Provide more frequent service Operate service for longer hours Provide more weekend service Simplify service Make service faster Improve schedules

Transcription

1

2

3

4 As described in The T Master Plan State of the System report, there are several key issues with existing transit service in Fort Worth and Tarrant County: Fort Worth has grown from a small city to a medium-sized city in a major metropolitan area. However, the area s population and employment have grown much faster than The T s system. Tarrant County s population will continue to grow, and increasing shares of older adults, Millennials, and minority residents will contribute to much higher demand for transit service. The T s service is very limited in terms of how frequently it operates and the hours that it operates. As a result, transit is not a convenient or attractive option for many of the county s residents and employees who have other travel options. Most of The T s services are provided within the I-820 loop, yet much of Tarrant County s recent growth has been to the north, northeast, and east of the loop. There is a significant and growing demand for transit in these areas but very little service. The input from stakeholders as part of this project indicates that many view the services provided by The T as being for those with no other options, particularly low-income residents and people with disabilities, and not for the broader population. To a certain extent, this perception reflects reality and is a consequence of the issues described above. These issues mean that The T needs to catch up with the growth that has already occurred and grow much faster in the future to keep pace with expected growth. This document summarizes several potential strategies to address The T s service challenges and develop a stronger regional transit system.

5 Transit service can be provided in many different ways, and the most effective approaches match different service strategies with the demands of individual markets. Potential strategies to improve transit in Tarrant County include: Provide more frequent service Operate service for longer hours Provide more weekend service Simplify service Make service faster Improve schedules Commuter rail Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Rapid Bus Streetcar Freeway BRT First mile/last mile connections Pedestrian access Bicycle access Park-and-ride facilities Transit-oriented development

6 Passenger information materials and delivery Real-time information System rebranding Family of services Region-wide branding Perhaps the most important way to make transit convenient is to make it frequent and to provide service over long hours. The T s service, in contrast, operates relatively infrequently and for short hours, and with only limited weekend service. One of the most important improvements The T can make is to significantly increase the amount of service that it provides. Most riders consider service that operates every 10 minutes or better as very convenient and service that operates every 15 minutes or better as relatively convenient. Conversely, service that operates every 30 minutes or more becomes too infrequent for most travelers who have other opportunities to travel, such as driving. In terms of these common definitions of frequency, on weekdays during the day (through the end of the PM peak): The T has only four routes that provide service every 15 minutes or better throughout the day on weekdays. Molly the Trolley and the TCU Shuttle are the only two routes in the system that operate every 10 minutes. 15 routes provide service every 16 to 30 minutes during peak periods, but only 11 during the midday. 10 routes provide service every 31 to 60 minutes during peak periods, and 12 during the midday. 10 routes provide only limited service on weekdays (the Express routes and Limited/Other routes that only operate a limited number of trips during peak hours). On weekday evenings and on weekends, service is much less frequent, and most routes operate every 60 minutes or less often. The lack of frequent service is one of the major issues facing The T, as relatively little service operates frequently enough for most potential riders to consider service to be convenient. To address this situation, more service will need to be provided on existing routes; new routes will also need to provide sufficiently frequent service. The span of service meaning the hours that service operates during the day is a second factor that strongly influences the convenience of a transit system. The T s services operate for more limited hours than those in most major metropolitan areas. On weekdays, the last trips depart at 10:51 p.m.; there is no service that begins its last trip after 11:00 p.m. Moreover, most routes end service much earlier: only 16 of 41 routes have a trip that departs past 8:00 p.m. on weekdays.

