Elements Needed to Create High-Ridership Transit Systems (2007)

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.

Introduction As indicated in Table 2-1, ridership on all U.S. transit systems has risen substantially over the past decade. Based on APTA’s ridership reports, total national ridership increased by over 22% between 1996 and 2005. As shown, ridership peaked in 2001, dropping somewhat over the next 2 years and then rising again in 2004 and reaching the high point for the decade in 2005. The growth during the late 1990s generally coincided with the economic boom during that period— and the subsequent ridership decline in the next 2 years similarly paralleled the economic down- turn beginning that year. While most agencies experienced at least modest ridership growth during the late 1990s, many agencies were able to sustain demand even between 2001 and 2003. As is discussed below, factors associated with the economy are certainly among the many influences on transit usage; one specific factor contributing to the resurgence of demand in 2004—continuing in 2005—was the sharp rise in gasoline prices. However, the research conducted in this study and elsewhere has shown that transit agency strategies have also played major roles in increasing ridership. This chapter reviews the external factors that affect ridership and the types of internal strategies agencies can use to build and retain ridership. Factors Affecting Ridership The research in this area has considered both internal and external factors that have contributed to demand for transit services. Agencies have utilized a broad range of internal strategies (i.e., actions planned and implemented by the agencies) related to service design, marketing, pricing and other types of efforts to help spur ridership growth. However, external factors outside of the agencies’ direct control (e.g., local economic conditions, cost/availability of alternative transportation modes, and land use/development patterns and policies) have also exerted a strong influence, both positive and negative, on demand levels. The relationship between external factors and ridership can be quite straightforward; for instance, population and employment growth in a region can raise transit demand simply by expanding the potential ridership base. Alternatively, certain factors (e.g., fuel prices, parking availability and prices, and regional development patterns) affect transit ridership by influencing the relative attractiveness of transit versus automobile use. While an agency may not be able to explicitly control these external factors, it can monitor them, anticipate their potential impact on transit demand, and take actions to mitigate—or take advantage of—them. Given the importance of these different types of factors, it is useful to understand the nature of the relative impacts of internal versus external factors. As transit demand is influenced by a combination of factors, it is a challenge to isolate the impact of any particular action or factor. 6 C H A P T E R 2 Factors Affecting Ridership

However, a number of the studies identified in Chapter 1, as well as the case studies conducted for this project, have examined the relative influences of external and internal factors on transit usage. The key findings from these studies are reviewed below. Previous TCRP Studies As indicated in Chapter 1, a number of previous TCRP studies have investigated the factors affecting transit ridership growth. Several of these have considered in particular the relative impact on demand of internal versus external factors—as well as the impact of individual types of agency initiatives. TCRP Research Results Digest 4: Transit Ridership Initiative, for example, reports that, based on interviews with senior staff at 27 transit agencies, “forces traditionally outside the control of transit planners, managers and even policy makers may have greater impacts on ridership than any combination of traditional fare, marketing, service design, or operational initiatives” (p. 5). On the other hand, the study also notes that “the introduction of nontraditional services and planning initiatives in many areas seems to suggest, however, that progress can be made in terms of both absolute ridership and market share, even in the short term. This is particularly true in communities that are pursuing strategies that better match an increasing variety of services with diverse markets” (p. 5). A follow-up study, described in TCRP Research Results Digest 29: Continuing Examination of Successful Transit Ridership Initiatives, considered the ridership trends over the next few years (1994–1996) of 22 of the agencies examined in the above study—along with trends at 20 additional agencies. Based on interviews with officials at these 42 agencies, the report notes that “external forces continue to have a potentially greater effect on ridership than system and service design initiatives” (p. 1). This report further suggests that the most important external factors (at least for the period covered by the study, 1994 through 1996) were • “The resurgence of local and regional economies, which has spurred ridership growth; • Reductions in federal transit operating assistance, which have suppressed ridership growth; and • Integration of public transportation with other public policy initiatives and program areas (e.g., welfare-to-work, education, and social service delivery), which has spurred ridership and eased some funding constraints.” (p. 1) However, this study also found that various types of agency actions and initiatives “have played a significant role in recent ridership success stories” (p. 1). The categories of agency actions/ initiatives identified were as follows: • Service adjustments. Types of service adjustments most frequently mentioned in the survey were – Reallocation of service to the most productive routes – Increased frequency of service Factors Affecting Ridership 7 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Ridership (000s) 7948 8374 8750 9168 9363 9653 9623 9427 9586 9708 Change from previous year — 5.4% 4.5% 4.8% 2.1% 3.1% -0.3% -2.0% 1.7% 1.3% Cumulative change (from ’96) — 5.4% 11.0% 15.4% 17.8% 21.5% 21.1% 18.6% 20.6% 22.1% SOURCE: APTA Transit Ridership Reports, 1997 - 2005 Table 2-1. Annual US transit ridership totals, 1996–2005.

