https://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=Rabiabonour&feedformat=atomTransitWiki - User contributions [en]2024-03-29T13:25:47ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.35.1https://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Bus_operator_recruitment&diff=4251Bus operator recruitment2017-06-04T03:17:29Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:RTDjob ad.jpg|thumbnail|right|RTD Denver has used ads like this one when holding job fairs.]]<br />
== Introduction ==<br />
Hiring bus operators is an essential function of managing a transit operation. With unemployment under 5%<ref>[https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000 Bureau of Labor Statistics. "Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey."]</ref>, businesses across the country are experiencing a shortage of qualified applicants. Transit agencies sometimes struggle to recruit employees. In cases where agencies do have applicants, they need to know how to ensure that they make the best hires. Effective advertising and competitive wages and benefits can help with recruitment, and a robust hiring and orientation process can help agencies select the right people and get them started on a path toward success.<br />
<br />
== Attracting Applicants ==<br />
A crucial component of attracting good candidates is offering competitive wages and benefits. Getting the message out about what is being offered is equally important. Agencies should advertise in attention-grabbing ways with messaging about the advantages of the job. Avoid overly wordy advertisements and focus on the key details, especially where to find more information. Job advertisements have traditionally been listed in the local newspaper, and other related opportunities exist such as local weeklies and alternative papers. <br />
<br />
The internet is a significant tool for job hunters. Agencies may advertise on websites such as the local [http://www.craigslist.org/about/sites craigslist], local news sources, partner agency websites, local blogs, and of course the agency's own website. Paid advertising also exists and can help job seekers find your opportunity quickly by targeting ads based on user's searches. Agencies with an urgent need to fill positions should consider paid opportunities. Use of [[Internet communications|social media]] such as Facebook can also help spread the word about job vacancies. <br />
<br />
Local access TV may provide another low cost alternative.<br />
<br />
Consider the size and placement of the ad in any media. Agencies may be tempted to constrain the job advertising budget. If hiring needs are urgent, low-cost ad placement may produce slim results. The advantage of savings over more expensive ads could be lost by a lengthy advertising process, especially if the agency is already understaffed.<br />
<br />
Another creative option is to use advertising on the exterior of agency vehicles such as supervisor or utility vans. These may stand out from other vehicles in traffic and catch the eyes of potential applicants. Advertising could be printed on a large magnet for reusability, or printed as a vinyl application.<br />
<br />
Encourage bus operators to participate in the recruitment process. Naturally some job seekers will find and question current bus operators about the job. Informed and friendly bus operators can help attract quality candidates. Consider providing employee referral bonuses.<br />
<br />
=== Retaining Applicants Through Hiring ===<br />
Once an agency has hired the right people, it needs to keep them. Agencies identify losing strong candidates as a major concern. Barriers to retention include difficult hours and work days and unpleasant job conditions. Agencies should look to flexible scheduling and foster an inclusive organizational culture to overcome these issues. Agencies can focus their marketing on the many positive aspects of the job opportunity and keep the application process as simple and welcoming as possible, but this should not replace identifying and correcting the institutional shortcomings that lead to attrition.<br />
<br />
Initial contact with an agency is crucial in forming opinions for anyone, including applicants. Agency staff should convey the attitude the agency believes will attract the best candidates. If agency staff dislike assisting new applicants or seem unfriendly during the process, some prospective applicants may not continue through the process.<br />
<br />
A long and complex application process can scare away prospective applicants by giving a poor impression of the agency. Some agencies have focused on slimming down the application. Consider removing segments such as "Tell us anything else important about yourself" that are more effectively covered in an interview. Other techniques include streamlining the driving record and background check process so the agency handles these tasks instead of the applicant. Although this may be an additional burden on the agency, some agencies have been able to partner with local authorities to expedite the process. Strategies such as these may improve the application process and encourage greater numbers of applicants, but do not necessarily produce better quality applicants.<br />
<br />
A recruitment package is a tool which allows the agency to present the job in the best possible light and inform prospective employees about requirements such as drug and alcohol testing. Recruitment packages can be handed out at career fairs, at agency offices, or even on board the bus.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
== Further Reading ==<br />
[http://www.tcrponline.org/PDFDocuments/tsyn40.pdf Moffat, G.K., Ashton, A. H., & Blackburn, D.R. (2001). "A Challenged Employment System: Hiring, Training, Performance Evaluation, and Retention of Bus Operators." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]<br />
<br />
This research synthesis outlines common industry practices in the recruitment and retention process.<br />
<br />
[[Category:Managing transit]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Bus_operator_recruitment&diff=4250Bus operator recruitment2017-06-02T01:37:23Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:RTDjob ad.jpg|thumbnail|right|RTD Denver has used ads like this one when holding job fairs.]]<br />
== Introduction ==<br />
Hiring bus operators is an essential function of managing a transit operation. With unemployment under 5%<ref>[https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000 Bureau of Labor Statistics. "Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey."]</ref>, businesses across the country are experiencing a shortage of qualified applicants. Transit agencies sometimes struggle to recruit employees. In cases where agencies do have applicants, they need to know how to ensure that they make the best hires. Effective advertising and competitive wages and benefits can help with recruitment, and a robust hiring and orientation process can help agencies select the right people and get them started on a path toward success.<br />
<br />
== Attracting Applicants ==<br />
A crucial component of attracting good candidates is offering competitive wages and benefits. Getting the message out about what is being offered is equally important. Agencies should advertise in attention-grabbing ways with messaging about the advantages of the job. Avoid overly wordy advertisements and focus on the key details, especially where to find more information. Job advertisements have traditionally been listed in the local newspaper, and other related opportunities exist such as local weeklies and alternative papers. <br />
<br />
The internet is a significant tool for job hunters. Agencies may advertise on websites such as the local [http://www.craigslist.org/about/sites craigslist], local news sources, partner agency websites, local blogs, and of course the agency's own website. Paid advertising also exists and can help job seekers find your opportunity quickly by targeting ads based on user's searches. Agencies with an urgent need to fill positions should consider paid opportunities. Use of [[Internet communications|social media]] such as Facebook can also help spread the word about job vacancies. <br />
<br />
Local access TV may provide another low cost alternative.<br />
<br />
Consider the size and placement of the ad in any media. Agencies may be tempted to constrain the job advertising budget. If hiring needs are urgent, low-cost ad placement may produce slim results. The advantage of savings over more expensive ads could be lost by a lengthy advertising process, especially if the agency is already understaffed.<br />
<br />
Another creative option is to use advertising on the exterior of agency vehicles such as supervisor or utility vans. These may stand out from other vehicles in traffic and catch the eyes of potential applicants. Advertising could be printed on a large magnet for reusability, or printed as a vinyl application.<br />
<br />
Encourage bus operators to participate in the recruitment process. Naturally some job seekers will find and question current bus operators about the job. Informed and friendly bus operators can help attract quality candidates. Consider providing employee referral bonuses.<br />
<br />
=== Retaining Applicants Through Hiring ===<br />
A risk that many agencies identify in hiring is the loss of strong candidates because of certain job aspects. These aspects could include entry-level hours and work days or the job conditions. To overcome these fears, agencies should focus their marketing on the many positive aspects of the job opportunity and keep the application process as simple and welcoming as possible.<br />
<br />
Initial contact with an agency is crucial in forming opinions for anyone, including applicants. Agency staff should convey the attitude the agency believes will attract the best candidates. If agency staff dislike assisting new applicants or seem unfriendly during the process, some prospective applicants may not continue through the process.<br />
<br />
A long and complex application process can scare away prospective applicants by giving a poor impression of the agency. Some agencies have focused on slimming down the application, especially in extreme cases with dozen-page forms. Consider removing segments such as "Tell us anything else important about yourself" that are more effectively covered in an interview. Other techniques include streamlining the driving record and background check process so the agency handles these tasks instead of the applicant. Although this may be an additional burden on the agency, some agencies have been able to partner with local authorities to expedite the process. Strategies such as these may improve the application process and encourage greater numbers of applicants, but do not necessarily produce better quality applicants.<br />
<br />
A recruitment package is a tool which allows the agency to present the job in the best possible light and inform prospective employees about requirements such as drug and alcohol testing. Recruitment packages can be handed out at career fairs, at agency offices, or even on board the bus.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
== Further Reading ==<br />
[http://www.tcrponline.org/PDFDocuments/tsyn40.pdf Moffat, G.K., Ashton, A. H., & Blackburn, D.R. (2001). "A Challenged Employment System: Hiring, Training, Performance Evaluation, and Retention of Bus Operators." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Managing transit]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Bus_operator_recruitment&diff=4249Bus operator recruitment2017-06-02T01:35:54Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:RTDjob ad.jpg|thumbnail|right|RTD Denver has used ads like this one when holding job fairs.]]<br />
== Introduction ==<br />
Hiring bus operators is an essential function of managing a transit operation. With unemployment under 5%<ref>[https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000 Bureau of Labor Statistics. "Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey."]</ref>, businesses across the country are experiencing a shortage of qualified applicants. Transit agencies sometimes struggle to recruit employees. In cases where agencies do have applicants, they need to know how to ensure that they make the best hires. Effective advertising and competitive wages and benefits can help with recruitment, and a robust hiring and orientation process can help agencies select the right people and get them started on a path toward success.<br />
<br />
== Attracting Applicants ==<br />
A crucial component of attracting good candidates is offering competitive wages and benefits. Getting the message out about what is being offered is equally important. Agencies should advertise in attention-grabbing ways with messaging about the advantages of the job. Avoid overly wordy advertisements and focus on the key details, especially where to find more information. Job advertisements have traditionally been listed in the local newspaper, and other related opportunities exist such as local weeklies and alternative papers. <br />
<br />
The internet is a significant tool for job hunters. Agencies may advertise on websites such as the local [http://www.craigslist.org/about/sites craigslist], local news sources, partner agency websites, local blogs, and of course the agency's own website. Paid advertising also exists and can help job seekers find your opportunity quickly by targeting ads based on user's searches. Agencies with an urgent need to fill positions should consider paid opportunities. Use of [[Internet communications|social media]] such as Facebook can also help spread the word about job vacancies. <br />
<br />
Local access TV may provide another low cost alternative.<br />
<br />
Consider the size and placement of the ad in any media. Agencies may be tempted to constrain the job advertising budget. If hiring needs are urgent, low-cost ad placement may produce slim results. The advantage of savings over more expensive ads could be lost by a lengthy advertising process, especially if the agency is already understaffed.<br />
<br />
Another creative option is to use advertising on the exterior of agency vehicles such as supervisor or utility vans. These may stand out from other vehicles in traffic and catch the eyes of potential applicants. Advertising could be printed on a large magnet for reusability, or printed as a vinyl application.<br />
<br />
Encourage bus operators to participate in the recruitment process. Naturally some job seekers will find and question current bus operators about the job. Informed and friendly bus operators can help attract quality candidates. Consider providing employee referral bonuses.<br />
<br />
=== Retaining Applicants Through Hiring ===<br />