7 On Saturdays, only 18 routes have trips departing after 8:00 p.m. and no service operates after 11:00 p.m. On Sundays, Molly the Trolley operates until 10:00 p.m., but all other service ends by 8:30 p.m. Viewed together with the service frequencies described above, The T s service operates neither frequently enough nor late enough to provide the flexibility that most riders with other options require. This limited service makes it difficult for riders or potential riders with alternative schedules or second- and third-shift employment. It also poses a challenge to those who would like to use transit to reach social or entertainment activities in the evening. The T operates 41 routes on weekdays, including seven express routes and two circulators that operate only during peak hours, as well as three lines that operate one or two special trips per day. Excluding peak-only Express and other Limited services, there are 33 routes that provide all-day service during weekdays. Significantly fewer routes operate on weekends: 25 routes operate on Saturdays, and only 16 operate on Sundays. The amount of weekend service provided, especially on Sundays, will need to increase for transit to become a more viable option for more residents. For people to use transit, they must be able to understand it, and simple route structures are easier to understand than complex route structures. As stated in the TCRP s Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes report, 1 a readily transparent service design can to some extent market itself insofar as user information needs are concerned, while a highly complex operation places heavy demand on the provision of information and the rider s ability to interpret and absorb it. The end result is that a simple route structure will attract more riders than a complex system. Potential new riders will be more willing try the system, and once they do, the simpler route structure will help ensure that they get where they want to go, when they want to go, without experiencing problems. A simple service structure will also attract more occasional riders who otherwise would not take the time to figure out a complicated system. Updating service based on service design principles that emphasize simplicity and clarity would attract more riders, especially occasional riders who have other travel options: To make service easy to understand and to eliminate service duplication, service should be developed to serve clearly defined markets. Ideally, major corridors should be served by only one route, with more service provided by increasing frequency rather than adding routes. Potential transit riders generally have at least a basic knowledge of an area s arterial road system and use that knowledge as a point of reference. The operation of bus service along arterials or neighborhood collector streets, whenever possible, makes transit service easier to understand and to use. Most potential transit riders have a basic knowledge of major landmarks (and are often traveling to them). When transit service is focused 1 Transit Cooperative Research Program, Transportation Research Board, Chapter 11, 2003.

8 around landmarks, these locations can also become transit hubs. People traveling in an unfamiliar area can more easily find their way to a landmark to make a transfer than to a lesser-known area. Routes should operate along the same alignment in both directions to make it easy for riders to understand how to get back to the starting point of their trip. The fewer directional changes a route makes, the easier it is to understand. Conversely, circuitous alignments are disorienting and difficult to remember. Routes should not deviate from the most direct alignment unless there is a compelling reason. As described above, service should be relatively direct, and to make service direct, the use of route deviations the deviation of service off the most direct route should be minimized. There are instances when the deviation of service is appropriate, for example to provide service to major shopping centers, employment sites, schools, or other major destinations. Transit systems frequently receive requests for individual trips to serve off-route locations (schools are a common example), but having different trips on the same route operate differently at different times makes service confusing, especially for occasional riders. As with route deviations, individual trips should not vary from the regular pattern unless there is a very compelling reason. People can easily remember repeating patterns but have difficulty remembering irregular sequences. For this reason, routes that operate along consistent alignments and at regular headways are more attractive than those that do not. Where different routes connect or operate along the same alignment, schedules should be coordinated to the greatest extent possible to provide short connection times and to operate service at even intervals. This will make service more convenient and reduce overcrowding in high ridership corridors. One of the major disadvantages of using transit versus driving is that it usually takes longer to go by transit than by car. There are many causes of this, including indirect routings, buses stuck in the same congestion as regular traffic, and frequent stops and short distances between bus stops. Strategies to reduce the time differential between transit and driving include operating more direct service, providing priority to transit (discussed later), and consolidating bus stops where possible. Drivers can easily take the most direct and/or fastest route between their origin and destination, while bus riders are often forced to endure a tour of every neighborhood along the route and out-of-direction travel (see Figure 1). National evidence indicates that travelers prefer faster service to slower service, and people would prefer to walk a longer distance to a faster route than a shorter distance to a slow route. As a result, straighter and faster routes attract more riders than slower indirect routes. Unless there is a very good reason, service should operate along the most direct route possible. 2 As The T seeks to attract a broader cross-section of the population to transit, providing faster and more direct routes will be an important strategy for improving service. 2 One exception is for Lifeline routes designed to serve populations with special needs; in these cases, short walk distances are more important than fast or frequent service.

9 Faster, more direct service will attract more riders than slower, indirect service. It is also less expensive to operate. Transit stops are the access and egress points for transit customers and, as such, should be conveniently located. However, they are also one of the biggest reasons that transit service is slower than automobile trips. Most riders want service that balances convenience and speed, and the number and location of stops are key components of determining that balance. At the present time, many of The T s stops are spaced very close together, and there is a greater emphasis on reducing walk distances than providing faster service. However, as the success of Spur* rapid bus service has shown, most passengers prefer a greater emphasis on faster service than on shorter walks; to achieve a better balance, stops can be consolidated. The consolidation of stops can also provide significant travel time savings. On average, it takes a bus about 20 seconds to slow down, stop and pick up a passenger, and accelerate back up to speed. Thus, a consolidation from nine stops per mile to six can save one minute per mile, or five minutes on a five-mile trip. It also provides a more comfortable ride, as it reduces stop-and-go operation. Stop consolidation can make service faster while still maintaining convenient access. Schedule improvements are another strategy to make service better for existing riders and encourage new riders to try transit. In particular, improvements include scheduling service with clockface headways, better coordination between routes, and adjustments to spans of service to better match demand.