– Enhanced passenger amenities – Introduction of transit center-based route structures • Fare and pricing adaptations. Frequently mentioned actions included – The introduction or expansion of deep discount passes – The expansion of outlet sales – Cooperative programs with businesses or other organizations or institutions • Planning orientation. Frequently mentioned examples included – Community-based planning activities – Strategic plans – Comprehensive operational analyses • Marketing and informational initiatives. These initiatives included “approaches ranging from broad public information campaigns to programs tailored to specific markets or specific services” (p. 12). • Service coordination, consolidation and market segmentation. These initiatives “are intended to highlight instances in which integration is occurring across a broad spectrum of transportation service providers and others, or where the needs of specific submarkets or user groups are being targeted.” (p. 13). While the report observes that “most systems experiencing major ridership increases attribute the increases to various combinations of strategies” (p. 1), it also notes that “route and service restructuring”was a prominent factor contributing to ridership increases during the study period (1994–96) and that “many of the systems experiencing significant ridership increases between 1994 and 1996 instituted or expanded deep discount fare policies along with efforts to make passes more widely available throughout their communities” (p. 2).1 A second follow-up study, described in TCRP Research Results Digest 69: Evaluation of Recent Ridership Increases, reviewed the 31 U.S. transit agencies experiencing the greatest ridership increases between 2000 and 2002. This included 15 of the 42 agencies examined in the previous study. Based on interviews with senior managers at 28 of these agencies, the study authors found that many of the factors observed in the previous study continued to play key roles in influencing ridership. As was found in the earlier studies, service adjustments represented the type of initiatives most widely cited as having influenced ridership, with service expansion mentioned by three-quarters of the agencies; more than half of the agencies reported service coordination and partnering (especially with universities), and half cited fare and pricing adaptations (including introduction of new fare media and technologies). Nearly half of the agencies suggested that shifts in planning orientation (including strategic planning and customer-oriented planning) were key factors. The one area that was not seen as important in increasing ridership by at least half of the agencies was marketing and information initiatives: one-sixth of the agencies “indicated that stand-alone marketing campaigns or initiatives were significant factors in ridership increases.”2 TCRP Report 27: Building Transit Ridership: An Exploration of Transit’s Market Share and the Public Policies That Influence It, reported on interviews with managers at 50 transit agencies—and subsequent case studies of 8 selected agencies. Like TCRP Research Results Digest 29, this study identified a range of specific internal transit strategies with the “poten- tial for increasing transit ridership or market share” (p. 7). These strategies are shown in Table 2-2. 8 Elements Needed to Create High Ridership Transit Systems 1The ridership changes over the past several years for the examples reviewed in TCRP Research Results Digest 29 are considered in Appendix A provided on the accompanying CD-ROM. 2TCRP Research Results Digest 69, p. 2.

Category Type Strategies Service improvements General Increased route structure Increased frequency Service cutbacks Dynamic scheduling Increased speed Improved security Improved comfort Increased capacity Suburb to suburb High-occupancy vehicle lanes/facilities Transportation demand management programs Suburban activity centers Suburb to central city Feeder services Fare integration Service coordination (timed transfers) Unitickets Station parking provisions Within central city Core services Information to customers Real-time information services Location Schedules Low technology Tailored schedules Bus stop information Medium technology Computerized information systems Kiosks Marketing and promotion Fare incentives Education New resident promotion Image advertising Cooperative promotions Public policy changes User-side subsidies Parking pricing/regulation Income taxes Fuel/carbon taxes Dedicated operating support Land use policy Local area bus services Road pricing Various SOURCE: TCRP Report 27: Building Transit Ridership: An Exploration of Transit’s Market Share and the Public Policies That Influence It (1997), p. 8 Table 2-2. List of potential transit strategies for building ridership (from TCRP Report 27). In analyzing basic mode choice decisions, TCRP Report 27 concluded that “transit ridership, in particular, has been found to vary with five general types of factors: • The levels of travel-inducing activities. Since travel is predominantly a derived demand, as the levels of those activities that require passenger transportation change, so can the demand for transit service be expected to change. • The price and other characteristics of the service. The price and various aspects of the level of service provided by the transit system have been shown by substantial previous research to affect the level of ridership. • Other transportation options. The price and service characteristics of substitute and complementary modes of travel may also be expected to influence transit passenger volumes. • The characteristics of the population served. The market for transit services comprises individuals with heterogeneous tastes, and the level of demand can be expected to vary between different demographic and socioeconomic subgroups of the population. • Other factors. Other determinants of transit patronage levels that are not easily classified into the above four categories include, for example, the weather and changes in public tastes over time.” (p. 25) Factors Affecting Ridership 9

