Improving Transit Integration Among Multiple Providers, Volume II: Research Report (2015) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 40-54
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 40... ...
40 Many transportation agencies want to make sure that the benefits of the decisions that they make regarding integration or improvement are worth the costs associated with the project. However, as this research has shown, sometimes projects have benefits that may actually cost more than the status quo or benefits that are qualitative and not measurable in terms of cost.
|
From page 41... ...
Assessment of Costs and Benefits 41 • Were costs and/or benefits or business case analyses used to support project selection or implementation? • For McAllen Central Station: Did vacancy rates around the transit facility change?
|
From page 42... ...
42 Improving Transit Integration Among Multiple Providers detailed studies to assess origin-destination activity, fare type utilization, or other metrics that would assist in evaluating a project's performance. It is also common for costs associated with contemplated integration efforts to be difficult to quantify for a public agency.
|
From page 43... ...
Assessment of Costs and Benefits 43 • Shared facilities -- Riders get faster and more reliable service and improved transfers. • Cross-boundary travel -- Services better match rider travel patterns which do not follow jurisdictional boundaries.
|
From page 44... ...
44 Improving Transit Integration Among Multiple Providers Profile Expected Outcomes Achieved PAAC Busways, PA Reduced operating costs for the transit agency (fewer service hours) Improved travel times for passengers Strengthened the regional transit network overall by sharing busways Established and strengthened relationships between systems Strengthened the Port Authority's reputation as a "team player" and supporter of regional services Yes McAllen Central Station, TX Centralized transportation at a single location Facilitated transfers between regional and international services to local bus routes Provided economic development benefits for local retailers on Main Street Yes Dallas-Fort Worth TRE Commuter Rail, TX Improved operating speeds and service reliability through infrastructure upgrades such as grade separation and doubletracking Facilitated regional fare that allows passengers to transfer between DART, The T, and DCTA services Yes Addison/Rutland County Connector, VT Increased ridership Developed new longer distance commuter services Resulted in cost savings Improved service quality Yes ORCA Universal Fare Card, Puget Sound, WA Improved operating speed Provided more accurate ridership data Improved revenue data Improved regional revenue reconciliation Yes Linx Mobility Management Co-op, Yellowstone, WY, MT, ID Increased regional mobility Increased ridership Increased revenues Increased awareness of transportation network Yes Urban Transit Association (ATUQ)
|
From page 45... ...
Assessment of Costs and Benefits 45 Case Studies: Summary Findings For the six case studies analyzed, agencies identified a range of benefits from the integration projects, some of which are quantifiable and some of which are described qualitatively. However, quantified cost data was provided only for capital projects that were the focus of the integration efforts in McAllen, Texas, and the Central Puget Sound region, Washington.
|
From page 46... ...
46 Improving Transit Integration Among Multiple Providers Research Triangle, NC Staff time to study and implement coordination projects Implementation of a new regional call center Implementation of regional software for automatic passenger counts Increased costs of overseeing merged transit service Increased customer satisfaction with regional call center Improved ability to bill cities for regional call center calls through new software Regional pass program makes travel easier and more cost effective for riders using more than one transit system by eliminating the transfer penalty Case Study Costs Benefits Valley Metro, Phoenix, AZ Staff time to study and implement coordination projects Costs of branding, such as new signs, paint schemes, marketing materials Increased ridership Improved public perception of transit and public willingness to fund system expansion Simpler, more accessible system resulting from regional fare structure, consistent branding, and common passenger information Cost savings from joint contract between RPTA and City of Tempe realized from: –Shared contractor staffing –More efficient use of facilities and equipment Cost savings from consolidating senior staff functions due to organizational merger of Valley Metro Bus and Valley Metro Rail Reduced overall costs from consolidation of dial-a-ride program Butte County B-Line, Butte County, CA Staff time to study and implement the consolidation Consultant study to assist with consolidation elements such as the costsharing formula, routing, and schedules Costs of branding and marketing Increased efficiencies and lower operating