Fare-Free Transit Evaluation Framework (2023) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Chapter 4 - Transit Agency Case Studies
Chapter 4 - Transit Agency Case Studies
Pages 50-80
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 50... ...
Information was gathered from the survey responses, transit agency interviews, news articles, and press releases. Purpose of Case Studies To inform evaluation framework development and provide more detailed examples of how fare free transit has been evaluated at transit agencies of different sizes across the United States, the project team developed 23 case studies.
|
From page 51... ...
Lucie County, FL Small Urban/Rural Cache Valley Transit District Cache Valley, UT Small Urban/Rural Corvallis Transit System Corvallis, OR University Community DASH Alexandria, VA Urban Local GoLine Indian River County, FL Small Urban/Rural Greater Richmond Transit Company Greater Richmond, VA Urban Local Intercity Transit Thurston County, WA Small Urban/Rural Kansas City Area Transportation Authority Greater Kansas City, MO Mid-Sized Regional Link Transit Chelan & Douglas Counties, WA Small Urban/Rural Mountain Line Missoula, MT University Community Partial Fare-Free Denver Regional Transportation District Greater Denver, CO Large Urban Regional Houston METRO Greater Houston, TX Large Urban Regional Iowa City Transit Iowa City, IA University Community Los Angeles Metro Los Angeles County, CA Large Urban Regional Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Greater Boston, MA Large Urban Regional Ride On Montgomery County, MD Urban Local San Francisco Muni San Francisco, CA Urban Local Sandy Area Metro Greater Sandy, OR Small Urban/Rural Steamboat Springs Transit Steamboat Springs, CO Resort Community Utah Transit Authority Wasatch Front, UT Large Urban Regional Not Fare-Free King County Metro King County, WA Large Urban Regional Sun Tran Tucson, AZ Mid-Sized Regional The Rapid Grand Rapids, MI Mid-Sized Regional Exhibit 4-1. Case study transit agencies by service area and agency type.
|
From page 52... ...
Survey Respondent and Case Study Transit Agencies by Fare-Free Classification Full fare-free agency survey respondent Partial fare-free agency survey respondent Not fare-free agency survey respondent Case study agency Exhibit 4-2. Map of survey respondent and case study transit agencies by fare-free classification.
|
From page 53... ...
* Data provided by Area Regional Transit KEY TAKEAWAYS Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT)
|
From page 54... ...
• Ridership increased among people with low incomes, retired people, and older people with higher incomes. Program Funding • FDOT provided funding for the 3-year pilot project and the county budget covered the addi tional cost when the pilot was extended.
|
From page 55... ...
miles Passenger Trips: 1 million Operating Expense: $3 million Farebox Recovery: 0% KEY TAKEAWAYS Corvallis Transit System (CTS) implemented full fare-free transit in 2011 with funding from a Transit Operations Fee on utility bills.
|
From page 56... ...
• The community is very supportive of fare-free transit service, and it is an integral part of the City of Corvallis community. Program Funding • Farebox revenue was replaced with a Transit Operations Fee, collected from all individuals and businesses through their utility services monthly bill.
|
From page 57... ...
Ridership increased by almost 50% in the first 3 months of zero-fare service and the network changes. DASH also studied a fare program alternative for people with low incomes but concluded it would have added additional administrative costs and benefited fewer riders than zero-fare for all.
|
From page 58... ...
miles Passenger Trips: 1 .3 million Operating Expense: $4 .1 million Farebox Recovery: 0% KEY TAKEAWAYS GoLine has operated fare-free transit service since the transit agency's inception, due in part to the large upfront costs of building a fare collection system. The transit agency is ranked as the most efficient transit agency in Florida, with the highest number of riders per local dollar of investment.
|
From page 59... ...
miles Passenger Trips: 9.3 million Operating Expense: $55 million Farebox Recovery: 20% KEY TAKEAWAYS Greater Richmond Transit Company (GRTC) suspended fares in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic and has continued to extend the policy.
|
From page 60... ...
Agency Type: Small urban/rural Urban Area Poverty Rate: 1 0% Service Area: Th urston County, W A Service Area Population: 0.2 million Service Area Size: 1 01 sq. miles Passenger Trips: 4 .7 million Operating Expense: $4 4 .6 million Farebox Recovery: 9% KEY TAKEAWAYS Intercity Transit launched a 5-year zero-fare demonstration project in January 2020 after it evaluated the feasibility of fare-free transit service.
|
From page 61... ...
miles Passenger Trips: 1 2.4 million Operating Expense: $1 00.4 million Farebox Recovery: 9% KEY TAKEAWAYS Buses operated by KCATA began zero-fare transit service in March 2020 and will be fare-free through 2023. KCATA is one of the largest U.S.
|
From page 62... ...
miles Passenger Trips: 1 million Operating Expense: $1 5 million Farebox Recovery: 4 % KEY TAKEAWAYS Link Transit operated four fare-free shuttle routes and expanded to systemwide fare-free as an emergency declaration in the spring of 2020. This was expanded into an additional 1-year pilot in July 2021.
|
From page 63... ...
Evaluation • A fare study was completed during the pandemic, including a feasibility evaluation of fare-free transit service. • Evaluation criteria included ridership and productivity impacts, increased operating costs, foregone farebox revenue, and on-time performance improvements.
|
From page 64... ...
• Improve operational efficiency and reduce administrative costs incurred by collecting fares. • Improve the environmental impact of local transportation by encouraging transit ridership.
|
From page 65... ...