A risk that many agencies identify in hiring is the loss of strong candidates because of certain job aspects. These aspects could include entry-level hours and work days or the job conditions. To overcome these fears, agencies should focus their marketing on the many positive aspects of the job opportunity and keep the application process as simple and welcoming as possible.<br />
<br />
Initial contact with an agency is crucial in forming opinions for anyone, including applicants. Agency staff should convey the attitude the agency believes will attract the best candidates. If agency staff dislike assisting new applicants or seem unfriendly during the process, some prospective applicants may not continue through the process.<br />
<br />
A long and complex application process can scare away prospective applicants by giving a poor impression of the agency. Some agencies have focused on slimming down the application, especially in extreme cases with dozen-page forms. Consider removing segments such as "Tell us anything else important about yourself" that are more effectively covered in an interview. Other techniques include streamlining the driving record and background check process so the agency handles these tasks instead of the applicant. Although this may be an additional burden on the agency, some agencies have been able to partner with local authorities to expedite the process. Strategies such as these may improve the application process and encourage greater numbers of applicants, but do not necessarily produce better quality applicants.<br />
<br />
A recruitment package is a tool which allows the agency to present the job in the best possible light and inform prospective employees about requirements such as drug and alcohol testing. Recruitment packages can be handed out at career fairs, at agency offices, or even on board the bus.<br />
<br />
== Further Reading ==<br />
[http://www.tcrponline.org/PDFDocuments/tsyn40.pdf Moffat, G.K., Ashton, A. H., & Blackburn, D.R. (2001). "A Challenged Employment System: Hiring, Training, Performance Evaluation, and Retention of Bus Operators." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Managing transit]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=AllTransit&diff=4248AllTransit2017-05-31T20:50:20Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Alltransit.jpg|right|thumb|700px|AllTransit's map interface compares areas in a city in terms of individual metrics. Source: [http://alltransit.cnt.org/metrics/ AllTransit]]]<br />
[[Category:Applications]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
[http://alltransit.cnt.org/ AllTransit&trade;] provides transit connectivity, access, and frequency data for transit stops across more than 800 US transit agencies.<ref name="data">[http://alltransit.cnt.org/about-the-data/ AllTransit. "About the Data." Year of Publication.]</ref> This information is combined with demographic data to give each neighborhood in a Performance Score from 1-10. Demographic information for each metric is available; combined with the Performance Score, this shows how well a particular community is served by its existing transit infrastructure. AllTransit&trade; is a collaboration between the [http://www.cnt.org/ Center for Neighborhood Technology (CNT)] and [http://transitcenter.org/ TransitCenter].<br />
<br />
==How it Works==<br />
AllTransit&trade; uses a comprehensive database of over half a million transit stops across 15,000 routes and 805 agencies.<ref name="data" /> Much this comes from public [http://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=General_Transit_Feed_Specification GTFS] data. Information was retrieved manually for agencies that do not use GTFS. The data can be explored through six metrics: jobs, economy, equity, health, transit quality, and mobility network.<ref>[http://alltransit.cnt.org/overview-of-metrics/ AllTransit. "Overview of Metrics."]</ref> Each metric contains multiple datasets from sources like the [https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/ American Community Survey] and the [http://lehd.ces.census.gov/data/ U.S. Census Longitudinal Employment-Household Dynamics Origin-Destination Employment Statistics]. The following is a sampling of the information available:<br />
* Jobs - access to jobs and workers, jobs and workers near transit, total commuters<br />
* Economy - access to customers, transportation costs as a percentage of income<br />
* Health - walkable neighborhoods, commute by bicycling and walking, access to farmers markets<br />
* Equity - population near transit, Low-Income Housing Tax Credit units near transit[[Image:alltransitrank.jpg|right|thumb|400px|AllTransit&trade; Performance Score top-ten rankings for California municipalities with populations larger than 250,000 people. Source: [http://alltransit.cnt.org/rankings/ AllTransit]]]<br />
* Transit quality - Transit Connectivity Index, transit trips per week<br />
* Mobility network - transit routes and stops within half a mile, bikeshare and carshare locations near transit<br />
<br />
These metrics can be examined at geographies ranging from census tract up to municipality, as well US house and state house and senate district. You can also view each individual metric on a map, which compares performance of areas within a region. Users can choose to overlay the map with carshare and bikeshare locations, farmers markets, and Low-Income Housing Tax Credit units. Accompanying the map is a downloadable graph comparing Performance Scores for the various geographies associated with an address.<br />
<br />
In addition to seeing the Performance Score for an individual area, AllTransit&trade; can also generate rankings of areas by Performance Score.<ref>[http://alltransit.cnt.org/rankings/ AllTransit. "AllTransit&trade; Performance Score." Year of Publication.]</ref> These areas can be sorted by state, size, and type of geography. The four metrics that make up the Performance Score are transit trips per week within a half-mile, transit routes within a half-mile, jobs accessible in a 30-minute trip, and commuters who use transit.<br />
<br />
==Applications==<br />
The system data in AllTransit&trade; comes straight from agencies themselves, so transit operators already have this information. However, the link between system information and demographic data is useful because it provides a quick measure of how well a system serves its constituency in a variety of ways. The fact that the tool provides information for areas across the country that a transit agency probably has no experience with makes it helpful for benchmarking service. In addition, datasets can be purchased if an agency wants to do their own analyses.<br />
<br />
AllTransit&trade; is especially valuable for people outside of transit agencies. Housing and transportation advocates can use the tool to illustrate their complaints about existing infrastructure and business owners can use it to find locations with good access to both potential employees and customers. The tool also has significant potential for researchers investigating the relationship between variables such as Performance Score and autos per household.<ref>[http://alltransit.cnt.org/potential-uses/ AllTransit. "Potential Uses."]</ref><br />
<br />
===Urban Scenarios===<br />
The public version of AllTransit&trade; is applicable across the US. This is useful for comparison, but also means that data on individual cities might be too limited for a specific use. In this case, CNT can be contracted to perform a custom analysis of a city using local datasets. In New York, an urban scenario was created to focus on housing affordability.<ref>[http://alltransit.cnt.org/new-york/ AllTransit. "New York Transit."]</ref> The analysis shows metrics not included in the standard AllTransit&trade; database, such as rent burden, job availability for non-English speakers, and Uber use.<br />
<br />
==Potential Issues==<br />
When using AllTransit&trade;, it is important to be aware that the data may not be 100% up-to-date. For instance, as of early November 2016 the tool does not include Los Angeles Metro Bikeshare. This is a new system, but is relevant to studying Los Angeles’s downtown. When using the tool, it's a good idea to double check to see if it looks like all the important data on your area are included.<br />
<br />
==[http://alltransit.cnt.org/ AllTransit&trade;]==<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
[http://alltransit.cnt.org/methods/AllTransit-Methods.pdf Center for Neighborhood Technology. "AllTransit&trade; Methods." 2016, April 18.]<br />
<br />
: This document details the methodology behind the AllTransit&trade; database. It describes the calculations involved in determining Performance Score and provides a full use of data sources used to create the metrics.<br />
<br />
[https://vimeo.com/166380940 Center for Neighborhood Technology. "AllTransit Webinar." 2016.]<br />
<br />
: This hour-long webinar further describes how to use the AllTransit tool.</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Housing_and_Transportation_Affordability_Index&diff=4247Housing and Transportation Affordability Index2017-05-31T20:49:13Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:HTIndexInUse.jpg|right|thumb|600px|H+T Index data is presented on a color-coded map. Source: [http://htaindex.cnt.org/map/ Housing and Transportation Affordability Index]]]<br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Traditional housing affordability numbers look just at the cost of the housing itself. Transportation costs are not included, yet these costs are heavily reliant on housing. The [http://htaindex.cnt.org/ Housing and Transportation (H+T®) Affordability Index] combines both housing and transportation costs in an effort to present a more complete view of neighborhood affordability. Typically housing affordability is measured as 30% of household income; the H+T Index adds in 15% of income for transportation to set a combined affordability threshold of 45% of household income.<br />
<br />
The H+T Index was originally created by the [http://www.cnt.org/ Center for Neighborhood Technology] (CNT) as a project of the [https://www.brookings.edu/ Brookings Institution]'s Urban Markets Initiative.<br />
<br />
==How it Works==<br />
The H+T Index overlays combined housing and transportation affordability data onto a map, making it easy to assess the location efficiency of a particular area. The map can be subdivided to the census block group level or bigger geographical units like tract, municipality, county, and Congressional District. Costs are presented as a percentage of household income, which can be set to regional typical, regional moderate, or national typical level. The map is color coded to highlight overall trends in affordability. The map also gives access to measures like autos per household, transit ridership as a percentage of workers, and annual transit cost. Data from the Index can be downloaded for free to let users perform their own analyses.<br />
<br />
Besides the main Index map, the website contains three other tools to help use its data:<br />
<br />
===[http://htaindex.cnt.org/fact-sheets/ H+T Fact Sheets]===<br />
The Index can automatically generate printable reports on individual municipalities, counties, CBSAs, MPOs and Congressional Districts. These reports provide a summary of the location efficiency and transportation costs of an area, as well as a detailed list of all the variables used by the Index.<br />
<br />
===[http://htaindex.cnt.org/total-driving-costs/ Total Driving Costs]===<br />
While gas is the most obvious cost of driving, the costs of owning and maintaining a car are generally much higher. This tool lets users input the price of gas and see the monthly or annual cost of both gas and car ownership in a particular area.<br />
<br />
===Comparison Maps===<br />
The Index can present several types of comparison maps.<br />
* [http://htaindex.cnt.org/compare-affordability/ Two Views of Affordability] - With this interface, it is possible to select a specific area and simultaneously view the cost of housing and the combined cost of housing and transportation.<br />
* [http://htaindex.cnt.org/compare-greenhouse-gas/ Greenhouse Gas Emissions] - This interface shows greenhouse gas emissions per household compared to emissions per acre, highlighting the emissions efficiency of dense neighborhoods.<br />
* [http://htaindex.cnt.org/compare/ Custom Comparisons] - Users can also create their own comparisons. This makes it possible to compare two different variables at the same or different locations.<br />
<br />
[[Image:HTIndexMethodology.jpg|right|thumb|450px|The H+T Index was created by performing a regression analysis of the relationship between neighborhood characteristics and transportation habits. Source: [http://htaindex.cnt.org/about/ Housing and Transportation Affordability Index]]]<br />
==Methodology==<br />
The heart of the H+T Index is a transportation costs model designed by CNT.<ref>[http://htaindex.cnt.org/about/HT_Index_Methods_2013.pdf Center for Neighborhood Technology. "H+T Index Methods." 2015.]</ref> Three dependent variables - auto ownership, auto use, and transit use - are used to calculate the transportation costs of a location. The model uses regression analysis to estimate the relationship between these three dependent variables and a variety of neighborhood characteristics like income, density, and transit connectivity. The analysis draws data from nine sources, including the [http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk 2009-2013 American Community Survey 5-year Estimate], [https://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/data/tiger-line.html U.S. Census TIGER/Line Files], and [http://www.transtats.bts.gov/tables.asp?DB_ID=630 2000 Census Transportation Planning Package].<br />
<br />
This analysis lets the Index estimate the yearly transportation cost for a specific area. CNT uses 15% of Area Media Income (AMI) as a threshold for transportation affordability. Combined with the standard 30% of AMI threshold for housing affordability, the Index presents 45% of household income to be an appropriate metric of location affordability. The Index also models vehicle-miles traveled in order to calculate greenhouse gas emissions.<br />
<br />
==Applications==<br />
The H+T Index’s model of affordability gives transportation planners a new way to think about the link between land use, travel behavior, and cost of living. By providing a more comprehensive view of the link between transportation and affordability, the Index can be useful in corridor planning and route alignment that best meets the needs of a population. This was put into practice in Chicago, where the Metropolitan Planning Council used H+T Index data as part of a bus rapid transit corridor selection analysis.<br />
<br />