However, in considering these mode choice factors, the authors conclude that “transit-side strategies alone are insufficient to achieve a large modal shift” (p. 11). This is attributed primarily to observations that: • “The private vehicle’s quality of service is valued very highly. • The range of transit service improvements is quite limited. • The automobile ownership decision dominates the mode choice hierarchy.” (p. 11) TCRP Report 27 also explains that “land use and related factors are very important” (p. 11). Three factors in particular are suggested as “affecting the interrelationship between land use and transit ridership: urban expressway capacity, urban core density, and downtown parking availability” (p. 11). Moreover, “ridership levels and market shares are very strongly associated with development densities, and are, therefore, highest in the core areas of the nation’s most densely developed cities” (p. 22). Finally, this report considers how various types of public policies (enacted at the federal, state and local levels) affect mode choice—and thus influence transit demand. Table 2-3 summarizes the mode choice impacts of the different types of public policy initiatives. TCRP Report 95: Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes represents a compilation and discussion of previous analyses of the nature of the impacts of various types of transportation system actions on demand; the study does not specifically address external factors. Individual chapters of the overall study have been published as stand-alone reports. Four of these reports (Chapter 9—Transit Scheduling and Frequency, Chapter 10—Bus Routing and Coverage, Chapter 11—Transit Information and Promotion, and Chapter 12—Transit Pricing and Fares) are particu- larly relevant to our study. Each of these chapters presents and discusses the results of analyses and agency experience regarding the nature of traveler response to a particular type of strategy. (The key findings from these chapters are discussed in Chapters 5 through 8.) 10 Elements Needed to Create High Ridership Transit Systems Transportation Inv estment Policy Infrastructure spending directl y affects the relative attractiveness of each mode Tr ansit operating assistance can help maintain, improve or expand services Research and development funding provides innovations in the provision of transportation services Transportation Pricing Polic y Ta xes and tolls make automobile use more expensive Local policies dictate taxi fares, and indirectl y, service levels Local parking pricing and availabilit y are very important components of the cost of driving En vi ronmental Policy Federal/state emissions standards increase new car prices Local air qualit y mandates require programs to reduce single-occupant vehicle use Local policies influence development patterns and transportation pricing Energ y Policy Minimum average fuel econom y standards increase new car prices and decrease operating costs Alternative fuel vehicle and research and development provisions of Energy Polic y Act are unlikely to affect choices made by consumers/households Tax Policy Income taxes affect economic activity and dispos able income, thereb y influencing the affordabilit y of various travel choices Preferential parking cost deductions promote automobile commuting over transit Sales taxes affect automobile costs and ma y support public transit Mortgage interest deductions influence housing location choice Property taxes ma y support local roadw ay infrastructure Land Use Polic y Provisions of zoning law s (lot size, us e) affect the viabilit y of public transit Design review s and other restrictions can require definitive plans for addressing transportation issues in new development s SOURCE: TCRP Report 27: Building Transit Ridership: An Exploration of Transit’s Market Share and the Public Policies That Influence It (1997), p. 33 Table 2-3. Summary of mode choice impacts of public policies.

Mineta Institute Study The Mineta Transportation Institute study cited earlier (Increasing Transit Ridership: Lessons from the Most Successful Transit Systems in the 1990’s) provides the most comprehensive review of the relative impacts of external and internal factors on transit ridership. Utilizing a range of methodological approaches (a literature review, an analysis of nationwide transit data/trends, and a survey of transit agency officials and in-depth case studies), the researchers consistently found that “the most significant factors influencing transit use are external to transit systems” (p. 105). Through an analysis of the National Transit Database (NTD) data for all U.S. transit agencies, the researchers found, in particular, “extraordinarily strong correlations between ridership and three external factors related to economic activity: unemployment rate, real hourly wage and real GDP” (p. 105). These correlations are summarized in Table 2-4. However, the researchers also found “a relatively high degree of correlation between transit ridership and the internal factors tested” (p. 105). The internal factors tested were related to average fare and service provided (revenue-vehicle miles and revenue-vehicle miles per person); these correlations are also shown in Table 2-4. The authors note, though, that the correlations to the amount of service “do not necessarily imply causality.” They point out that “increased service should increase ridership, but increased demand should also motivate transit managers to increase service” (p. 34). The Mineta Institute researchers conducted a survey of the 227 U.S. systems that gained ridership between 1995 and 1999; 103 usable responses were obtained. Consistent with the findings from the other methodologies, the survey responses indicated that ridership increases could be attributed to a combination of internal and external factors. The following basic categories of external factors were identified through this survey (p. 57): • Population growth. Specific factors include increased immigration and rising transit dependency (due to aging populations, for instance). • Strong economy and employment growth. Specific factors include increased tourism and greater demand for travel in general. • Changing metropolitan form. Specific factors include increased suburbanization and residential/employment relocation. • Changes to transportation system. Specific factors include increased congestion, reduced parking availability and increased costs, increased gas prices, and construction projects and time delays. The internal factor categories identified were as follows (p. 57): • Fare changes and innovations. Specific factors include fare decrease or freeze, universal fare coverage programs, and introduction of new payment options. Factors Affecting Ridership 11 Unlinked Trips Unlinked Trips/Person Internal Factors Real average fare (2001$) -0.61 -0.81 Revenue vehicle miles 0.81 n/a Revenue vehicle miles per person n/a 0.37 External Factors Unemployment rate -0.70 -0.16 Real hourly wage (2001$) 0.96 0.70 Real GDP (2001$) 0.79 0.24 Real GDP per person (2001$) 0.82 0.29 SOURCE: Mineta Transportation Institute, Increasing Transit Ridership: Lessons from the Most Successful Transit Systems in the 1990’s (2002), p. 4 (source of data in table: calculation using National Transit Database data) Table 2-4. Correlation coefficients of internal and external factors and transit ridership: 1995–1999.