: 1 05.8 million Operating Expense: $64 4 .4 million Farebox Recovery: 24 % * Data provided by RTD KEY TAKEAWAYS Denver Regional Transportation District (RTD)
|
From page 66... ...
Data provided by METRO KEY TAKEAWAYS METRO evaluated fare-free transit alternatives and found that serving a population as large as the Houston METRO area would require a significant amount of additional funding, including any associated ridership increases and fare revenue losses. The evaluation examined only costs and did not include equity or social metrics, which restricted its ability to measure potential benefits.
|
From page 67... ...
Agency Type: University community Urban Area Poverty Rate: 20% Service Area: I ow a City, I A Service Area Population: < 0.1 million Service Area Size: 25 sq. miles Passenger Trips: 1 .6 million Operating Expense: $7.6 million Farebox Recovery: 1 9% KEY TAKEAWAYS After a comprehensive fare study, Iowa City Transit (ICT)
|
From page 68... ...
Agency Type: Large urban regional Urban Area Poverty Rate: 1 3% Service Area: Los Angeles County, CA Service Area Population: 8.6 million Service Area Size: 1 ,500 sq. miles Passenger Trips: 380 million Operating Expense: $1 .9 billion Farebox Recovery: 1 5% KEY TAKEAWAYS The transit agency is currently running a 2-year pilot program that provides fare-free transit to students in participating school districts.
|
From page 69... ...
• Improve operational efficiency and reduce administrative costs incurred by collecting fares. • Reduce emissions from local transportation by encouraging transit ridership.
|
From page 70... ...
Initial pilot results showed that ridership increased faster on the fare-free route than on other MBTA bus routes. Fare-Free Context • To support riders during the COVID-19 pandemic, MBTA piloted fare-free transit on one bus route between August 2021 and February 2022.
|
From page 71... ...
miles Passenger Trips: 20.6 million Operating Expense: $1 24 .6 million Farebox Recovery: 1 6% KEY TAKEAWAYS Ride On suspended fare collection for COVID-19 and conducted an evaluation of a range of fare free and discounted fare alternatives. The transit agency focused on four areas of analysis in its evaluation: equity, fiscal impacts, ridership, and fare program administration.
|
From page 72... ...
miles Passenger Trips: 223 million Operating Expense: $856 million Farebox Recovery: 23% KEY TAKEAWAYS The transit agency has multiple partial fare-free programs targeting certain population groups, including youth, some students, people with disabilities, older people with low incomes, and people experiencing homelessness. Muni has not seen any major changes in ridership due to the programs, but no official evaluations were conducted.
|
From page 73... ...
Agency Type: Small urban/rural Urban Area Poverty Rate: Not available Service Area: G reater Sand y, OR Service Area Population: Not available Service Area Size: Not available Passenger Trips: 1 23,000 Operating Expense: $1 .4 million Farebox Recovery: 6% KEY TAKEAWAYS The transit agency started as fare-free, introduced fares, and now provides free fares for local service. In the back and forth, the transit agency found that reduced fares may not increase ridership as much as full fare-free transit.
|
From page 74... ...
< 0.1 million Service Area Size: Not available Passenger Trips: 1 .1 million Operating Expense: $3.6 million Farebox Recovery: 4 % * Data provided by Steamboat Springs Transit KEY TAKEAWAYS The transit agency experimented with different levels of partial fare-free transit and eventually landed on partial fare-free transit on local service.
|
From page 75... ...
Fare-Free Policy Goals • Improve financial and operational efficiency by reducing boarding times and removing fare collection costs. • Attract ridership.
|
From page 76... ...
• The transit agency measured the impacts of "Free Fare February." • UTA plans to undergo a regional fare-free transit evaluation later in 2022. Outcomes • UTA has received a few complaints from riders about passengers experiencing homelessness and disruptive passengers.
|
From page 77... ...
miles Passenger Trips: 1 28.7 million Operating Expense: $91 0.2 million Farebox Recovery: 26% KEY TAKEAWAYS King County Metro does not have fare-free transit but administers two subsidized pass programs to support riders with low incomes, one of which is fully subsidized. Since October 2020, King County Metro and Sound Transit, the regional transit provider, have provided fully subsidized transit passes to people with very low incomes enrolled in certain state benefits programs.
|
From page 78... ...
miles Passenger Trips: 1 5.7 million Operating Expense: $79.5 million Farebox Recovery: 1 7% KEY TAKEAWAYS The transit agency suspended fares during the COVID-19 pandemic and completed a contactless solutions study that included an evaluation of permanent fare-free transit 2021–2022. Federal money replaced fare revenues in the short-term, but future fare-free transit will involve finding increased funding to cover the fare revenue gap and support increased use of paratransit.
|
From page 79... ...
• The recommendations from the fare study include a proposed strategy for returning to fares, as well as considerations for long-term, fare-free transit that includes fixed-route and paratransit service needs, replacement revenue and funding, and safety and security costs. Program Funding • Current fare-free transit is being sustained through federal relief funding and continuing without fares would require finding a new funding source or receiving a larger budget from the city council.
|
From page 80... ...
• Both programs were discontinued due to the use of the routes as shelter by a high number of people experiencing homelessness and behavioral issues related to public intoxication. Fare-Free Policy Goals • Alleviate congestion and parking demand in downtown Grand Rapids.
|
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.