Housing professionals can also use the H+T Index. By clearly displaying the location efficiency of various census blocks, policymakers can easily identify areas in which to prioritize development and demonstrate importance the importance of transportation in land-use planning. Cities such as San Francisco, California and El Paso, Texas have used the H+T Index to rethink the way they approach affordable housing development. <br />
<br />
===Index Customization===<br />
In cases where the Index is not specific enough for a city’s needs, the Center for Neighborhood Technology has worked to create customized versions. CNT partnered with the [http://uli.org/ Urban Land Institute] to tailor the tool to the San Francisco Bay Area; Minneapolis-St. Paul; Washington, DC; and Boston. These custom versions of the Index present a more accurate picture of local affordability by including additional data on land use and housing costs. The [http://apps.cnt.org/msp/index.php?cmp=y&det= Minneapolis-St. Paul Housing + Transportation Cost Calculator], for example, lets users input information for a specific household and compare it to neighborhood averages.<br />
<br />
==[http://htaindex.cnt.org/ Housing and Transportation Affordability Index]==<br />
<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
<br />
[http://htaindex.cnt.org/user-guide/ H+T Index User Guide] <br />
<br />
: This illustrated guide provides instructions on how to use each tool on the Index's site.<br />
<br />
[[Category: Technology]]<br />
[[Category: Applications]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Location_Affordability_Portal&diff=4246Location Affordability Portal2017-05-31T20:47:42Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:LAP1.jpg|right|thumb|550px|An example of the Location Affordability Index results for Redding, CA. Source: [http://www.locationaffordability.info/default.aspx Location Affordability Portal]]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Like the [[Housing and Transportation Affordability Index]], the Location Affordability Portal takes a holistic view of housing costs that acknowledges the frequent trade-offs between housing and transportation costs. The portal contains two tools: the [http://www.locationaffordability.info/lai.aspx Location Affordability Index (LAI)] and [http://www.locationaffordability.info/tcc.aspx My Transportation Cost Calculator]. The LAI estimates housing and transportation costs down to the Census block-group level for a variety of household profiles. My Transportation Cost Calculator lets a user enter information about their own transportation costs in order to customize the estimates presented in the LAI.<br />
<br />
The Location Affordability Portal was developed for the U.S. [https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD Department of Housing and Urban Development] and [https://www.transportation.gov/ Department of Transportation].<br />
<br />
==How It Works==<br />
The Location Affordability Portal presents housing and transportation affordability through two related tools: the Location Affordability Index and My Transportation Cost Calculator.<br />
<br />
===Location Affordability Index===<br />
The LAI allows users to see affordability data at levels ranging from census block up to Metropolitan Statistical Area. Housing costs, transportation costs, and a combined measure are presented as both dollar amounts and percentages of income. Any of these three measures can be overlaid onto a map in order to see geographic trends.<br />
<br />
Not everyone in a specific area has the same housing and transportation costs. The LAI models these differences in two ways. First, it distinguishes between renters and owners, letting users look at costs for each individually or both combined. The index also provides eight different household profiles against which to benchmark affordability. Median-income family is the default, but of course not every household is represented by the median-income family. It would be impossible to capture the full range of potential households, but the tool does include seven other profiles that adjust for variations in income, household size, and number of commuters. For each combination of location, household profile, and owner status, LAI provides average vehicle ownership and annual miles driven and transit trips.<br />
<br />
In addition to being viewed in the online tool, data from the LAI can be downloaded as Excel files for further analysis.<br />
<br />
===My Transportation Cost Calculator===<br />
While the LAI simply presents estimates for average housing and transportation costs, My Transportation Cost Calculator compares this information to an actual household. A user can input their household data, housing costs, and vehicle costs. The calculator assists users in estimating their total transportation costs, vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and transit costs. This information is used to create a personalized estimate of annual household costs, which can be compared to costs for a similar household in the same area as estimated by the LAI. It is also possible to compare multiple locations with the calculator, clearly demonstrating the effect that location choice can have on housing and transportation costs.<br />
<br />
==Methodology==<br />
The Location Affordability Portal was built using several federal data sources, including the American Community Survey, the National Transit Database, and the Consumer Expenditure Survey.<ref>The Location Affordability Portal uses information from the 2008-2012 ACS (the most recent available), and as such cannot provide up-to-date housing costs.</ref> The team then used regression modeling to estimate costs for specific locations based on the available data. Simultaneous equation modeling (SEM) was used to link the various regression models. Along with a VMT regression model, the SEM allowed for the estimation of household travel behavior. Combined with cost per use data from the Consumer Expenditure Survey and National Transit Database, this creates estimated transportation costs.<ref>[http://www.locationaffordability.info/About_Data.aspx Location Affordability Portal. "About the Portal."]</ref><br />
<br />
==Applications==<br />
Compared to traditional housing cost metrics, the LAI provides a more complete look at cost of living and its relationship to location. This has significant implications for land use. The tool is particularly useful for long-range transportation planning, as it can help identify areas where poor transportation options lead to high transportation costs. Because it breaks apart housing and location costs, it can demonstrate the fact that while some neighborhoods are cheaper in terms of housing, transportation makes them expensive to live in. This has implications for the development of sustainable affordable housing.<br />
<br />
My Transportation Cost Calculator is most obviously a tool for individuals, who can use it to make better-informed decisions on where to live. However, it can also be used by planners to supplement the LAI. Because it allows for custom information to be inputted, it lets planners look at hypothetical households not covered in the LAI’s eight profiles. This gives them a more thorough picture of affordability for actual residents of the areas in which the planners work.<br />
<br />
==[http://www.locationaffordability.info/default.aspx Location Affordability Portal]==<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
[http://www.locationaffordability.info/LAPMethodsv2.pdf Data and Methodology: Location Affordability Index Version 2.0.]<br />
<br />
: This white paper goes into extensive detail about the methodology used to create the Location Affordability Index.<br />
<br />
[http://www.locationaffordability.info/lai.aspx?url=user_guide.php Location Affordability Index User Guide]<br />
<br />
: The Location Affordability Index User Guide contains illustrated instructions explaining how to use the tool.<br />
<br />
[http://www.locationaffordability.info/tcc.aspx?url=/user_guide.php My Transportation Costs Calculator User Guide]<br />
<br />
: My Transportation Costs Calculator also has an illustrated user guide.<br />
<br />
[[Category: Applications]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Remix&diff=4245Remix2017-05-31T20:46:30Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{infobox<br />
|title= Remix<br />
|image= Remix-logo.png<br />
|vendor= Remix<br />
|license= Proprietary<br />
|documentation= https://help.remix.com/<br />
|data_in= [[GTFS]], GIS shapefiles, ACS/Census, [[OpenStreetMap]], LEHD<br />
|data_out= [[GTFS]], GIS shapefiles and database, maps, KML<br />
|website= [https://www.remix.com/ https://www.remix.com/]<br />
}}<br />
[https://www.remix.com/ Remix] is web-hosted application for planning public transit systems. It automates the process of route and schedule scenario testing, letting planners draw routes onto a map and immediately see a potential schedule and fleet requirements. This can exponentially decrease the time costs of experimenting with different scenarios. As of October 2016, 36 transit agencies in California and over 150 across the world are using Remix. These agencies range in size from just a couple fleet vehicles to well over a thousand.<br />
__TOC__<br />
==How it Works==<br />
[[Image:Remix1.png|right|thumb|700px|Remix makes it easy to draw a line and see schedule and cost information. Source: [https://www.remix.com/ Remix]]]<br />
The process of route planning has typically required paper maps and work in Excel or other software packages. Remix consolidates data and analytical tools for route planning into a web interface. When an agency signs up with Remix, the company will work with them to integrate the system into the agency’s workflow.<br />
<br />
===Street network===<br />
The street network is imported from [[OpenStreetMap]] (OSM). This means that transit scenarios must be analyzed in the current street network. If street features are missing, they can be updated in OpenStreetMap.<br />
<br />
===Setting up the existing transit network===<br />
Remix employees import route info into the software using [[GTFS]] data and provide employee training. Remix identifies service spans and approximate frequencies -- average parameters describing the service abstracted from the exact imported schedule.<br />
<br />
Variables such as operating cost per hour or mile (with costs for Saturday, peak) can be set for the agency.<br />
<br />
===Creating scenarios / editing the network===<br />
After onboarding is complete, the agency can start using Remix. New "scenarios" can be created. Each scenario can contain a different route network. Existing routes can be edited and new routes can be added. Span, frequency, and runtime can be adjusted for each route. Route alignments and stops are edited on a map. By default, Remix assumes that stops are placed every 0.25 miles. This default can be adjusted. Stops can also be deliberately placed on the map.<br />
<br />
===Measures & Outputs===<br />
Measures including the following update as the route is drawn.<br />
<br />
====Costs & resources====<br />
* Number of buses<br />
* Operating cost per year<br />
* Route miles<br />
<br />
====Catchment====<br />
* Population within defined buffer of stops<br />
* Jobs within within defined of stops<br />
<br />
Buffers are calculated according to "crow flies" methodology, not the street grid.<ref>https://help.remix.com/articles/2869-can-i-change-the-radius-of-the-buffer</ref><br />
<br />
===Layers===<br />
In order to better understand the impact of a route, various information layers such as population density and poverty rate can be overlaid onto the map. This helps ensure that the system is reaching the people and places it needs to, and any changes are compliant with [[Transit and Civil Rights|Title 6 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964]]. In addition, the Remix staff can create custom layers using GIS data provided by the agency — both heat maps and point data. For example, one agency in Australia created a shapefile for projected population growth to better plan for their future service area.<br />
[[Image:RemixJane.png|right|thumb|250px|When using Jane, the white circles show how far a rider can travel in a specific timeframe. Source: [https://www.remix.com/ Remix]]]<br />
<br />
===Jane===<br />
Transit systems aren’t lines on maps; they are ways for people to get around a city. Remix includes a rider surrogate isochrone tool called Jane. You can put Jane anywhere on the map, select a time of day, and see how far she could travel in 15, 30, 45, or 60 minutes. This is helpful both for intra-agency planning and public outreach.<br />
<br />
===Title VI Engine===<br />
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prevents against discrimination in the provision of government services, including public transportation.<ref>[https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations-and-guidance/civil-rights-ada/title-vi-civil-rights-act-1964 Federal Transit Administration. "Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964." 2016.]</ref> A transit agency must do a Title VI analysis of any route changes to ensure that they do not disproportionately impact minority populations. This is incredibly important, but it does make it difficult for agencies to engage in major system change. Remix takes the complicated process of Title Vi analysis and simplifies it to a one-click automated function.<br />
<br />
See the Remix discussion of the [https://blog.remix.com/title-vi-in-10-minutes-or-less-with-remixs-title-vi-engine-87f55eadcc4e Title VI process using Remix].<br />
<br />
===Output formats===<br />
Remix can output transit network scenarios, indicators, and visualizations in these formats:<br />
* Shapefile<br />
* Excel (describing indicators)<br />
* [[GTFS]] - Frequency-based, describing service parameters rather than an operationally-ready schedule<br />
* Embeddable map for the web (with a mechanism to leave comments)<br />
* Printable view<br />
<br />
==Applications==<br />
The most obvious application for Remix is in the internal planning process. Planners can use the tool to quickly model scenarios and plan anything from a simple detour on a single route to an entirely new transit system. <br />
<br />
Remix can be used as an outreach tool. In public meetings, it can allow a presenter to give a live demonstration of possible changes to a system. The real-time cost adjustments give a clear representation of how feasible a plan is. Most people have trouble visualizing how the average citizen can interact with a transit system, so Jane has a large potential to clarify the utility of a system.<br />
<br />
==Costs==<br />
The cost for Remix depends on the scale of the agency. Contact Remix sales for a quote.<br />
<br />
==Case Studies==<br />