10 People can remember repeating patterns much better than irregular patterns. For example, they can remember that service operates every 15 minutes better than they can remember that service operates four times an hour with trips spaced 15, 8, 22, and 35 minutes apart one hour and something different the next hour (see Figure 3). In addition, people can also remember schedules that repeat at the same time every hour (clockface headways) rather than those that fall at different times every hour. For example, they can remember that service operates at 7, 22, 37, and 42 minutes past the hour every hour better than a schedule that operates four times an hour but at different times every hour. The rescheduling of The T s routes with clockface headways would make schedules easier to remember. The operation of service with irregular headways makes it impossible to provide timed connections and means that where multiple routes operate in the same corridor, some buses will operate back-to-back and other times there will be gaps in service. This scheduling is inconvenient for passengers, as they do not realize the benefit of the total amount of service that is provided. It also means that buses that run close behind another bus are nearly empty, while the first bus after a gap can be overcrowded. The operation of service at clockface headways as described above will allow for timed transfers at many locations where service operates infrequently for example, twice an hour on routes that operate every 30 minutes and once an hour on routes that operate every 60 minutes. In addition, in most cases where two or more routes operate in the same corridor, and especially in Transit Emphasis Corridors (see below), each route can be rescheduled to operate at the same service frequencies and to alternate trips at even intervals. This will eliminate bunching and gaps and increase the effective amount of service provided to passengers (since two buses arriving at the same time have the equivalent utility of a single bus). Some routes have demand for service that begins or ends earlier or later. To provide more robust service and better match service with demand, in most cases it may be desirable both to start service earlier and to end service later.

11 The T s service is located almost entirely within the I-820 loop around Fort Worth. Consequently, The T s service is currently most useful for those who both live and work within I-820 and very limited for those who need to travel to or from areas outside of this loop. However, much of the county s recent growth has occurred beyond I-820, and there are many areas with significant demand for transit that are unserved or only minimally served today. These areas include much of the eastern half of Tarrant County, generally located in an arc east and south of I-35W and to the north of US Highway 287 (see Figure 4), in and around: Arlington Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) Airport Grapevine Hurst and North Richland Hills Bedford and around Texas Health Harris Methodist Hospital White Settlement/Naval Air Station/Joint Reserve Base Overall, there are significant mismatches between transit demand and supply, including large areas with demand but little or no service. Just to meet current transit demands, The T will need to significantly expand service to new areas. Looking forward, these mismatches will only increase. Projections of future growth indicate that rapid growth will continue in areas beyond the loop, and that by 2035, transit demand will be generally as high as within the loop (see Figure 5). The areas with the highest levels of new demand will be the same as those listed above, plus additional areas such as Alliance.

12

13 Over the past decade, there has been an increased emphasis on the development of Frequent Service Networks that provide frequent service over a long span of time to and from most major destinations. Many of these networks are also specially branded to increase awareness. Among the best known are Vancouver s Frequent Transit Network (see Figure 6) and Minneapolis/St. Paul s Hi-Frequency Transit Network. The development of a Frequent Service Network for Fort Worth and Tarrant County could make service very convenient for many trips and will be an essential element in developing transit service for a much broader cross-section of the region s population. Throughout the country, there is an increased interest in developing new types of higher quality transit services. These include commuter rail, light rail, Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), Rapid Bus, streetcar, and more. The T has already started to develop premium services, such as TRE commuter rail, Molly the Trolley, and the Spur* rapid bus line. However, with those exceptions, many of The T s most important bus routes continue to provide regular local service. While it is not yet known which services will be most appropriate in which areas, the development of a Frequent Service Network with premium services will be a key element in developing more compelling transit service.

14 Commuter rail carries large volumes of passengers with stations typically spaced three to five miles apart. It is usually, but not always, oriented toward peak-period travel and typically serves suburban residents commuting to downtown employment centers. The T and Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) jointly developed and operate TRE commuter rail service between Fort Worth and Dallas, and The T is in the process of implementing TEX Rail service between Fort Worth and DFW Airport. Both services have generated support from a broad constituency. The original plan for TEX Rail service included commuter rail service from Fort Worth s southwest to downtown Fort Worth, then continuing on to DFW Airport. The southwest leg was not included in the current TEX Rail project in order to reduce costs, but should still be considered for future service. Nearly 200 cities throughout the world have developed Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) services that have made bus service much more attractive and greatly increased ridership. BRT has become popular for many reasons: BRT is faster, more convenient, more comfortable, and more attractive than regular bus service. Because it is more attractive, BRT can significantly increase ridership. A 2012 study reported that over half of the BRT systems reviewed increased ridership by over 30% in their first year of operation. 3 Many BRT lines, such as Boston s Washington Street Silver Line and Cleveland s HealthLine, produced much greater ridership increases. The cost to construct a full-featured BRT system is typically less than half the cost of light rail, and operating costs are not significantly higher than regular bus service. Well-branded BRT services attract favorable attention to themselves and to other available transit services. 3 General Accounting Office, Bus Rapid Transit Projects Improve Transit Service and Can Contribute to Economic Development, July 2012.