• Marketing and information programs. This category includes advertising, niche marketing/ market segmentation, survey research and customer satisfaction feedback mechanisms. • Service improvements. This category includes expansion of routes (geographical/temporal), introduction of new/specialized service, and route restructuring. • Amenities/service quality. This category includes development of transit centers, develop- ment of park-and-ride facilities, increasing frequency/reliability of service, cleanliness of service, new vehicles, and bus stop improvements (e.g., signage, shelters, and benches). • Partnerships. This category includes community outreach/education, planning and strate- gies, and intra-agency cooperation. The results of the survey, in terms of frequency with which each of the internal factors was cited, are shown in Table 2-5. As indicated, the internal factors mentioned most often by the survey respondents as contributing to ridership increases were service expansion and route restructuring; these were followed by advertising/information programs. In general, internal factors were mentioned more often than external factors—as could be expected from transit managers. However, external factors were acknowledged as having an impact; the most commonly mentioned external factors were economic/employment growth, population growth and worsening traffic congestion. The final element of the study was a set of case studies of a dozen of the “most successful” U.S. transit agencies (in terms of ridership growth during the study period). The major factors cited by these agencies as being primarily responsible for their ridership growth are summarized in Table 2-6. As indicated, there was considerable variability in the major causes identified, although “several agencies were forthright in attributing the bulk of their ridership increases to external factors such as rapid population increases and economic growth” (p. 103). 12 Elements Needed to Create High Ridership Transit Systems Size of Transit System Type of Program Very Small (n=29) Small (n=13) Medium (n=22) Large (n=17) Very Large (n=22) Total (n=103) % of Systems Mentioning Program Rank Service Improvements Service expansion 23 13 17 14 16 83 81% 1 Route restructuring 19 12 11 12 6 62 60% 2 Introduction of new/specialized services 14 10 10 6 11 51 50% 4 Fare Innovations/Changes New payment options 7 5 2 8 7 29 28% 6 Universal fare coverage program (UFC) 2 6 6 5 9 28 27% 7 Fare freezes/decreases 12 1 1 2 4 20 19 9 Marketing Advertising/information program 20 9 12 7 11 59 57% 3 Market segmentation/niche marketing 2 0 0 6 2 10 10% 10 Partnerships Employer-based partnerships (including UFC) 3 7 6 9 8 33 32% 5 University-based partnerships (including UFC) 3 4 7 5 6 25 24% 8 Community outreach/local government 2 0 3 2 0 7 7% 11 Social service collaboration 1 1 0 1 2 5 5% 14 Service Quality and Amenities Reliability/shortened headways 1 0 2 3 1 7 7% 11 Park and ride lots 1 2 1 0 2 6 6% 13 Rail development 0 1 0 0 4 5 5% 14 Bus stop improvements 1 0 1 1 0 3 3% 16 Safety, cleanliness 0 0 0 3 0 3 3% 16 New buses 1 0 0 0 1 2 2% 18 Note: Since there are multiple responses per transit system, “% of Systems Mentioning Program” does not sum to 100% SOURCE: Mineta Transportation Institute, Increasing Transit Ridership: Lessons from the Most Successful Transit Systems in the 1990’s (2002), p. 58 (source of data in table: survey of 103 transit agencies that reported ridership increases between 1995 and 1999) Table 2-5. Frequency of internal programs contributing to ridership growth (from Mineta Institute survey of U.S. transit agencies).

Other Studies A number of other studies have considered the relative impacts of internal and external factors on transit ridership. For example, Gomez-Ibanez (“Big-City Transit Ridership, Deficits and Politics Avoiding Reality in Boston,” 1996) analyzed ridership changes at the MBTA (Boston) in the late 20th Century, and found the agency’s ridership to be considerably more strongly influenced by downtown employment levels and real per capita income levels than by changes in service levels or fares. He estimated that, for each 1% drop in employment, MBTA ridership would be lowered by 1.24 to 1.75%, and that each 1% rise in per capita income would result in a 0.70% drop in ridership. In contrast, Gomez-Ibanez determined that a 1% increase in the amount of service provided would result in a gain of 0.30 to 0.36% in ridership, and a 1% reduction in fares would generate 0.22 to 0.23% in additional ridership. A study by Kain and Liu (Secrets of Success: How Houston and San Diego Transit Providers Achieved Large Increases in Transit Ridership, 1995) analyzed data (for the years 1968–1992), to ascertain why ridership in both cities generally increased during the early 1990s—a time when many transit systems were suffering significant ridership losses. The researchers attribute much of the increases in both cities to a combination of two internal transit factors (average fares and revenue vehicle miles of service) and three external factors (i.e., regional employment levels, fuel prices, and automobile ownership levels). In an earlier study of transit in Portland (OR), Liu (Determinants of Public Transit Ridership: Analysis of Post World War II Trends and Evalua- tion of Alternative Networks, 1993), considering the same types of variables (using data from Factors Affecting Ridership 13 Agency (location) Major population/ employment increases Major fare structure change Flash pass system instituted Coordination with major employers Extensive public participa- tion Extensive use of market research Major capital invest- ment Land use policies New fixed rail routes Major route reconfig- uration ATC (Las Vegas, NV) ++ AMA (San Juan, PR) ++ Caltrain (SF Bay area) ++ + ++ Gainesville (FL) RTS + +++ + Green Bus Line (Brooklyn, NY) ++ Long Beach (CA) Transit ++ + MARTA (Atlanta, GA) ++ + Milwaukee Co. (WI) Transit ++ ++ ++ MTA-NYCT (NY City) ++ ++ + ++ OMNITRANS (Riverside, CA) + Pace (Chicago, IL) ++ ++ Tri-Met (Portland, OR) + ++ ++ % cited as major factor 33% 42% 17% 17% 0% 0% 8% 8% 8% 17% % cited as secondary factor 0% 0% 0% 17% 8% 33% 8% 0% 0% 0% % cited as factor 33% 50% 17% 33% 8% 33% 17% 8% 8% 17% ++ denotes cited as major factor + denotes cited as secondary factor SOURCE: Mineta Transportation Institute, Increasing Transit Ridership: Lessons from the Most Successful Transit Systems in the 1990’s (2002), p. 99 (source of data in table: interviews with managers at case study agencies listed) Table 2-6. Causes of ridership increases reported by case study agencies (from Mineta Institute case studies of U.S. transit agencies).