* '''Scenario Planning in Torrance, CA''' - With a very small team, [https://www.torranceca.gov/92.htm Torrance Transit] was unable to make significant changes to its service. Scenario planning could be a months-long process. Remix cut this down to just a few days. Using the platform, the agency was able to model the effects of consolidating service on one of its bus lines and figured out it could do so without harming the community. Once implemented, the change will save Torrance Transit over half a million dollars per year<ref>[https://blog.remix.com/taking-the-heartache-out-of-planning-in-torrance-ca-9de28a01e89f#.9qbl25ech Remix. "Taking the Heartache Out of Planning in Torrance, CA." 2016.].</ref><br />
* '''Collaboration in Greater Seattle, WA''' - Planning doesn’t just involve one agency; any project is going to have multiple stakeholders. When [http://metro.kingcounty.gov/ King County Metro] was working on a 25-year plan to add 2.5 million service hours to the network, it was looking at two years of consensus-building. Using Jane to clearly demonstrate the way routes interact, the planning team cut the feedback time on iterations in half and finalized the plan in just 9 months, with 2 or 3 fewer staff than would have been necessary otherwise<ref>[https://blog.remix.com/king-county-metro-builds-consensus-in-record-time-during-long-range-plan-76c14e57547d#.z7jcamego Remix. "King County Metro Builds Consensus in Record Time During Long-Range Plan." 2016.].</ref><br />
* '''Planning for a Transit Tax in Indianapolis, IN''' - In November 2016, residents in central Indiana voted on a quarter-cent income tax hike to let the [http://www.indympo.org/Pages/home.aspx Indianapolis Metropolitan Planning Organization] increase bus service in two counties. Remix has let the MPO clearly demonstrate where the money would go. Working entirely in-house, the organization planned 7 scenarios for 7 funding levels that they could take to public meetings. The referendum passed<ref>[https://blog.remix.com/preparing-for-a-transit-tax-increase-in-indianapolis-indiana-1001b49118aa#.lkf3cze2x Remix. "Preparing for a Transit Tax Increase in Indianapolis, Indiana." 2016.].</ref><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
[https://blog.remix.com/ Remix Blog]<br />
: Remix maintains a blog with additional case studies, webinars, and information about product updates. The blog also has videos from Remix's annual conferences, where planners talk about the way they use the tool at their agencies.<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Network planning software]]<br />
[[Category:GTFS-consuming applications]]<br />
[[Category:Applications]]<br />
[[Category: Complex data analysis]]<br />
[[Category:Scenario planning tools]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Web-based_rider_feedback&diff=4244Web-based rider feedback2017-05-31T20:44:48Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Webfeedback.jpeg|right|thumb|500px|Digital tools are increasingly important for transit agencies looking to connect with riders. Source: [https://www.pexels.com/photo/man-in-brown-hoodie-standing-in-front-of-train-railway-211052/ Clem Onojeghuo]]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
In the internet age, web-based feedback tools are becoming an increasingly important means of communication between transit agencies and their customers. Riders expect to be able to submit comments and complaints digitally and get prompt, helpful feedback. Transit agencies should be excited about the potential for increased customer interaction but acknowledge the difficulties facing implementation.<br />
<br />
==Web-Based Feedback Basics==<br />
<br />
===Pros and Cons===<br />
Web-based feedback is immensely useful to transit agencies. In particular, it is well-suited to time-sensitive communications, increases public participation, and can improve an agency's image. In addition, some tools allow for easier generation of summary reports than traditional outreach methods. However, internet tools raise important questions about accessibility and equity and can encourage negative feedback. Online tools are also resource-intensive. Customers are used to 24-hour real-time support online, which is out of the capabilities of most agencies. <br />
<br />
===Types of Feedback===<br />
* '''Solicited feedback''' - Transit agencies can use these tools to solicit specific comments from customers as a way to get opinions on short- and long-range plans and assess travel behavior.<br />
* '''Unsolicited feedback''' - When given the chance, riders will share all sorts of unsolicited comments. Frequent issues include service quality, personnel issues, safety, and general policy opinions. These comments can generally be sorted into two categories: time-sensitive concerns that should be addressed as quickly as possible (for example, information about malfunctioning equipment), or ongoing concerns about the service that may warrant further review.<br />
<br />
===Marginalized Audiences===<br />
The proliferation of the internet makes web-based feedback accessible to a large portion of the American population. As of 2014, 87% of adults in the country were online.<ref name=TCRP1>[http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/172697.aspx Watkins, K.E., Xu, Y., Bregma, S., & Coffel, K. "Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services." Transit Cooperative Research Program Report 179, 2015.]</ref> People of color are somewhat less well-represented, but still have internet usage numbers in the 80% range. However, there are certain groups that should be specially considered in terms of the accessibility of web-based tools.<br />
* '''Low-income communities''' - 23% of people with household incomes under $30,000 are offline, which is particularly concerning given that this demographic tends to be overrepresented in terms of transit ridership.<br />
* '''Persons with disabilities''' - Web-based tools can be difficult for people with physical disabilities, specifically people with vision impairments. Tools need to have built-in accessibility features.<br />
* '''Non-English speakers''' - In some communities, people with limited English proficiency are a significant part of transit ridership. While online translation tools are useful, something human translation is needed.<br />
<br />
General internet usage does not necessarily imply mobile access or social media proficiency. Email and text messaging are a more reliable method for reaching a large audience than other digital tools.<ref>[http://trilliumtransit.com/2013/04/08/social-media-analyzed/ Antrim, A. "Getting real about the utility of social media for public transit." 2013.]</ref><br />
<br />
==Implementation==<br />
Incorporating web-based feedback into an agency’s operations requires new models of staffing, training, customer response, and data analytics.<br />
<br />
===Staffing===<br />
While some agencies let individual departments handle their own web presence, others find it easier to concentration online operations in one or several specific parts of the agency. The system an agency picks can depend on agency size, types of feedback tools, and union work rules.<br />
<br />
===Training===<br />
The use of web-based feedback is still a relatively new part of transit agency operations, and it is vital that employees are properly trained in this difficult field. There are three specific areas in which employees must be trained:<br />
* '''Technical Skills''' - Without training in the technical operation of various tools, employees will be unable to use them to their full potential.<br />
* '''Policies and Procedures''' - While it is common for agencies to have established systems for dealing with public comments, employees at all levels must be trained in how these policies carry over into the world of web-based feedback.<br />
* '''Messaging and Tone''' - Web-based tools can be a powerful tool for connecting with riders. This also means that they are dangerous - problematic messaging and tone can harm the agency’s image. Avoid using social media solely to convey negative information like service alerts - one study has shown that this can increase negative customer interaction on Twitter.<ref>[http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01944363.2014.980439 Schweitzer, L. "Planning and Social Media: A Case Study of Public Transit and Stigma on Twitter." Journal of the American Planning Association, volume 80, 2014.]</ref><br />
<br />
===Customer Response===<br />
Before even considering the specifics of online customer interaction, it is important to establish response timeframes. When a customer submits a comment or question to a form-based tool they should get an automated message letting them know that the response has been received and giving them an idea of how long they should expect to wait for a response, as well as how to track the complaints. In the case of social media, it should be made clear when various accounts are staffed as well as what the general timeframe for response is. <br />
<br />
Public forums, including Facebook, offer their own challenges and opportunities. One fundamental strategy is to let conversations progress naturally. Online communities often self-police negative or nonconstructive comments more effectively than the agency can. If this hands-off approach doesn’t work, posting restrictions and simply posting new content to progress the conversation can be effective.<br />
<br />
===Using Feedback===<br />
Like with traditional public comments, an agency can procure a lot of valuable information through web-based feedback. But for this information to be useful, it needs to be processed effectively. Comments should be sorted by factors like time-sensitivity, what party they came from, and what departments can best handle them. Because the systems that most agencies use to process customer comments predate web-based feedback, new tools are necessary to integrate new feedback sources.<br />
<br />
==Picking the Right Tools==<br />
Figuring out what web-based feedback tools to use can be intimidating. Not only are there many categories of tools with different functions, but the rate at which technology changes makes it difficult to decide at what point to adopt a new tool. It’s impossible to cover all the options, so here we’ll focus on four broad categories of tools and some specific examples: issue reporting, online public comment forums, customer research, and feedback management.<br />
[[Image:Socialmedia.png|right|thumb|350px|Transit agencies have an increasing number of social media platforms they can use to connect with riders. Source: [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Socialmedia-pm.png Ibrahim.Id, Wikimedia Commons]]]<br />
* '''Issue Reporting''' - One of the most important functions of web-based feedback is to let customers communicate service problems. This has traditionally been done through email or dedicated forms on the agency's website. More recently social media and apps like [http://govoutreach.com/productscrmmobile.htm GORequest Mobile] have provided new channels for issue reporting.<br />
* '''Online Public Comment Forums''' - These sorts of tools allow the agency to get feedback on specific issues in a structured form, much like they would at a normal public meeting. Examples include the map-based platform [https://www.placespeak.com/en/ PlaceSpeak] and idea management tool [https://ideascale.com/ IdeaScale].<br />
* '''Customer Research''' - The internet provides myriad opportunities for conducting customer research. [https://www.google.com/forms/about/ Google Forms] is an example of a survey tool. Some off-the-shelf tools allow for conducting screened feedback panels, though agencies like New Jersey Transit and TriMet have chosen to make their own in-house tools.<br />
* '''Feedback Management''' - Besides customer-facing applications, agencies should consider internal tools to manage feedback. Apps like [https://hootsuite.com/ Hootsuite] and [https://tweetdeck.twitter.com/ TweetDeck] help manage social media, while services like [https://www.zendesk.com/ ZenDesk] provide more comprehensive customer support tracking.<br />
<br />
===Procurement===<br />
A lot of online customer interaction can be done with free social media platforms, but other tasks require specialized tools. Depending on budget and goals, agencies can either purchase licenses for existing tools or have ones custom-developed. Custom tools can be tailored to work with an agency’s existing systems, but they can also be costly to create and maintain. Off-the-shelf tools are cheaper, but can be more limited in functionality. Both options are worth pursuing; an agency should interrogate exactly what functionality they are looking for and how much they can realistically afford to spend on the technology.<br />
<br />
===Tool Selection Guide===<br />
The TCRP report includes a detailed guide for deciding what web-based tools to use. The guide helps an agency identify its needs, then narrows down the choices based on tool features, and finally uses additional detail to help make the final decision.<br />
<br />
==Case Studies==<br />
The TCRP consulted a number of agencies in putting together a report on web-based feedback.<ref name=TCRP1 /> Looking at one small, medium-sized, and large transit agency illuminates a number of clear takeaways when it come to the implementation of web-based feedback systems<br />
<br />
===Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro)===<br />
Metro is a very large agency, with more than 1.4 million weekday trips across a variety of modes in FY2012. The agency uses web-based tools to supplement a robust system of traditional rider engagement.<br />
* Social media policy - Metro had no social media policy when it joined Facebook in 2011, and quickly ran into trouble. The marketing department deleted derogatory content from the page and were criticized for silencing criticism. Metro responded with a comment policy that clearly delineated what was and was not appropriate.<br />
* Picking tools - Metro will typically create websites and social media profiles for new projects, and uses cost-benefit analysis to decide when other tools are useful. In one instance, Metro was planning a corridor project that covered too large an area to make in-person meetings accessible to all stakeholders. Interactive project maps and real-time webcasts allowed the agency to reach a larger community than would have otherwise been feasible.<br />
* Analytical tools - Early feedback management at Metro involved manually created summary reports. This was too resource intensive, and eventually the agency adopted a combination of free and paid tools to manage social media posts and make them accessible to employees in different departments.<br />
[[Image:Trimetresponse.jpg|right|thumb|400px|TriMet developed a flowchart guiding staff on how to deal with web-based feedback. Source: [http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/172697.aspx Transit Cooperative Review Program]]]<br />
<br />
===Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon (TriMet)===<br />
Moving to a mid-sized agency, TriMet averaged 328,400 unlinked weekday trips in the Portland area in FY2012. The agency uses online tools to build community support and is working on developing a new feedback management system.<br />
* Social media planning - Starting to use social media is a major commitment. TriMet went in without a plan and couldn’t back out when they felt overwhelmed. The agency created a plan that focused all department’s on the mission to provide clear, easy customer support.<br />
* Agency image - TriMet wanted to be known as a customer-oriented brand. While social media helped connect, it also presented challenges. Unable to take complaints over Twitter, TriMet directed Twitter queries to an online form not optimized for mobile. This inconvenient system is harmful to agency image.<br />
* Internal communications - TriMet decided to create a new system for operators to report safety issues that worked over agency intranet. The reports are visible across the system and automatically inputted into the agency’s customer feedback database. The move was so popular that TriMet began moving legacy paper reports to a similar system.<br />
<br />
===Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA)===<br />
DCTA is much smaller than the other two agencies, with just 11,400 unlinked weekday trips in FY2012. The agency works in a tech-savvy community with a large student population, and uses digital tools to maximize the power of its limited staff.<br />
* Extending resources - Web-based feedback doesn’t just help riders with internet access. Using online forms and the issue-reporting app GORequest reduces the strain on the agency’s phone help line, letting them more quickly serve customers who need to make calls.<br />
* Different platforms, different audiences - DCTA has found that different online services help it reach different groups of riders. Facebook tends to be popular with baby-boomers, while college students are very active on Twitter.<br />
* Improving service - Due to limited resources, DCTA only ran commuter rail during rush hour and into the evening. They saw that there was much more demand for service midday than in the evening, so they proposed altering service to move the later service earlier. While opponents of the move used social media to try to garner support, they were unsuccessful and DCTA was confident that moving the service would be better for more riders.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
[http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/167067.aspx Bregman, S. "Uses of Social Media in Public Transportation." Transit Cooperative Research Program Synthesis 99, 2012.]<br />
<br />
: This paper takes an in-depth look into the use of social media at a transit agency.<br />
<br />
[http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01944363.2014.980439 Schweitzer, L. "Planning and Social Media: A Case Study of Public Transit and Stigma on Twitter." Journal of the American Planning Association, volume 80, 2014.]<br />
<br />
: This paper looks at Twitter messaging and shows how negativity on the part of the agency can elicit negative responses from customers.<br />
<br />
[http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/172697.aspx Watkins, K.E., Xu, Y., Bregma, S., & Coffel, K. "Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services." Transit Cooperative Research Program Report 179, 2015.]<br />
<br />
: This research provides a comprehensive guide to web-based feedback practices, including explanations of various types of services and a detailed tool to help agencies decide what technologies to pursue.<br />
[[Category:Applications]][[Category:Market Response]][[Category:Technology]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Urban_Integrated_National_Transit_Database&diff=4243Urban Integrated National Transit Database2017-05-31T20:43:28Z<p>Rabiabonour: /* How it Works */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Ftis1.jpg|right|thumb|600px|iNTD lets users search NTD data using a simple interface. Source: [http://www.ftis.org/ FTIS]]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
The [[National Transit Database | National Transit Database (NTD)]] is important source of data for transit agencies, especially for benchmarking performance and planning service. While most of these data are publicly available, they are cumbersome to access, especially when comparing multiple agencies or years. The Florida Transit Information System (FTIS) makes it easy to examine NTD information with a free web-based tool called the Urban Integrated National Transit Database (Urban iNTD). Developed by Florida International University’s Lehman Center for Transportation Research for the Florida Department of Transportation, this tool gives transit planners an increased ability to both retrieve and analyze NTD data.<br />
<br />
==How it Works==<br />
Transit agencies that receive funds from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) are required to report operating data to the NTD. About 850 agencies are included in the database.<ref>[https://www.transit.dot.gov/ntd/what-national-transit-database-ntd-program Federal Transit Administration. "What is the National Transit Database?" 2016.]</ref> This information is technically public, but is presented as a series of excel files which require knowledge of the data schema to use and experience with Microsoft Excel in order to analyze. iNTD brings all of this information into a central system. The data can be sorted by agency, year, and individual NTD forms.<br />
<br />
==Peer Comparisons==<br />
One of the most useful features of iNTD is the ability to easily compare an agency to its peers. Peer comparison is useful for benchmarking performance against comparable agencies and for understanding how agencies with different funding structures, riderships, or other factors operate.<br />
<br />
The first step in the comparison process is to establish an agency's peer group. After inputting an agency, iNTD will automatically identify potential matches and sort them by how comparable they are. A user can then manually trim down this list to the desired peer agencies. The comparison can be filtered to look at entire agencies or specific modes (bus, rail, etc.) and can distinguish between directly operated and purchased service. This step also allows the user to select what years to use in the analysis. NTD data is published in the fall for the preceding year, so the most recent years may not be available.<br />
[[Image:Ftis2.jpg|right|thumb|400px|A partial example of a report generated by iNTD. Source: [http://www.ftis.org/ FTIS]]]<br />
Once the peer group is established, the next step is to select performance measures. NTD measures can be selected individually, but iNTD also allows for the selection of predefined variable groups. Once the desires variables have been selected, they can be saved as a new group for future use.<br />
<br />
After the peer group and performance measures have been specified, iNTD will retrieve the data. There are multiple ways that the data can be presented. It is possible to look at the actual NTD forms, though this is the least clear way of exploring the data. To get a quick snapshot of the information, the tool can create summary reports looking at mode data for either a single agency across all selected years or all selected agencies for a single year.<br />
<br />
For more in-depth analysis, iNTD can create a table containing all the selected data. iNTD provides tools within the app that lets users sort the data, adjust monetary values for inflation, make charts, and perform summations and regressions. The table can also be exported as an Excel file for further work.<br />
<br />
==Case Studies==<br />
===San Jose, CA===<br />
When looking to assess the efficacy of its light rail maintenance program, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) turned in part to iNTD. The tool helped the agency establish a peer group, which it then edited to account for VTA’s specific vehicle type. VTA also used iNTD to retrieve data for variables such as fleet age, miles of track, and maintenance costs. The analysis shows that, even after accounting for high labor costs in the San Francisco Bay Area, VTA has very high maintenance costs compared to its peers. The data also showed that VTA has an unusually high spare ratio, which could drive some of these costs.<br />
<br />
===Knoxville, TN===<br />
Most of the funding for Knoxville Area Transit comes from the city’s general fund. The agency was curious to see how its performance compared to agencies that are similar, but have a dedicated funding source. It selected a peer group and used NTD data to eliminate agencies without dedicated funding. It then found data for variables like operating expense per capita, boardings per revenue hour, and percentage of operating costs that are subsidized. It discovered while the region’s investment in transit is relatively low, the agency’s service compares well to its peers.<br />
<br />
==[http://www.ftis.org/urban_iNTD.aspx Urban Integrated National Transit Database]==<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
<br />
[http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/163872.aspx Parks, J., Ryus, P., Coffel, K. Gan, A., Perk, V., Cherrington, L., Arndt, J., & Nakanishi, Y. (2010). A Methodology for Performance Measurement and Peer Comparison in the Public Transportation Industry. Transit Cooperative Research Program.]<br />
<br />
: This report contains both illustrated instructions for using iNTD and a more in-depth framework for measuring performance and comparing it to peer agencies. Note: iNTD was previously called INTDAS, which is what the report refers to it as. The instructions are still relevant.<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Applications]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Scoop&diff=4242Scoop2017-05-31T20:38:22Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Scoop.jpeg|right|thumb|500px|Scoop's BART integration hopes to encourage carpooling to transit. Source: [https://blog.takescoop.com/carpool-to-bart-59d8555e79a2#.qxhusnw9p Scoop]]]<br />
[[Category:Applications]]<br />
[[Category:First and Last Mile]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Carpooling has long been looked at as a potential way to reduce congestion and help the environment. One clear barrier to carpooling is finding someone who shares your route from home to work. Technology has the potential to help solve this problem, and in recent years a variety of carpooling apps have been released. [https://www.takescoop.com/ Scoop] is an app that tries to increase carpooling by connecting riders with drivers. Businesses can sign up for Scoop; the app will prioritize matching coworkers for the most efficient commutes.<br />
<br />
Scoop has recently partnered with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) in the San Francisco Bay Area to integrate carpool service with BART [[park-and-rides]]<ref>[http://mtc.ca.gov/whats-happening/news/mtc-partners-bart-and-scoop-guarantee-parking-spots-carpoolers Metropolitan Transportation Commission. "MTC Partners with BART and Scoop to Guarantee Parking Spots for Carpoolers." 2017.]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==How it Works==<br />
Unlike ride-hailing apps like Lyft and Uber, Scoop is aimed at filling empty seats on existing commutes. The night before going to work, a user tells the app that they are looking to either drive or ride and what time they plan on leaving. They’re then automatically matched with someone on a similar route. The rider pays the driver a distance-based fee for the ride through the app. In the early afternoon the process repeats for evening commutes. In order to deal with the uncertainty of rides that are only scheduled one-way, Scoop includes a featured called Guaranteed Ride Home. If a rider cannot be matched with a driver for their return trip, Scoop will reimburse them up to $40 to take public transportation or a taxi home<ref>[https://takescoop.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/205655238-What-is-Guaranteed-Ride-Home- Scoop. "What is Guaranteed Ride Home?" 2017.]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==Carpool to BART==<br />
Many people utilize park-and-ride at BART stations, and as a result parking lots fill up quickly. To manage parking demand, in January 2017 BART began a pilot program with MTC and Scoop to encourage carpooling. Under the pilot, riders who use Scoop are guaranteed a parking spot before 10 a.m. at BART’s Dublin/Pleasanton Station. The process is the same as using the Scoop app for any other trip, with users setting their work location as 5801 Owens Drive, Pleasanton. Drivers will receive a placard to place in their car, and Scoop will work with BART police on a daily basis to ensure that all vehicles parked in the program spaces actually were used for a carpool. As with all Scoop service, passengers are guaranteed a ride home from the station in the evening. In the early stages of the pilot carpoolers will receive free parking at the station, though the pricing structure may change as the program moves forward<ref>[https://blog.takescoop.com/carpool-to-bart-59d8555e79a2#.qxhusnw9p Scoop. "Scoop launches the Carpool to BART program, starting with Dublin/Pleasanton station on January 23rd." 2017.]</ref>.<br />
<br />
The partnership is funded by a $358,000 Mobility on Demand Sandbox grant from the Federal Transit Administration. The grant allowed for increased integration between Scoop and BART; the app can be used to pay for BART parking and rides are coordinated with train schedules. Drivers can also mark their vehicle as wheelchair accessible to make the program open to as many people as possible.<br />
<br />
==511 Contra Costa County==<br />
In May of 2017 the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) launched a pilot integrating Scoop into [https://511contracosta.org/ 511 Contra Costa], its transportation demand management program. CCTA will subsidize the app for Contra Costa residents, offering them $2 off each ride. The pilot, which does not have an announced end date, is funded by the [http://www.baaqmd.gov/grant-funding/public-agencies/county-program-manager-fund Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s Transportation Fund For Clean Air Program Manager Funds] and Measure J.<br />
<br />