15 In order to provide many of the benefits of BRT service more quickly and affordably, many transit systems have begun providing Rapid Bus service. The T operates a Rapid Bus line with its Spur* service; other agencies with Rapid Bus services include Los Angeles Metro, San Francisco Bay Area s AC Transit, and Kansas City s KCATA. Rapid Bus service includes the elements of BRT that can be implemented on existing roadways at a lower cost and in a much shorter timeframe (see Figure 8). Rapid Bus can also be a first step toward full BRT whereas BRT represents a middle ground between light rail service and regular bus service, Rapid Bus represents a middle ground between BRT and regular bus. The service benefits of Rapid Bus are not as significant as with BRT but are still very meaningful compared to regular bus service: Rapid Bus is faster, more convenient, more comfortable, and more attractive than regular bus service Because it is more attractive, Rapid Bus can significantly increase ridership. LA Metro s first two Metro Rapid lines increased ridership by 49%; AC Transit s Rapid service on San Pablo Avenue increased ridership by 66%; and Kansas City s first MAX line increased ridership by over 50%. The cost to implement Rapid Bus service is relatively low and consists of moderately higher costs for vehicles and premium stations/stops. Increased operating costs can be limited to the additional service required to serve the new riders. Well-branded Rapid Bus services, like BRT, attract favorable attention to themselves and also to other available transit services.

16 Over the past decade, streetcar service has become increasingly popular in the United States. Modern streetcar services are now being implemented in many cities throughout the U.S. to both improve transit service and to stimulate economic development. Examples include Dallas, Portland, Seattle, and Tacoma, where modern streetcar service has already been implemented, and Washington, D.C., Atlanta, and Kansas City, where construction is underway. The current desire to develop streetcar service can be attributed to two factors. First, newer, shorter lines have proven to be very effective at serving shorter trips within neighborhoods and downtowns, adding a new type of transit service that can fill gaps in existing bus services. Second, streetcar service has been very effective in stimulating development. Most new streetcar services are being developed both to stimulate development and to improve transportation. The City of Fort Worth considered streetcar service between downtown and the near Southside/Hospital District in the late 2000s, and decided not to pursue it. However, that decision occurred in the midst of the recession, and there may be sufficient interest to revisit the idea in the future. Most decisions about whether or not to use transit involve time and cost, and most transit services are slower than travel by private vehicle. However, when transit is faster or nearly as fast (for example, many rail services), a large number of travelers will choose to travel by transit rather than by car. Thus, one of the most effective ways to encourage transit use is to make transit as fast as possible. Freeway bus services are designed to do this and, compared to other transit services, are unique in that they: Operate along freeways, either in regular traffic lanes, in high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, or along the shoulders Can have stations within the freeway right-of-way that are designed to minimize travel times by eliminating all or most of the local circulation that is required to serve stops or stations located outside of the freeway rights-of-way As with urban BRT, Freeway BRT can be implemented in a number of ways, including a mix-and-match approach along an alignment:

17 With service in general traffic, no special considerations are provided for bus service, and buses operate in the same manner and at the same speed as all other traffic. Most express bus services operate in general traffic. Throughout the United States, freeway bus services operate in HOV lanes. One challenge for these services is that most HOV lanes are the leftmost lanes, which requires buses to weave across all lanes of traffic to serve stops that are off the highway. To avoid this situation, transit stations are now being constructed in freeway medians where they can be easily accessed from HOV lanes. Twelve states 4 have implemented policies that permit buses to operate on selected freeway shoulders in order to speed service, and more are now considering it. These policies permit buses to operate on selected freeway and arterial shoulders in order to bypass congestion and maintain transit schedules. Bus-on-shoulder operation is a low-cost way to make freeway transit service faster and more reliable. States that have implemented bus-on-shoulder operation cite several benefits, including: Shorter and more predictable and reliable transit times Fewer missed transfer connections Increased transit ridership Reduced driver overtime One of the most time-consuming aspects of freeway bus service can be the time it takes to get off and on the freeway in order to serve local stops. To reduce these delays, many areas have developed stops and stations that are located directly along freeways, and most have been retrofitted into existing freeways. In general, there are three types of freeway stops and stations: 1. Stops located along freeway shoulders 2. Stops located along freeway interchange ramps 3. Stops located in freeway medians (see Figure 10) 4 California, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Virginia, and Washington have shoulder-running policies.

