 Draft Final Report
|
From page 120... ...
Considering the long wait times, and long total travel times, Mat occur for feeder trips at Pierce Transit and are likely to be repeated at many transit systems, these characteristics are probably essential ones for feeder transfer locations. ACRE B-IA III-38 Draft Final Report
|
From page 121... ...
Fare Coordination Because of the difficulty in keeping all handyDART drivers supplied with Fare Saver tickets to be used as transfers onto fixed route service, BC Transit's paratransit operators chose on their own to forego charging a fare for paratransit trips. Pierce Transit also elected to provide the paratransit portion of feeder trips at no charge.
|
From page 122... ...
Systems offering a lower level of paratransit service might experience less demand reduction due to feeder service than Pierce Transit. Pierce Transits timed transfer bus network provides a set of natural transfer points for feeder service at which bus departure Hines are closely controlled.
|
From page 123... ...
However, appropriate procedures may succeed in reducing wait times compared to those observed at Pierce Transit. Since Pierce Transit's paratransit fare Is equal to its discount f~xed-route fare, riders had no fare incentive to use feeder service compared to direct paratransit.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.