1976–1990), found that several external factors (per capita income, automobile ownership, and suburbanization of residences and employment locations) had a greater impact on demand for transit than did internal factors (i.e., annual transit miles and average fares). Finally, regarding the relative impact of internal strategies, a major regional bus study in the Washington, DC area (TranSystems Corp. et al., WMATA Regional Bus Study – Final Report, September 2003) included an analysis of the various types of service improvements and their relative potential contributions to an overall goal of doubling ridership over the next 20 years. The results of this analysis are shown in Table 2-7. As indicated, “expand fixed route coverage” was expected to have the largest relative impact among the service improvements, followed closely by “improve frequency”; note, however, that “normal expected ridership growth” (due to non service-related factors) was expected to have the largest impact. In considering the factors affecting transit demand and productivity, the WMATA study also concluded that “For bus routes, and indeed for transit in general, perhaps the most important single factor affecting ridership is the density of development in the corridor served by the route. Density is so important because a fixed-route service has, by definition, a limited service area. It is limited because people (1) don’t like to walk and (2) don’t like to transfer.” (WMATA Regional Bus Study – Comprehensive Operational Analysis Summary Report, February 2001, p. 67) This study further evaluated the relationship between ridership/productivity on specific routes and several selected land use and demographic factors along these routes. Regression analysis was conducted involving five independent variables (related to residential density, employment density, household vehicle ownership, number of senior residents, and proximity to regional activity centers) and three ridership measures (i.e., ridership, peak productivity, and off-peak productivity). None of the variables alone were found to explain much of the variation in rider- ship or productivity. However, the analysis confirmed that ridership and productivity tend to be higher in areas that have a greater-than-average percentage of households with no vehicles; it also indicated that ridership tends to be higher for routes that serve regional activity centers. (p. 77) Findings from the Case Studies As discussed in Chapter 1, a key element of this project was a series of case studies of U.S. transit agencies that have deployed various strategies to promote ridership growth.3 Table 2-8 shows the types of ridership strategies deployed by these agencies. As indicated in the table, the case study agencies used various combinations of strategies in their efforts to increase ridership, and most agencies used strategies in all major categories. All twelve agencies deployed partnership/coordination initiatives, eleven used operating/service adjustments, 14 Elements Needed to Create High Ridership Transit Systems Strategy/Factor Estimated % Increase Normal expected ridership growth 36% Expand fixed-route coverage 23% Improve frequency 19% RapidBus, priority and strategic corridors 8% Enhance image of bus systems 8% Extend span of service 4% Introduce flexible-route service 2% Total 100% SOURCE: TranSystems Corp., WMATA Regional Bus Study Final Report (Sept. 2003), p. 42 Table 2-7. Relative contributions of service improvements to doubling of ridership in Washington region (over a 20-year period). 3The case study reports are included in Appendix D which is provided on the accompanying CD-ROM.

ten marketing/promotional and information initiatives and nine fare collection/structure initiatives. The most common type of strategy was operating/service adjustments (40 separate actions, strategies or initiatives implemented by all of the case study agencies), followed by partnership/coordination initiatives (27), marketing/promotional and information initiatives (23), and fare collection/structure initiatives (14). The most widely used subcategories were partnerships (18 separate initiatives among all the case study agencies) and routing/coverage adjustments (17). Other commonly used subcategories included scheduling/frequency adjustments (12), marketing/promotional initiatives (12) and information improvements (11). The least used were improved amenities (4) and fare structure changes (5). With regard to specific types of action, the most common was university/school pass (9 separate initiatives), followed by route restructuring (7), travel demand management strategies (7), general marketing/promotions (7), and improved pay- ment convenience (7). Factors Affecting Ridership 15 Category/Subcategory/Type of Initiative AT BA T BR AT S CA TA GC RT A OC TA Ri de O n Tr an sf or t Tr i-M et UT A VI ST A W TA No . o f St ra teg ies Operating/Service Adjustments 40 Routing/coverage adjustments 17 Increased route coverage X X X X X 5 Route restructuring X X X X X X X 7 Improved schedule/route coordination X X X X X 5 Scheduling/frequency adjustments 12 Increased service frequency X X X X X 5 Increased span of service X X X X 4 Improved reliability/on-time performance X X X 3 New types of service 7 Improved travel speed/reduced stops X X X X 4 Targeted services X X X 3 Improved amenities 4 Passenger facility improvements X X X 3 New/improved vehicles X 1 Increased security and safety 0 Partnerships/Coordination 27 Partnerships 18 University/school pass programs X X X X X X X X X 9 Travel demand management strategies X X X X X X X 7 Privately subsidized activity center service X X 2 Coordination 9 Consistent regional (inter-agency) operating policies X X 2 Coordination with social service agencies X X 2 Coordination with other transportation agencies X X X 3 Promotion of transit-supportive design/TOD X X 2 Marketing and Information Initiatives 23 Marketing/promotional initiatives 12 Targeted marketing/promotions X X X X X 5 General marketing/promotions X X X X X X X 7 Information improvements 11 Improved informational materials X X X X X 5 Improved customer information/assistance X X X 3 Automated transit traveler information X X X 3 Fare Collection/Structure Initiatives 14 Fare collection improvements 9 Improved payment convenience X X X X X X X 7 Regional payment integration X X 2 Fare structure changes 5 Fare structure simplification X 1 Fare reduction X X X X 4 Table 2-8. Types of strategies used by case study agencies.