18 As described above, The T provides express bus service between downtown Fort Worth and outlying areas of the city. Express routes are mostly oriented around the traditional morning inbound and afternoon outbound peaks of commuter travel, with midday service on only one route and no reverse commute trips. There are a number of potential improvements that could be made to existing express services, and new services could be implemented as well. Most express routes provide only two or three trips during the AM and PM peaks, and schedules are designed to accommodate traditional work schedules. Providing trips during the middle of the day and trips departing later than they currently do (last departure at 6:05 p.m.) would improve flexibility and convenience for riders. As the Fort Worth region has grown, employment opportunities have increased outside of downtown just as population has. Reverse commute trips during peak periods would meet growing demand for commute trips to these employers. Transit Emphasis Corridors are corridors that are served by high volumes of transit service where priority is given to transit and high-quality transit amenities are provided. In some cases, Transit Emphasis Corridors are transit malls where vehicular traffic is limited entirely, or with only limited exceptions, to transit. Much more common, however, are Transit Emphasis Corridors that emphasize transit service but do not exclude other traffic. A major benefit of Transit Emphasis Corridors is that they make transit service faster, which makes it more attractive. Transit Emphasis Corridors also typically include more significant and higher quality stop facilities, which help to make transit service more comfortable. Many small- to medium-size transit systems focus service around a single downtown transit center. As service grows, however, connections outside of downtown become increasingly important. Outlying transit centers and hubs can facilitate connections between local and regional services as well as connections to neighborhood shuttles, Rider Request routes, and neighboring service providers. They can also provide connections in a variety of other ways, including: Park-and-ride spaces for express bus riders Secure bike parking and bikeshare stations Complementary services, such as intercity bus service, taxis, university shuttles, corporate shuttles, and new types of services such as ZipCar, Uber, and Lyft Transit centers can also provide other features such as indoor waiting facilities, wireless internet, concessions, and joint development (see Figure 11). The T s service is mostly oriented around the Intermodal Transportation Center (ITC) in downtown Fort Worth, but is also focused around six transfer centers across the city. However, these centers are generally designed as bus stops that facilitate transfers between multiple local routes, and they lack more significant service connections or passenger amenities. As the system grows to provide more service and expand service across Fort Worth and Tarrant County, outlying transit hubs will play a major role in providing greater access to transit service and supporting more regional travel patterns.

19 One way to improve service in downtown areas and urban cores is through Circulators that provide frequent service and, in a similar manner as streetcars, act as pedestrian accelerators to facilitate short distance travel. Circulator services are often used as a strategy to encourage traditionally infrequent or choice riders to try public transit. The major benefits of well designed circulator services include: Encouraging public transit use for short distances that would otherwise be too far to walk Connecting key destinations with a simple, easy-to-use service Providing a first mile/last mile connection with other transit services Promoting economic development The T currently operates Molly the Trolley service in downtown Fort Worth. That service has not met ridership goals but is still viewed by local partners as a valuable community asset. There may be ways to improve the existing service, such as beginning service earlier so that commuters could better use it as a first mile/last mile connection with TRE and local bus services. Most of Tarrant County s growth has occurred outside of downtown Fort Worth and in neighboring communities, yet The T s services are heavily focused on transporting people to and from downtown Fort Worth rather than functioning as a regional system. Feedback from stakeholders and the public has indicated a strong demand for transit service that works regionally and connects destinations and cities across the county. New services will be needed to develop a more robust transit system that better serves these types of trips, such as: The T currently operates seven express bus routes that connect to downtown Fort Worth from outlying communities and park-and-ride facilities. Expanded express service could meet commuter demand between communities and major activity centers in the region. There are a number of major corridors in the region that are rapidly growing and carry a significant share of regional travel. Rapid transit service, such as dedicated-lane BRT, can provide connections across Fort Worth and Tarrant County along corridors that can support high levels of service.