==[https://www.takescoop.com/ Scoop]==<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/></div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Air_quality&diff=4241Air quality2017-05-31T20:16:45Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:ZEBusRibbonCutting.jpg|right|thumb|350px|This is the ribbon-cutting ceremony for San Jose's newest zero-emissions bus. Photo by Flickr user congressman_honda.]] <br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Public transit can have an effect on human health by reducing air pollution created by trips taken by private automobiles. The emissions from cars contribute to asthma, cancer, and other diseases. This pollution also has serious implications for equity, as a growing body of evidence demonstrates that low-income people, more likely to live near heavily traveled highways, are disproportionately impacted by these diseases. Emissions from vehicles of all types also have implications for climate change, which ultimately has an effect on human health by raising temperatures and causing or exacerbating extreme weather events.<br />
<br />
==Strategies for Improving Air Quality==<br />
===Increasing Ridership===<br />
Transit agencies have an interest in increasing ridership for cost-effectiveness reasons - serving more passengers per vehicle mile, for example. But environmental agencies and regional governments rely on public transit as an alternative to the single-occupant vehicle as a strategy for reaching air quality goals. However, studies conducted by transit agencies on their work’s effect on air quality were not readily available, possibly because those agencies are charged with many other responsibilities and do not have resources to produce independent studies. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, though, recommend expanding public transportation as one of its eight transportation policies that could drastically improve public health. The CDC also offers a toolkit to aid planners and decisionmakers in conducting health impact assessments to measure the benefits and costs for health of transportation projects.<ref>Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [http://www.cdc.gov/transportation/recommendation.htm "CDC Transportation Recommendations."] 2010.</ref><br />
<br />
===Modernizing Vehicles===<br />
Most California transit agencies have had to modernize their buses for some degree because of the California Air Resources Board’s Fleet Rule. For example, transit agencies in California are required to replace vehicles early beginning in 2015 and as of January 2012, must add particulate matter filters to buses.<ref>California Air Resources Board.[http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/bus/bus.htm “Public Transit Agencies.”] 2011.</ref> But many transit agencies have exceeded these expectations because they see modernizing their vehicle fleets as a part of their mission to improve air quality and reduce their dependence on volatile and expensive traditional gasoline and diesel fuel. Los Angeles’ Metropolitan Transportation Authority switched many of its buses to compressed natural gas (CNG) in 2005, and retired its last diesel bus in 2011.<ref> Metropolitan Transportation Authority. [http://www.metro.net/news/simple_pr/metro-retires-last-diesel-bus/ “Metro Retires Last Diesel Bus, Becomes World’s First Major Transit Agency to Operate Only Clean Fuel buses.”] 2011.</ref> An alternative to retiring buses is retrofitting them. Because diesel fuel is also a major contributor to particulate matter in the air, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) worked together to support Bay Area transit agencies in retrofitting buses with filters that capture 85 percent of diesel exhaust particulate matter.<ref>Metropolitan Transportation Commission and Bay Area Air Quality Management District. [[media:MTC_Retrofits.pdf|"Bus Filters Remove Tons of Soot from Bay Area Air."]] 2006.</ref><br />
<br />
==Important Policies==<br />
===Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality standards (CMAQ)===<br />
Air quality and public transit are linked in many ways, but one of the most direct connections made by any agency is through the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) standards. CMAQ provides a source of funding to states with air quality that does not meet the Clean Air Act’s air quality standards - this funding can be used for public transit projects and is distributed through the state’s department of transportation. These funds may be used by transit agencies to provide new service, to expand public transit service, and/or to provide incentives to use existing services.<ref>Federal Highway Administration. [http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/air_quality/cmaq/reference/public_transportation/ “Air Quality.”] 2005.</ref><br />
<br />
===Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)===<br />
In the interest of attaining federal air quality standards, every four years, or when a regionally significant project is approved, regions across the country must prepare a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The TIP must be approved first by the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) where the non-attainment area is located, then by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA).<ref>Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration. [http://www.planning.dot.gov/documents/briefingbook/bbook.htm "The Transportation Planning Process; A Briefing Book for Transportaiton Planning Decisionmakers, Officials, and Staff.”] 2007.</ref> When a planning agency develops a new Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), they must prepare a conformity analysis to demonstrate that the transportation plans meet air quality standards and do not exceed the ‘budget’ of emissions allocated to the area by the State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP).<ref>Metropolitan Transportation Commission. [[media:MTC_TIP_Conformity_Report.pdf|”Transportation-Air Quality Conformity Analysis for the Transportation 2035 Plan and 2011 Transportation Improvement Program.”]] 2010.</ref><br />
<br />
===Proposition 1B (California)===<br />
Approved in 2006, Proposition 1B, The Highway, Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act, set aside billions of dollars of bond money to establish accounts to accomplish a variety of transportation goals, including modernizing transit systems, improving air quality, and improving intercity rail systems. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) disburses these funds to local transit agencies for different projects.<ref>California Department of Transportation. [http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/transprog/ibond.htm “Transportation Programming - Proposition 1B - Transportation Bond Program.”] 2011.</ref> In 2012, about 80 projects were awarded a total of about $350 million in grants through this program.<ref>California Department of Transportation. [http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/paffairs/news/pressrel/12pr070.htm “Caltrans Awards $350 Million in Grants to Improve Public Transit and Air Quality.”] 2012.</ref><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
[[media:OrangeLine_GHGs.pdf|Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. (2011). “Metro Orange Line Mode Shift Study and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis.”]]<br />
: When Los Angeles Metro built its Orange Line [[bus rapid transit]] line, it included a bikeway and other facilities for bicyclists alongside the dedicated lane. The purpose of this study was to establish the benefits of that bikeway in terms of greenhouse gas emissions avoided. The bikeway was created in order to complement the busway and both have exceeded expectations in terms of use. Bicycle facilities are an important tool that transit agencies have for pursuing sustainability and promoting public health and this study offers one example of quantifying these benefits. <br />
<br />
[http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/generalinfo.htm Environmental Protection Agency. “Transportation Conformity: General Information.”]<br />
: This guide from the EPA provides links to a guide for understanding the transportation conformity process, along with resources for technical assistance, and a guide for state and local officials. It also includes a report with case studies of cities implementing the conformity requirements through the 1990s, including San Francisco. <br />
<br />
[http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/documents/rrpapp.htm California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board. (2000). “Final Diesel Risk Reduction Plan with Appendices.”]<br />
: This report from the California Air Resources Board outlines some strategies for reducing the particulate matter in the state’s air. It describes the risks and strategies from a variety of diesel engine types (stationary, and mobile engines in school buses, transit buses, and trucks). However, transit providers may be interested in the report because it includes a summary of existing policies governing diesel engines, methodology for measuring particulate matter, and reviews of technologies for reducing particulate matter. <br />
<br />
[[media:MTC_Guide.pdf|Metropolitan Transportation Commission. (2009). “Transportation, Land Use, and Greenhouse Gases: A Bay Area Resource Guide.”]]<br />
: This guide reviews a wide range of strategies for meeting California’s greenhouse gas emissions reductions over the next couple decades. The guide evaluates strategies based on how well they will be able to reduce emissions, as well as how cost-effective they are. Increasing ridership on public transit, facilitating biking and walking, and changing travel behavior are all included as components of the overall plan to reduce California’s emissions.<br />
<br />
[[Category:Transit and Public Health]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Air_quality&diff=4240Air quality2017-05-31T20:16:23Z<p>Rabiabonour: /* Additional Reading */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:ZEBusRibbonCutting.jpg|right|thumb|350px|This is the ribbon-cutting ceremony for San Jose's newest zero-emissions bus. Photo by Flickr user congressman_honda.]] <br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Public transit can have an effect on human health by reducing air pollution created by trips taken by private automobiles. The emissions from cars contribute to asthma, cancer, and other diseases. This pollution also has serious implications for equity, as a growing body of evidence demonstrates that low-income people, more likely to live near heavily traveled highways, are disproportionately impacted by these diseases. Emissions from vehicles of all types also have implications for climate change, which ultimately has an effect on human health by raising temperatures and causing or exacerbating extreme weather events.<br />
<br />
==Strategies for Improving Air Quality==<br />
===Increasing Ridership===<br />
Transit agencies have an interest in increasing ridership for cost-effectiveness reasons - serving more passengers per vehicle mile, for example. But environmental agencies and regional governments rely on public transit as an alternative to the single-occupant vehicle as a strategy for reaching air quality goals. However, studies conducted by transit agencies on their work’s effect on air quality were not readily available, possibly because those agencies are charged with many other responsibilities and do not have resources to produce independent studies. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, though, recommend expanding public transportation as one of its eight transportation policies that could drastically improve public health. The CDC also offers a toolkit to aid planners and decisionmakers in conducting health impact assessments to measure the benefits and costs for health of transportation projects.<ref>Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [http://www.cdc.gov/transportation/recommendation.htm "CDC Transportation Recommendations."] 2010.</ref><br />
<br />
===Modernizing Vehicles===<br />
Most California transit agencies have had to modernize their buses for some degree because of the California Air Resources Board’s Fleet Rule. For example, transit agencies in California are required to replace vehicles early beginning in 2015 and as of January 2012, must add particulate matter filters to buses.<ref>California Air Resources Board.[http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/bus/bus.htm “Public Transit Agencies.”] 2011.</ref> But many transit agencies have exceeded these expectations because they see modernizing their vehicle fleets as a part of their mission to improve air quality and reduce their dependence on volatile and expensive traditional gasoline and diesel fuel. Los Angeles’ Metropolitan Transportation Authority switched many of its buses to compressed natural gas (CNG) in 2005, and retired its last diesel bus in 2011.<ref> Metropolitan Transportation Authority. [http://www.metro.net/news/simple_pr/metro-retires-last-diesel-bus/ “Metro Retires Last Diesel Bus, Becomes World’s First Major Transit Agency to Operate Only Clean Fuel buses.”] 2011.</ref> An alternative to retiring buses is retrofitting them. Because diesel fuel is also a major contributor to particulate matter in the air, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) worked together to support Bay Area transit agencies in retrofitting buses with filters that capture 85 percent of diesel exhaust particulate matter.<ref>Metropolitan Transportation Commission and Bay Area Air Quality Management District. [[media:MTC_Retrofits.pdf|"Bus Filters Remove Tons of Soot from Bay Area Air."]] 2006.</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
==Important Policies==<br />
===Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality standards (CMAQ)===<br />
Air quality and public transit are linked in many ways, but one of the most direct connections made by any agency is through the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) standards. CMAQ provides a source of funding to states with air quality that does not meet the Clean Air Act’s air quality standards - this funding can be used for public transit projects and is distributed through the state’s department of transportation. These funds may be used by transit agencies to provide new service, to expand public transit service, and/or to provide incentives to use existing services.<ref>Federal Highway Administration. [http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/air_quality/cmaq/reference/public_transportation/ “Air Quality.”] 2005.</ref><br />
<br />
===Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)===<br />