The case studies examined, to the extent possible, the effect of specific strategies on ridership at each agency. In some cases, however, strategies are too recent to allow for any assessment of the ridership impact. In other cases, particularly where agencies have simultaneously implemented several strategies, it was not possible to isolate the impact of individual efforts. At several of the agencies, multiple strategies actually comprised elements of a single comprehensive ridership enhancement program. For example, OCTA’s “Putting Customers First” campaign included service adjustments, marketing efforts and fare collection/structure improvements. Similarly, TriMet’s “Frequent Service” program included a range of marketing and informational efforts as well as service adjustments. Based on the cases where sufficiently detailed data were available, it was determined that the most significant direct impacts on ridership have come from different types of operating/service adjustments (particularly increased route coverage, route restructuring, and increased service frequency) and as a result of partnerships with various local entities (particularly universities). Although marketing/promotions and information improvements seldom had a major direct effect on ridership, they invariably represented important complements to the introduction of any service improvements—and were often instrumental in the establishment of key partnerships. For example, establishing and maintaining a positive image of the transit agency in the community was seen by several agencies as a crucial element both in attracting/retaining riders and building key partnerships. Fare collection and fare structure initiatives similarly were not typically seen as having major ridership impacts on their own, but also represented important “pieces of the over- all puzzle.”4 (In actuality, the distinction between categories is often blurred; for example, a key result of many partnerships is some type of new fare payment mechanism.) In addition to reviewing the specific strategies—and ridership trends—at each agency, each of the case studies assessed the effect on ridership of various external factors (e.g., gasoline price trends, regional employment/unemployment levels, and population growth in the service areas). The key findings regarding external factors are as follows: • Gasoline prices fluctuated somewhat between 1995 and 2004, experiencing a net increase, but averaging a less than 5% increase per year through 2003. Although gas prices were presumably one of many factors affecting people’s decision to use transit, there is no clear relationship in any of the case study locations between gas price and transit demand through 2004. However, the precipitous rise in gas prices (53%) between October 2004 and October 2005 has been a more important factor contributing to the ridership growth during that period. The retail price of regular gasoline reached a high average price of over $3 per gallon in September 2005; this represents an increase of over 185% since 1995, and the price has more than doubled just since 2002. Although the price subsequently fell significantly (the average was approximately $2.15, as of December 2005), the earlier sharp rise doubtless led many people who previously might never have considered using transit to reconsider their modal decisions—and to use transit for at least a portion of their trips. Thus, the fuel price increase through much of 2005 was clearly a factor affecting transit ridership. • In most of the case study regions, the unemployment rate peaked in 2002 or 2003 and has declined somewhat since then. However, in a few places (i.e., Lansing, Cleveland, and Bangor), unemployment has continued to rise over the past couple of years. Ridership has grown in these locations—despite the increase in unemployment—as well as in locations that saw a drop in unemployment. Thus, while unemployment is certainly a factor affecting demand, 16 Elements Needed to Create High Ridership Transit Systems 4Although not observed in any of the Case Studies, Chapter 8 points out that fare-related strategies can have significant effects on ridership; in particular, reduction of fare levels (e.g., introduction of free transfers) has in several instances resulted in considerable jumps in demand. For example, the introduction of free bus-rail transfers and a variety of prepaid options in New York City in the late 1990s led to a 15% ridership gain.