20 Improving and expanding commuter rail service provides another opportunity to connect major activity centers in the region with a high level of transit service. The T has already pursued this, with TRE service in partnership with DART, and is building on this effort with the planned TEX Rail service between Fort Worth and DFW Airport via Grapevine. In addition to fixed-route bus and rail services, a regional vanpool program offers a popular and cost-effective way to provide ridesharing opportunities to commuters who live too far from fixed-route lines or who need to reach outlying employment centers that have less or no transit service. Local circulators could provide local service and connections to regional transit services and employment centers in environments that may not be able to support urban fixed-route service. The development of outlying transit centers, as described previously, is another strategy for improved regional service. As transit needs continue to grow outward and to new locations, transit centers can serve as focal points for outer area transit and provide connections between local and regional services. Transit service is most attractive when it is faster than driving or when the time differences are reasonably small. To make transit faster, it can be given priority over regular traffic. This can be done through the use of the following approaches: Exclusive bus lanes, which can be developed in a number ways, such as in the center of roadways and in curb lanes Peak period-only bus lanes, usually in lieu of parking, but sometimes through the use of a regular traffic lane Queue jump lanes typically substitute a short stretch of parking for a curbside bus lane that allows buses to jump to the front of the queue at bus stops (see Figure 13) Transit signal priority extends green signals for approaching buses, allowing them to pass through the intersection before the light turns red and providing them with an early green signal (see Figure 14) Freeway shoulders used by express buses to bypass congestion

21 The T has implemented transit signal priority along East Lancaster Avenue in conjunction with Spur* service. The implementation of transit priority measures on new BRT and Rapid Bus lines, and in areas served by the Frequent Service Network described above, would make transit service much more attractive. Waiting for the bus is a significant part of nearly every bus rider s transit experience. If bus stops provide a comfortable waiting environment, people traveling to and from that area will be more likely to use transit; conversely, if bus stops do not provide a comfortable environment, people will be less likely to use transit. Not surprisingly, research shows that the quality of the customer experience while waiting for transit vehicles is a crucial determinant of both overall satisfaction and general community attitudes towards transit, and that the cost of better amenities is often more than offset by increased ridership. 5 At all transit systems, different stops serve different purposes and different volumes of passengers. It is accepted that the most important stops need to be well designed, attractive, comfortable, and convenient. The T provides high-quality stops on the Spur* route with shelters, real-time information, and other amenities (see Figure 15). However, other stops receive much less planning, fewer resources, and less attention to design, with the result that these stops are often located in inconvenient locations or provide fewer amenities than may be warranted. For a number of reasons, particularly cost, it is not practical to provide all amenities at all stops. Typically, more extensive amenities are provided at the busiest locations (for example, transit centers), and only basic amenities (such as bus stop signs) are provided at very low-volume stops. The T currently uses a point system to prioritize and rank bus stops as potential locations for shelters, evaluating the number of daily boardings, whether the stop serves a major activity/employment center, whether it serves a hospital or social service agency, and whether there has been a local community request for a shelter. 5 The Role of Transit Amenities and Vehicle Characteristics in Building Transit Ridership: Amenities for Transit Handbook, Transportation Research Board, 1999.

22 To prioritize improved stop facilities with more amenities, The T could adopt a systematic approach that consists of a hierarchy of stops based on relative importance (see Figure 17). The level of amenities that should be provided is then based upon that hierarchy. For example, basic stops that serve relatively few riders would consist simply of a bus stop sign with bus route information and, if possible, a paved waiting area pad, lighting, and a trash receptacle. At the other end of the spectrum, major regional portals would be uniquely designed and would include a full range of amenities including local area information and real-time passenger information.

23 One of the greatest challenges faced by transit agencies and customers is making the connection between the starting point of the trip and the transit stop ( first mile ), or between the transit stop and the ending point of their trip ( last mile ). In some cases, passengers have a simple walk of just a few blocks, but in many other cases, fixed-route service may end too far from a destination to walk, or at a point where a lack of pedestrian infrastructure makes it too difficult or dangerous to walk. There are a variety of approaches available to address the first mile/last mile challenge, and the best approach for Fort Worth is likely to be a combination of public and private solutions. In some jurisdictions, transit agencies play a significant role in ensuring the first mile/last mile connection is met, providing services specifically tailored to meet this need. The FlexBus in Orlando, operated by LYNX, is one example of a transit agency filling this role. Another important type of connection that is increasingly being provided by cities is bike share; The T is already pursuing this strategy with the B-cycle bike share system, which has 35 stations across Fort Worth, including two stations at the ITC (see Figure 18). The private sector offers additional strategies, including transportation network companies (such as Uber and Lyft) and car sharing companies (such as Car2Go). The pedestrian environment is the foundation for good access to public transit and is critical for attracting new riders, increasing ridership among existing passengers, and improving the overall travel experience. Since every rider begins and ends a transit trip as a pedestrian, the quality of the pedestrian environment is an important part of the trip and can be a deciding factor when choosing whether or not to take transit at all, especially for those with the option to drive. Improving the overall pedestrian environment is conducive to transit ridership in general, but concentrating these improvements in the vicinity of transit facilities is especially effective in improving pedestrian access to transit. In many cases, bicyclists represent new ridership people who would not have had access to or incentive to ride transit without the additional convenience afforded by a bicycle at either or both ends of a transit trip. Access projects and programs emphasize the reduction of barriers to, on, and across the system; this