In the interest of attaining federal air quality standards, every four years, or when a regionally significant project is approved, regions across the country must prepare a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The TIP must be approved first by the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) where the non-attainment area is located, then by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA).<ref>Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration. [http://www.planning.dot.gov/documents/briefingbook/bbook.htm "The Transportation Planning Process; A Briefing Book for Transportaiton Planning Decisionmakers, Officials, and Staff.”] 2007.</ref> When a planning agency develops a new Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), they must prepare a conformity analysis to demonstrate that the transportation plans meet air quality standards and do not exceed the ‘budget’ of emissions allocated to the area by the State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP).<ref>Metropolitan Transportation Commission. [[media:MTC_TIP_Conformity_Report.pdf|”Transportation-Air Quality Conformity Analysis for the Transportation 2035 Plan and 2011 Transportation Improvement Program.”]] 2010.</ref><br />
<br />
===Proposition 1B (California)===<br />
Approved in 2006, Proposition 1B, The Highway, Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act, set aside billions of dollars of bond money to establish accounts to accomplish a variety of transportation goals, including modernizing transit systems, improving air quality, and improving intercity rail systems. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) disburses these funds to local transit agencies for different projects.<ref>California Department of Transportation. [http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/transprog/ibond.htm “Transportation Programming - Proposition 1B - Transportation Bond Program.”] 2011.</ref> In 2012, about 80 projects were awarded a total of about $350 million in grants through this program.<ref>California Department of Transportation. [http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/paffairs/news/pressrel/12pr070.htm “Caltrans Awards $350 Million in Grants to Improve Public Transit and Air Quality.”] 2012.</ref><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
[[media:OrangeLine_GHGs.pdf|Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. (2011). “Metro Orange Line Mode Shift Study and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis.”]]<br />
: When Los Angeles Metro built its Orange Line [[bus rapid transit]] line, it included a bikeway and other facilities for bicyclists alongside the dedicated lane. The purpose of this study was to establish the benefits of that bikeway in terms of greenhouse gas emissions avoided. The bikeway was created in order to complement the busway and both have exceeded expectations in terms of use. Bicycle facilities are an important tool that transit agencies have for pursuing sustainability and promoting public health and this study offers one example of quantifying these benefits. <br />
<br />
[http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/generalinfo.htm Environmental Protection Agency. “Transportation Conformity: General Information.”]<br />
: This guide from the EPA provides links to a guide for understanding the transportation conformity process, along with resources for technical assistance, and a guide for state and local officials. It also includes a report with case studies of cities implementing the conformity requirements through the 1990s, including San Francisco. <br />
<br />
[http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/documents/rrpapp.htm California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board. (2000). “Final Diesel Risk Reduction Plan with Appendices.”]<br />
: This report from the California Air Resources Board outlines some strategies for reducing the particulate matter in the state’s air. It describes the risks and strategies from a variety of diesel engine types (stationary, and mobile engines in school buses, transit buses, and trucks). However, transit providers may be interested in the report because it includes a summary of existing policies governing diesel engines, methodology for measuring particulate matter, and reviews of technologies for reducing particulate matter. <br />
<br />
[[media:MTC_Guide.pdf|Metropolitan Transportation Commission. (2009). “Transportation, Land Use, and Greenhouse Gases: A Bay Area Resource Guide.”]]<br />
: This guide reviews a wide range of strategies for meeting California’s greenhouse gas emissions reductions over the next couple decades. The guide evaluates strategies based on how well they will be able to reduce emissions, as well as how cost-effective they are. Increasing ridership on public transit, facilitating biking and walking, and changing travel behavior are all included as components of the overall plan to reduce California’s emissions.<br />
<br />
[[Category:Transit and Public Health]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Cost_effective_vehicle_purchases&diff=4239Cost effective vehicle purchases2017-05-30T03:48:07Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:MetroHybrid.jpg|right|thumb|500px|A hybrid Los Angeles Metro bus in 2009. Photo by Mike Bottone, via Flickr user Metro Transportation Library and Archive.]]<br />
=Introduction=<br />
The decision to purchase a vehicle requires careful consideration of up-front vehicle acquistion costs, and later vehicle operations and maintenance costs. With the increase in the costs of fuel and maintenance labor, fuel efficient, reliable vehicles are now more valuable than in the past. Cost-effective vehicle procurement is an important part of maintaining a reliable fleet that can run efficiently and for long hours. The problem of ‘peaking’ adds to these problems. Peaking refers to the high number of vehicles needed to accommodate the high numbers of passengers that converge on the system during morning and evening rush hours. This means that transit systems have to obtain and maintain more vehicles than are needed during off-peak hours. <br />
<br />
State and local governments are eligible to receive funds for capital costs, like vehicles, from the federal Department of Transportation through several programs, like the Surface Transportation Program, the Bus and Bus Facilities Program, and others, though they must follow certain guidelines and meet eligibility requirements.<ref>[http://www.dot.gov/livability/grants-programs.html US Department of Transportation. “Livability Grants and Programs.”]</ref> This is important to note because the availability of capital funding is the best predictor of the age at which transit agencies retire vehicles.<ref name="useful">[[media:Useful_Life_of_Buses.pdf |Federal Transit Administration. (2007). “Useful Life of Transit Buses and Vans.”]]</ref> Another important resource for California's transit providers is the California Transit Association. The Association's mission is to advocate for public transit and share resources, including research and surveys, among member organizations.<ref>[http://www.caltransit.org/node/58 California Transit Association. (2012). "Strategic Plan."]</ref><br />
<br />
=Regulations Affecting Procurement=<br />
One study by the Federal Transit Administration found that several federal and state policies and regulations affect procurement and service-life length. For example, the Americans with Disabilities Act has had an effect on the technology sought in vehicles, including on-board annunciators and reliable lifts. The FTA’s own minimum requirements for the span of time a vehicle must be in service before it can be retired without a penalty was also found to alter expectations for service-life of vehicles among practitioners - its 12-year minimum for 40-foot buses became the expectation of the service-life, rather than the minimum. Most importantly, though, they found that these regulations have a relatively minor effect on service-life of vehicles, especially when compared with the low-bid procurement process. The low-bid procurement process was found to degrade the lifespan and quality of the vehicles obtained in order to accept the lowest possible price. Accepting a low bid should not be prioritized over obtaining high-quality, long-lasting vehicles.<ref name="useful" /> <br />
<br />
==Emissions Regulations==<br />
The SAFETEA-LU transportation legislation specifically names diesel retrofits as a cost-effective method for reducing emissions to meet federal air quality standards, and this method has been studied by the EPA and the Transportation Research Board. New transit vehicle purchases may even be eligible for Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement funds (CMAQ).<ref>[http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/air_quality/cmaq/policy_and_guidance/2008_guidance/index.cfm Federal Highway Administration. (2008). “Final Program Guidance: The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Improvement Program under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users.”]</ref><br />
<br />
California’s air quality goals also affect the parameters that transit providers have to work within when procuring vehicles. The California Air Resources Board requires that fleets reduce their overall emissions, including particulate matter and nitrous oxide from fleet vehicles. The Air Resources Board also has specific requirements for urban buses, separate from an agency’s average fleet emissions.<ref>[http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/bus/bus.htm California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board. (2011). “Public Transit Agencies.”]</ref> Additionally, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has separate, specific requirements for Southern California transit agencies and other government agencies that manage fleets of 15 or more vehicles. It requires that new vehicle purchases must be lower emission vehicles or vehicles that use alternative fuels.<ref>[http://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/laws/ELEC/CA Alternative Fuels Data Center. (2012). "California Laws and Incentives for Electricity.“ US Department of Energy.]</ref> <br />
<br />
==Buy America Requirements==<br />
Agencies receiving funds from the Federal Transit Administration must purchase vehicles that are made up of 60 percent domestic parts and assembled in the United States under the US Department of Transportation’s Buy America requirement. There are three possible reasons for the FTA to waive this requirement: if the requirement is not in the public interest; if the parts or components are not produced in a sufficient enough quantity; and if fulfilling the requirement would add over 25 percent to the cost.<ref>[http://www.dot.gov/buyamerica/index.html United States Department of Transportation. “Buy America.”]</ref> Although waivers are available for this requirement, one study found that many small, rural providers had difficulty fulfilling it when procuring paratransit vehicles.<ref>[http://www.trb.org/main/blurbs/158998.aspx National Cooperative Highway Research Program. (2007). “Research Results Digest 319: Buy America Issues Associated with the State DOT Procurement of Paratransit Vehicles Using FTA Funds.”]</ref> <br />
<br />
=Fuel Considerations=<br />
Emissions regulations aside, the rising cost of traditional fuels makes using alternative fuels more attractive. However, it is important to consider the costs of vehicles and the wide variety of alternative fuels, such as ethanol or electricity. The majority of buses currently run on diesel gas, but natural gas and other alternatives are gaining footing because of their advantages in cost and availability. The benefits of making the switch to an alternative fuel must also be balanced with the possible costs of re-training staff to handle the fuel and retrofitting garages and fuel pumps.<ref>[http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/165390.aspx Science Applications International Corporation. (2011). "Guidebook for Evaluating Fuel Choices for Post-2010 Bus Procurements." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]</ref><br />
<br />
=Case Studies=<br />
==California Transit Finance Corporation==<br />
[http://www.caltransit.org/node/2160 CTFC] is a non-profit corporation established to assist California Transit Association members with capital finance and vehicle purchases. See more information at [[California Transit Finance Corporation]].<br />
==German Case Study==<br />
Buehler and Pucher examined the elements of a successful increase in transit efficiency in Germany in one case study. They found that purchasing new vehicles, and sharing them among transit agencies, was a part of improving the financial sustainability of Germany's transit system, along with reducing labor costs and [[fare reform]].<ref>[[media:MakingTransportFinanciallySustainable.pdf|Buehler, R. & John Pucher. (2011). "Making Public Transport Financially Sustainable." Transport Policy]]</ref><br />
<br />
[[Category:Investment and planning]]<br />
<br />
=References=<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
=Additional Reading=<br />
[https://www.transit.dot.gov/funding/procurement/best-practices-procurement-manual Federal Transit Administration. (2016). “Best Practices Procurement Manual.”] <br />
: The Federal Transit Administration created this manual to assist both grantees and contractors in navigating the process of administering contracts for the purpose of procuring capital investments for transit. The manual includes best practices for meeting federal requirements, as well as for long-term planning for procurement. <br />
<br />
[http://apps.trb.org/cmsfeed/trbnetprojectdisplay.asp?projectid=1036 KFH Group, Inc. et al. (2000). “Analyzing the Costs of Operating Small Transit Vehicles; User’s Guide.” Transit Cooperative Research Program. ] <br />
: Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration, this link includes both the report and the user-friendly Microsoft Excel tool for evaluating costs. The tool asks the user to input baseline information into an Excel form and it produces a report based on the type of vehicle being purchased and how the transit provider intends to use it. <br />
<br />
[http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/165390.aspx Science Applications International Corporation. (2011). "Guidebook for Evaluating Fuel Choices for Post-2010 Bus Procurements." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]<br />
: Because fuel-efficiency and use of alternative fuels have become so important to obtaining funding and to the missions of transit agencies, this guide is especially useful for comparing the many options of alternative fuels. The link also includes the Microsoft Excel-based tool that was developed for evaluating the [[Life-cycle assessment of transit|life-cycle costs]] and emissions of the different types of fuels and buses.<br />
<br />
[http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/156159.aspx Cambridge Systems, Inc. et al. (2005). "Analytical Tools for Asset Management" National Cooperative Highway Research Program.]<br />