there was no discernible direct relationship between the unemployment trend and ridership in any of the case study systems. • Regarding population changes, the case study areas varied considerably: one area (Cleveland) experienced a small loss (3%) between 2000 and 2004, two others (Bangor and Lansing) stayed roughly even, and the others all saw significant growth (from 3% in Advance Transit’s area to Ventura County’s 13%). Population growth doubtless contributed to ridership increases in most of these locations, although the percentage ridership growth generally far outstripped the percentage population increase. In comparing the rate of population change to the demand trend, there is no direct relationship between the two factors; for example, the agency that saw the greatest percentage rise in demand (Advance Transit) had one of the lower population increases, and the second largest ridership rise (CATA) occurred in a region that had very little growth during the review period. • However, population and economic growth associated with particular trip generators did appear to have an effect on ridership in a couple of the case study locations. These included growth/expansion of college campuses and medical centers. For instance, significant expansion of the Dartmouth campus and two medical centers—and the resulting increase in traffic congestion and limited availability of parking—directly contributed to increased transit demand at Advance Transit. Meanwhile, increasing enrollment at University of Maine would seem to be a key factor affecting ridership on one of BAT’s key routes. • Specific events affected demand at two of the case study locations: (1) The presence of the Winter Olympics in 2002 caused an overall increase in economic activity in and around Salt Lake City, and a marketing campaign encouraged local residents to use transit rather than driving. This contributed to an increase in UTA’s ridership in 2002 despite the economic recession occurring in 2001–02. (2) A period of particularly heavy rainfall in Ventura County washed out roads for a week in 2004 and made many routes inoperable; while there was still ridership growth in 2004–05, it occurred at a rate somewhat lower than that of the previous years. Thus, although certain specific developments or events apparently directly affected transit use at several of the case study locations, and broader trends (e.g., related to gasoline prices, employment/ unemployment levels, and population changes) certainly contributed to ridership increases at all locations, the overall finding from the case studies is that these external factors had less of an effect than the agencies’ own initiatives on ridership growth during the review period. The next section discusses the categorization of specific internal and external factors affecting transit ridership. Categorization of Factors Affecting Ridership Mode Choice Parameters Thus, as indicated by the above research findings, transit demand results from a combina- tion of a broad range of factors, some within an agency’s direct control and others not. In categorizing the specific types of factors/strategies of both types, it is also useful to review the parameters that contribute to mode choice decisions, particularly those that influence the decision to use transit. The basic considerations involved in mode choice decisions are the characteristics of the mode and the characteristics of the individual traveler and can be summarized as follows: • Price and availability of each mode. This includes factors such as – The availability and cost of automobile use (i.e., day-to-day costs such as fuel, parking cost/ availability, and tolls, as well as long-term costs such as purchase/lease, maintenance/repairs, insurance, taxes, and registration; also, nature of employer subsidy if any) and Factors Affecting Ridership 17

– The availability and cost of transit (i.e., fare, employer or other subsidy, if any, and parking cost, if applicable). • Quality of service of each mode. This includes factors such as – Travel time (i.e., the door-to-door time required to make a trip); – Convenience (i.e., the effort needed to access and use the transit service, including the need to transfer and the walking distance to/from a stop/station at both ends of the trip; also, ease of accessing schedule and other types of information, amenities such as bicycle racks, guaranteed-ride-home provision for transit or ridesharing); – Comfort (e.g., crowding/amount of space, seating arrangements, privacy, shelter at bus stops, and personal entertainment possibilities); – Service reliability (i.e., the predictability of the travel time and schedule from day to day); – Perceived personal security/safety; and – Perceived overall “image”of each mode (e.g., courtesy/helpfulness of transit personnel, and cleanliness of transit vehicles and stations). • Trip characteristics for each particular trip. This includes factors such as – Trip length and purpose, – Number of people to be making the trip, and – Whether there are multiple destinations involved. • Personal (sociodemographic) characteristics of the traveler. This includes factors such as – Income; – Origin and destination locations; and – Status (e.g., employed, student, or retired). Clearly, the majority of the specific parameters in these categories lie outside of the transit agency’s direct control and thus represent external factors. Nevertheless, it is important to realize that the transit agency can control key parameters in the first two categories. In other words, the crux of the challenge in generating high ridership for transit services is to make transit as competitive as possible in the areas of pricing and service quality—while developing a clear understanding of how best to address the considerations in the latter two categories. Categorization of External Factors As indicated above, industry researchers have identified a range of factors outside of transit agencies’ direct control that have a strong influence on transit demand. Essentially, these factors can be divided into two general classifications, those that affect demand for and supply of tran- sit service. The former can be further divided into those factors, discussed above, that influence the mode choice decision (this applies to those travelers who have the option of using their own automobiles—or another non-transit mode) versus those factors that more directly affect the need or market for transit service (e.g., population characteristics or changes in a region that have an impact on the number of transit-dependent travelers). The supply side refers to the ability to provide adequate transit service in a region; this is related to such factors as funding availability and land use/development patterns (e.g., can sufficient transit be provided to adequately serve dispersed employment and residential locations?). Based on the industry review, the key external factors affecting transit ridership can be categorized as shown in Table 2-9. The type of impact (demand versus supply) is shown for each individual factor.As indicated, a number of factors apply to more than one of these classifications. As suggested above, while a transit agency may not be able to directly control such factors, it is important to understand their effect on demand and consider them in developing internal strategies. In fact, the appropriateness—and effectiveness—of specific types of agency actions will in many cases depend on the prevailing conditions and policies. An agency should thus monitor the prevailing trends within these factors and pursue strategies that take advantage of—or, if necessary, mitigate—them. 18 Elements Needed to Create High Ridership Transit Systems