24 includes facilities that support bicycle travel to and from transit stops, bicycle parking and storage, and opportunities to bring bicycles on transit using bike racks on buses or designated areas for bike storage onboard buses or commuter rail vehicles. These strategies can eliminate a significant barrier to the use of a bicycle as either the first or last leg of an otherwise transit-based trip, expanding the reach of transit. Park-and-ride facilities allow people to use transit for some or most of their journey, especially for express bus and commuter rail services. As described in previous sections, there are opportunities to improve park-and-ride access by developing additional locations and enhancing passenger amenities, as well as developing facilities in conjunction with outlying transit hubs. Park-and-ride facilities can play a key role as The T expands its commuter and regional services. Transit demand is strongly related to development patterns and, in particular, development density. The reach of transit is generally limited to within a quarter- to half-mile of the transit line or station, and thus the size of the travel market is directly related to the density of development in that area. In areas with denser development and more people and employees, transit can be provided in close proximity to many people. Transit-oriented development (TOD) focuses development at or immediately adjacent to high-quality transit service, providing a market for transit that can in turn support more service. In addition to close proximity to transit, TOD should be densely developed, feature a mix of uses (residential, commercial, retail), and provide comfortable and convenient multimodal connections to and around the station area. Walking, biking, and local transit access to TOD areas can support the convenience and attractiveness of transit service. For people to be able to use transit, they must first know that it is there and be able to understand how to use it. This means that it is extremely important for transit systems to provide clear and concise information about their services. Furthermore, transit typically serves a broad cross-section of an area s residents, workers, and visitors. Because different people access, use, and process information in different ways, transit systems must deliver information in a number of different ways. For example, many older adults are not web-literate, so providing information via the web may not reach older residents. For this reason, telephone and printed information must be provided as well. However, telephone and printed information will not reach many younger riders, who rely primarily on web-based information. For transit systems to reach the people that they hope to serve, it is essential that they provide effective information in ways that will reach as many people as possible. There are two types of basic service information that all transit systems provide: (1) route and schedule information (including maps, schedules, and information on connections), and (2) basic instructions on how to ride transit (such as fare policy, stop locations, and accommodation of riders with disabilities). These types of information are delivered in a variety of ways: Traditional delivery methods include printed maps, schedule cards, and rider guides. These are often distributed physically onboard buses and at key transit locations.

25 As with other types of information, the majority of distribution has moved to the internet. Nearly all transit systems now provide service information on their websites where people can either view it electronically or print it. Third-party distribution systems have also become increasingly common. Most major transit systems now present route and schedule information through Google Transit, and smaller transit systems are also moving in this direction. In addition, transit systems are increasingly providing real-time service information (see below), and people are increasingly expecting it. This information can be provided on signs at stations and stops, on traditional websites, and through mobile websites and smartphone apps. The T already provides information in a variety of ways. However, the lack of real-time passenger information for most of its services is a significant gap. To date, The T has implemented real-time arrival information through NextBus for the Spur*, Molly the Trolley, and the Burnett Plaza Lunch Line, but it has yet to be implemented on The T s other fixed-route services. Most major transit systems now provide real-time service information to their riders via websites, smartphones, and text messaging. This improves convenience, as transit riders know that if a bus is late they can wait to leave for the bus stop rather than waiting at the stop. It also eliminates the uncertainty that is often associated with transit use, as riders can quickly see whether they missed the bus or whether it is still coming and how far away it is. Measures such as real-time arrival information and service updates provide transit riders instant access to the most crucial element of successful service: reliability. Studies have shown that transit riders without real-time information perceive their wait time at stops as 50% longer than it really is. 6 With the 6 Watkins, Kari Edison, Ferris, Brian, Borning, Alan, Rutherford, G. Scott, and David Layton. Where Is My Bus? Impact of Mobile Real-Time Information on the Perceived and Actual Wait Time of Transit Riders. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Volume 45, Issue 8, October 2011.