costs due to single contractor and single fleet More effective use of transit facilities and equipment Reduced administrative costs by consolidation, from 6%-7% of annual operating costs to 3% of annual operating costs Elimination of duplicate service Improved service productivity as measured by passengers per vehicle mile Simplified route structure and schedule making the system easier to use Timed transfers reduce total travel time for linked trips Comprehensive customer service Increased ability to secure outside funding Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN Staff time to implement coordination efforts such as coordinated fares, pooling vehicles, AVL integration, public information, establishing operating protocols on shared transit corridors Duplication of AVL equipment on bus rapid transit line due to lack of coordination Reduced flexibility for smaller suburban agencies to adapt to changing needs under the regional agency Common fare instrument makes system more seamless to riders Single fare structure is easier to understand More legible route network due to unified route numbering system More efficient use of transit vehicles due to single owner and streamlined fleet management Improved customer convenience through centralized regional transit information Increased operating efficiencies from shared scheduling and dispatch due to integrated AVL system for all but one operator Enhanced public information provided through real-time system implemented with AVL system Optimized flow of transit vehicles through coordinated operational protocols on dedicated downtown transit corridors Table 4-2. Summary of case study costs and benefits.
|
From page 47... ...
Assessment of Costs and Benefits 47 Case Study Costs Benefits Improved customer satisfaction with realtime information system Reduced customer information calls due to real-time information Improved customer experience by eliminating transfers among multiple paratransit providers Regional ADA certification makes the process easier for customers Contractual merger of transit system (DATA/TTA) improved on-time performance, service quality, service frequency, and fleet condition.
|
From page 48... ...
48 Improving Transit Integration Among Multiple Providers the exception of Butte County B-Line, it is unclear that any of the agencies gave early consideration of a before and after analysis in the implementation of their integration efforts. Contract Consolidations and Consolidation of Administrative Functions Isolating the costs and savings of consolidated functions can be a complex undertaking.
|
From page 49... ...
Assessment of Costs and Benefits 49 Examples of the case study uses of cost- and revenue-sharing models demonstrate these points. • For Twin Cities, the revenue allocation model has had a long and contentious history, illustrating the challenge of balancing suburban transit needs with urban transit needs and sharing tax revenues fairly within the region.
|
From page 50... ...
50 Improving Transit Integration Among Multiple Providers Although outcomes might not be evaluated using a formal process and structure, agencies sometimes undertake a formal or informal "lessons learned" process where they report back on the integration efforts as a way to highlight the positive impacts and explain how the negative outcomes occurred. While useful in most cases in assisting agencies to understand the challenges that arose during implementation, the value of these lessons learned can suffer if they are overly sanitized to protect the decision makers or agencies themselves that may have had a role in the challenges.
|
From page 51... ...
Assessment of Costs and Benefits 51 planning stages to support decision making but did not do post-ORCA assessment of costs and benefits. Objectives and Initial Analysis In January 1996, a Phase I Feasibility Analysis for Regional Fare and Technology Coordination for Central Puget Sound was completed (IBI Group, 1996)
|
From page 52... ...
52 Improving Transit Integration Among Multiple Providers costs were acknowledged to be greater than originally estimated. With regard to the key objectives outlined in the RFP in 1999, the project had mixed results based on stakeholder interviews as shown in Table 4-3.
|
From page 53... ...
Assessment of Costs and Benefits 53 an assessment of costs and cost savings cannot be done on the implementation of ORCA; however, ORCA stakeholders believe the project is successful based on the goals that were initially established. It should be noted, however, that in the four years that ORCA has been operational, a range of reports on usage and costs is prepared for management of the system.
|
From page 54... ...
54 Improving Transit Integration Among Multiple Providers in Butte County and Valley Metro and reductions in customer service inquiries at the other two agencies. However, a quantitative cost-benefit analysis was not considered as it was not perceived to be valuable to the decision-making process.
|
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.