Categorization of Internal Factors and Strategies/Initiatives Factors Affecting Transit Demand As indicated above, a transit agency can control key mode choice decision parameters in two basic areas: pricing/availability and service quality. Thus, the agency’s goal in seeking to generate high ridership is essentially to influence mode choice by (1) maximizing the relative attractiveness of transit in those two areas, and (2) recognizing and addressing the full range of requirements imposed by travelers’ personal and trip characteristics. The basic factors comprising the pricing/availability mode choice considerations are as follows: • Fare levels; • Nature of subsidy programs (e.g., with employers, social service agencies, and educational institutions); and • Amount (including service hours/days) and types of service available. The basic factors constituting the service quality mode choice considerations include the following: • Route design; • Service schedules and frequency of service; • Service reliability (perceived and actual); • Accessibility features (for persons with disabilities); • Parking availability (e.g., park-and-ride lots for rail and express services); • Availability, ease of obtaining, and usefulness of information and customer assistance; Factors Affecting Ridership 19 Type of Impact Demand Type of Factor Mode choice decision Need/market for transit Supply (i.e., ability to provide adequate transit) Population characteristics/changes General growth in the region High/increased immigration High/increased number of seniors High/increased tourism High number of college students X X X X X X Economic conditions Employment/unemployment levels Per capita income levels Household auto ownership levels X X X X X X Cost and availability of alternative modes Fuel and toll pricing Parking pricing and availability Taxi fares Fuel taxes Auto purchase and ownership costs Availability of commuter benefits programs by employers X X X X X X Land use/development patterns and policies Density of development Relative locations of major employers and residential areas (e.g., increasing suburbanization) Land use/zoning controls and incentives X X X X X X Travel conditions Climate/weather patterns Traffic congestion levels/highway capacity Traffic disruptions (e.g., from major construction projects) X X X X X Public policy/funding initiatives Air quality mandates Auto emission standards Federal/state transit funding levels (capital and operating) Local transit funding (e.g., sales or other tax receipts) X X X X X Table 2-9. Summary of external factors influencing transit ridership.

20 Elements Needed to Create High Ridership Transit Systems Category/ Subcategory Type of Strategy Examples of Specific Actions/Initiatives Operating/Service Adjustments Routing/coverage adjustments Increased route coverage Service expansion; introduction of local circulators Route restructuring Reallocation to most productive routes, new crosstown routes Improved schedule/route coordination Feeder services; timed transfers; transit centers; regional integration Scheduling/frequency adjustments Increased service frequency Increased frequency on specific routes Increased span of service Longer service hours (e.g., late night/weekend) Improved reliability/on-time performance Implementation of AVL, transit signal priority, transfer connection protection New types of service Improved travel speed/reduced stops Introduction of express bus, BRT, rail Targeted services University-oriented service, downtown circulator, special event shuttle Improved amenities Passenger facility improvements Improved bus stop/station, transit center, park-and-ride amenities New/improved vehicles Improved amenities, use of articulated buses Increased security Increased agency security presence Increased safety Promotion of safety features of vehicles Partnerships/Coordination Partnerships University/school pass programs Reduced pass price or per trip reimbursement to university (or other school) Travel demand management strategies Employer pass/voucher programs; vanpooling; ride-matching; parking cash-out Subsidized activity center service Subsidized service to office parks or other activity centers Coordination Consistent regional (inter-agency) oper. policies Transfer agreements Coordination with social service agencies Mobility manager; user-side subsidy program Coordination with other transportation agencies Roadway or parking management strategies Promotion of transit-supportive design/TOD Requirements for bus stops/shelters at new developments Marketing and Information Initiatives Marketing/promotional initiatives Targeted marketing/promotions New resident/college student/tourist promotion; individualized marketing General marketing/promotions Agency image advertising, special promotions, cooperative advertising Information improvements Improved informational materials Easier to read printed system and route maps/schedules, flyers/newsletters Improved customer information and assistance Transit information center, in-station customer assistants Automated transit traveler information Pre-trip planning and en-route information, including real-time information Fare Collection/Structure Initiatives Fare collection improvements Improved payment convenience AFC, new prepaid fare options, expanded fare media distribution/reload options Regional payment integration Regional smart card program Fare structure changes Fare structure simplification Elimination of fare zones; elimination of express or rail surcharge Fare reduction Deeply discounted options; reduced base fare; free transfers, free fare zone Table 2-10. Types of strategies/actions/initiatives.

Factors Affecting Ridership 21 • Nature of passenger amenities (i.e., related to cleanliness, aesthetics, and comfort of vehicles and stations/bus stops/shelters); • Ease of fare payment (e.g., purchase of prepaid options and type and technology of payment); • Nature of integration (e.g., service/schedules and fare policies and payment) with other agencies in the region; • Perceptions of agency safety and security; and • Public image of agency. Finally, certain aspects of the agency’s organizational structure and management approach may well affect the agency’s ability to develop and implement the types of strategies needed to generate high ridership; these elements include: • Agency labor practices, • Governing board structure and vision, and • Agency corporate culture. Such elements have the potential to facilitate—or inhibit—the agency’s ability to offer new types of service (such as flexibly routed community-oriented service), pursue new partnerships (with universities, employers, or social service agencies) or otherwise innovate or respond proactively to changing markets. The next section identifies the specific types of strategies, actions, and initiatives transit agencies have utilized in addressing the above factors and generating and/or sustaining signifi- cant ridership increases. Types of Strategies, Actions, and Initiatives Based on the industry review, transit agency strategies, actions, and initiatives can be generally categorized as follows: • Operating/Service Adjustments, • Partnerships/Coordination, • Marketing and Information Initiatives, and • Fare Collection/Structure Initiatives. Subcategories, as well as examples of more specific types of actions and initiatives, are shown in Table 2-10. Key considerations in identifying appropriate strategies are discussed in Chapter 3. Agency examples of use of the various types of strategies are discussed in Appendix A (provided on the accompanying CD-ROM) and Chapter 4, and details related to each strategy are provided in Chapters 5 through 8.