26 introduction of mobile apps that deliver information on the arrival of next buses, 92% of people who use the OneBusAway app (a product of a consortium of transit agencies, nonprofits, and app developers) reported being more satisfied with public transit despite no changes in actual service. Conversations with stakeholders and focus group participants revealed that The T is widely viewed as a system that provides service for those with no other options, particularly low-income residents and people with disabilities, rather than a viable travel option for the general public. Respondents stated that The T s brand carries a stigma about who uses transit and that service is perceived as inconvenient and difficult to understand. This perception is not uncommon among transit agencies, although there are several agencies that have rebranded to better highlight the usability and convenience of their system and to attract more choice riders. In anticipation of redesigned bus service and the introduction of streetcar service, the Central Oklahoma Transportation and Parking Authority (COTPA) decided to undertake a complete rebranding. The new public facing brand, EMBARK, replaced the METRO Transit brand on Oklahoma City transit services. Rebranding occurred in response to relative lack of awareness about METRO Transit service in the city, along with a desire to attract choice riders who might not otherwise consider using transit. Central Arkansas Transit Authority (CATA), which serves the Little Rock region in Arkansas, voted in early 2015 to rebrand their system. The rebranding effort includes a new agency name Rock Region Metro and a new color scheme, with a new design for transit vehicles. Rebranding the agency is occurring as part of a systemwide strategic plan and service redesign and is intended to help communicate the system s overhaul to the public. Focus groups and other public engagement revealed similar thoughts to those heard in regard to The T, that the agency only provided service for low-income residents or those who had no other transportation options. In tandem with a redesign of service and other improvements, Rock Region Metro s new branding is geared toward making transit more attractive to choice riders and increasing ridership in the region.

27 The T operates seven primary types of local and regional bus service: Rapid Bus, Radial Routes, Crosstown Routes, Feeder Routes, Circulator Routes, Express Routes, and Rider Request Routes. In addition, The T operates TRE service (commuter rail) and MAX in Arlington (commuter/express bus). Radial, Crosstown, and Feeder routes are presented as general local service to the public, while Express routes and the Rider Request routes are marketed as such. The Spur* is The T s first Rapid Bus route and is intended to be the start of development of more enhanced transit services. The Spur* has many BRT features and is marketed as a distinct and recognizable line that offers frequent and comfortable service beyond The T s regular fixed routes. Circulator routes, such as Molly the Trolley, feature unique branding and are generally better known by and more attractive to people who may not be regular transit riders. There are many ways to classify routes, but the most important element is to accurately present service in a manner that helps people understand of how service works. Three systems that do this particularly well are Los Angeles, Providence, and Kansas City. LA Metro in Los Angeles uses a classification approach that is coupled with color-based branding. There are four types of bus service: Metro Liner BRT (Silver), Metro Express (Blue), Metro Rapid (Red), and Local (Orange). Providence s RIPTA, although it aspires to develop streetcar service, is a bus-only system that recently redesigned its services around an all-bus family of services:

28 RIPTA s new R-Line service High ridership arterial routes Radial routes to urban centers Other local bus routes Major routes between regional centers Express routes and local routes that only operate during commute times General public anchored flex routes that typically provide connections to fixed-route services KCATA in Kansas City uses a classification system that consists of: Streetcar service (now under construction), MAX BRT/Rapid Bus lines, Connex service, and frequent radial and crosstown routes Lower frequency all-day local bus routes Includes express routes and peak-only local routes Includes flex service and midday-only routes As illustrated in the examples above, families of services can be developed in different ways and tailored to the services provided by individual transit systems and the areas that they service. However, typical elements include: Categories of service types that reflect service quality, level of service, and markets served Services that comprise the backbone network, whether they be rail services, BRT services, other types of premium bus services, or high frequency regular bus routes Other services that fill gaps, provide connections to the backbone network, and extend service coverage to lower demand areas One of the biggest barriers to providing and marketing transit in a region with multiple providers is that information is often organized by agency or mode instead of from a passenger-centric point of view. At the present time, transit in the Metroplex is provided by several agencies, including The T, DART, and Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA). As is commonly the case in areas where there are multiple transit operators, the services that these agencies provide are branded differently. Some areas with multiple transit providers present all services to the public as part of a single cohesive system. Perhaps the best example is the Phoenix area, where the services provided by four different providers are all presented to the public as Valley Metro, and most passengers view individual services as part of a single system. This approach could be used to present The T and other regional services as part of a single system where the sum is greater than the individual parts.