: This report and accompanying ISO tool offer a framework for analyzing decisions across modes and goals. Because asset management can have a variety of goals - preservation or increasing efficiency, for example - state DOTs and other public agencies may need more complex decision-making tools. This report explains how to use the two tools developed by the authors - AssetManager NT and AssetManager PT, designed to analyze decisions for short- or long-term. The tools developed and this report address concerns beyond the scope of transit planners’ usual work (like pavement management, for example), but the tool is intended to be useful for a variety of uses within state and local DOTs. <br />
<br />
[http://www.trb.org/main/blurbs/158998.aspx National Cooperative Highway Research Program. (2007). “Research Results Digest 319: Buy America Issues Associated with the State DOT Procurement of Paratransit Vehicles Using FTA Funds.”] <br />
: This report is the result of an investigation into how Buy America requirements affect small, rural transit providers when procuring paratransit vehicles. The report uses a literature review and interviews to make suggestions for changes to the requirements that might make satisfying it easier for a wide range of transit providers. <br />
<br />
[http://www.apta.com/resources/standards/Documents/APTA-PS-TP-WP-001-11.pdf American Public Transportation Association. (2011). “Technology Terms and Conditions.”]<br />
: This white paper specifically addresses best practices for transit providers when procuring information technology. This can range from basic computers to complex software and mobile data collection systems. This guide is especially useful because it describes each common component of a contract for information technology and the benefits, risks, and common approaches associated with each. Although not about vehicle procurement, this topic is relevant as transit providers rely on intelligent transportation systems to improve service.</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Cost_effective_vehicle_purchases&diff=4238Cost effective vehicle purchases2017-05-30T03:43:19Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:MetroHybrid.jpg|right|thumb|500px|A hybrid Los Angeles Metro bus in 2009. Photo by Mike Bottone, via Flickr user Metro Transportation Library and Archive.]]<br />
=Introduction=<br />
The decision to purchase a vehicle requires careful consideration of up-front vehicle acquistion costs, and later vehicle operations and maintenance costs. With the increase in the costs of fuel and maintenance labor, fuel efficient, reliable vehicles are now more valuable than in the past. Cost-effective vehicle procurement is an important part of maintaining a reliable fleet that can run efficiently and for long hours. The problem of ‘peaking’ adds to these problems. Peaking refers to the high number of vehicles needed to accommodate the high numbers of passengers that converge on the system during morning and evening rush hours. This means that transit systems have to obtain and maintain more vehicles than are needed during off-peak hours. <br />
<br />
State and local governments are eligible to receive funds for capital costs, like vehicles, from the federal Department of Transportation through several programs, like the Surface Transportation Program, the Bus and Bus Facilities Program, and others, though they must follow certain guidelines and meet eligibility requirements.<ref>[http://www.dot.gov/livability/grants-programs.html US Department of Transportation. “Livability Grants and Programs.”]</ref> This is important to note because the availability of capital funding is the best predictor of the age at which transit agencies retire vehicles.<ref name="useful">[[media:Useful_Life_of_Buses.pdf |Federal Transit Administration. (2007). “Useful Life of Transit Buses and Vans.”]]</ref> Another important resource for California's transit providers is the California Transit Association. The Association's mission is to advocate for public transit and share resources, including research and surveys, among member organizations.<ref>[http://www.caltransit.org/node/58 California Transit Association. (2012). "Strategic Plan."]</ref><br />
<br />
=Regulations Affecting Procurement=<br />
One study by the Federal Transit Administration found that several federal and state policies and regulations affect procurement and service-life length. For example, the Americans with Disabilities Act has had an effect on the technology sought in vehicles, including on-board annunciators and reliable lifts. The FTA’s own minimum requirements for the span of time a vehicle must be in service before it can be retired without a penalty was also found to alter expectations for service-life of vehicles among practitioners - its 12-year minimum for 40-foot buses became the expectation of the service-life, rather than the minimum. Most importantly, though, they found that these regulations have a relatively minor effect on service-life of vehicles, especially when compared with the low-bid procurement process. The low-bid procurement process was found to degrade the lifespan and quality of the vehicles obtained in order to accept the lowest possible price. Accepting a low bid should not be prioritized over obtaining high-quality, long-lasting vehicles.<ref name="useful" /> <br />
<br />
==Emissions Regulations==<br />
The SAFETEA-LU transportation legislation specifically names diesel retrofits as a cost-effective method for reducing emissions to meet federal air quality standards, and this method has been studied by the EPA and the Transportation Research Board. New transit vehicle purchases may even be eligible for Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement funds (CMAQ).<ref>[http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/air_quality/cmaq/policy_and_guidance/2008_guidance/index.cfm Federal Highway Administration. (2008). “Final Program Guidance: The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Improvement Program under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users.”]</ref><br />
<br />
California’s air quality goals also affect the parameters that transit providers have to work within when procuring vehicles. The California Air Resources Board requires that fleets reduce their overall emissions, including particulate matter and nitrous oxide from fleet vehicles. The Air Resources Board also has specific requirements for urban buses, separate from an agency’s average fleet emissions.<ref>[http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/bus/bus.htm California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board. (2011). “Public Transit Agencies.”]</ref> Additionally, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has separate, specific requirements for Southern California transit agencies and other government agencies that manage fleets of 15 or more vehicles. It requires that new vehicle purchases must be lower emission vehicles or vehicles that use alternative fuels.<ref>US Department of Energy. Alternative Fuels Data Center. [http://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/laws/ELEC/CA California Incentives and Laws for Acquisition / Fuel Use.“] 2012.</ref> <br />
<br />
==Buy America Requirements==<br />
Agencies receiving funds from the Federal Transit Administration must purchase vehicles that are made up of 60 percent domestic parts and assembled in the United States under the US Department of Transportation’s Buy America requirement. There are three possible reasons for the FTA to waive this requirement: if the requirement is not in the public interest; if the parts or components are not produced in a sufficient enough quantity; and if fulfilling the requirement would add over 25 percent to the cost.<ref> United States Department of Transportation. [http://www.dot.gov/buyamerica/index.html “Buy America.”]</ref> Although waivers are available for this requirement, one study found that many small, rural providers had difficulty fulfilling it when procuring paratransit vehicles.<ref>[http://www.trb.org/main/blurbs/158998.aspx National Cooperative Highway Research Program. (2007). “Research Results Digest 319: Buy America Issues Associated with the State DOT Procurement of Paratransit Vehicles Using FTA Funds.”]</ref> <br />
<br />
=Fuel Considerations=<br />
Emissions regulations aside, the rising cost of traditional fuels makes using alternative fuels more attractive. However, it is important to consider the costs of vehicles and the wide variety of alternative fuels, such as ethanol or electricity. The majority of buses currently run on diesel gas, but natural gas and other alternatives are gaining footing because of their advantages in cost and availability. The benefits of making the switch to an alternative fuel must also be balanced with the possible costs of re-training staff to handle the fuel and retrofitting garages and fuel pumps.<ref>[http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/165390.aspx Science Applications International Corporation. (2011). "Guidebook for Evaluating Fuel Choices for Post-2010 Bus Procurements." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]</ref><br />
<br />
=Case Studies=<br />
==California Transit Finance Corporation==<br />
[http://www.caltransit.org/node/2160 CTFC] is a non-profit corporation established to assist California Transit Association members with capital finance and vehicle purchases. See more information at [[California Transit Finance Corporation]].<br />
==German Case Study==<br />
Buehler and Pucher examined the elements of a successful increase in transit efficiency in Germany in one case study. They found that purchasing new vehicles, and sharing them among transit agencies, was a part of improving the financial sustainability of Germany's transit system, along with reducing labor costs and [[fare reform]].<ref> Buehler, Ralph and John Pucher. [[media:MakingTransportFinanciallySustainable.pdf|"Making Public Transport Financially Sustainable."]] 2011.</ref><br />
<br />
[[Category:Investment and planning]]<br />
<br />
=References=<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
=Additional Reading=<br />
[https://www.transit.dot.gov/funding/procurement/best-practices-procurement-manual Federal Transit Administration. (2016). “Best Practices Procurement Manual.”] <br />
: The Federal Transit Administration created this manual to assist both grantees and contractors in navigating the process of administering contracts for the purpose of procuring capital investments for transit. The manual includes best practices for meeting federal requirements, as well as for long-term planning for procurement. <br />
<br />
[http://apps.trb.org/cmsfeed/trbnetprojectdisplay.asp?projectid=1036 KFH Group, Inc. et al. (2000). “Analyzing the Costs of Operating Small Transit Vehicles; User’s Guide.” Transit Cooperative Research Program. ] <br />
: Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration, this link includes both the report and the user-friendly Microsoft Excel tool for evaluating costs. The tool asks the user to input baseline information into an Excel form and it produces a report based on the type of vehicle being purchased and how the transit provider intends to use it. <br />
<br />
[http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/165390.aspx Science Applications International Corporation. (2011). "Guidebook for Evaluating Fuel Choices for Post-2010 Bus Procurements." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]<br />
: Because fuel-efficiency and use of alternative fuels have become so important to obtaining funding and to the missions of transit agencies, this guide is especially useful for comparing the many options of alternative fuels. The link also includes the Microsoft Excel-based tool that was developed for evaluating the [[Life-cycle assessment of transit|life-cycle costs]] and emissions of the different types of fuels and buses.<br />
<br />
[http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/156159.aspx Cambridge Systems, Inc. et al. (2005). "Analytical Tools for Asset Management" National Cooperative Highway Research Program.]<br />
: This report and accompanying ISO tool offer a framework for analyzing decisions across modes and goals. Because asset management can have a variety of goals - preservation or increasing efficiency, for example - state DOTs and other public agencies may need more complex decision-making tools. This report explains how to use the two tools developed by the authors - AssetManager NT and AssetManager PT, designed to analyze decisions for short- or long-term. The tools developed and this report address concerns beyond the scope of transit planners’ usual work (like pavement management, for example), but the tool is intended to be useful for a variety of uses within state and local DOTs. <br />
<br />
[http://www.trb.org/main/blurbs/158998.aspx National Cooperative Highway Research Program. (2007). “Research Results Digest 319: Buy America Issues Associated with the State DOT Procurement of Paratransit Vehicles Using FTA Funds.”] <br />
: This report is the result of an investigation into how Buy America requirements affect small, rural transit providers when procuring paratransit vehicles. The report uses a literature review and interviews to make suggestions for changes to the requirements that might make satisfying it easier for a wide range of transit providers. <br />
<br />
[http://www.apta.com/resources/standards/Documents/APTA-PS-TP-WP-001-11.pdf American Public Transportation Association. (2011). “Technology Terms and Conditions.”]<br />
: This white paper specifically addresses best practices for transit providers when procuring information technology. This can range from basic computers to complex software and mobile data collection systems. This guide is especially useful because it describes each common component of a contract for information technology and the benefits, risks, and common approaches associated with each. Although not about vehicle procurement, this topic is relevant as transit providers rely on intelligent transportation systems to improve service.</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Cost_effective_vehicle_purchases&diff=4237Cost effective vehicle purchases2017-05-30T03:02:32Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:MetroHybrid.jpg|right|thumb|500px|A hybrid Los Angeles Metro bus in 2009. Photo by Mike Bottone, via Flickr user Metro Transportation Library and Archive.]]<br />
=Introduction=<br />
The decision to purchase a vehicle requires careful consideration of up-front vehicle acquistion costs, and later vehicle operations and maintenance costs. With the increase in the costs of fuel and maintenance labor, fuel efficient, reliable vehicles are now more valuable than in the past. Cost-effective vehicle procurement is an important part of maintaining a reliable fleet that can run efficiently and for long hours. The problem of ‘peaking’ adds to these problems. Peaking refers to the high number of vehicles needed to accommodate the high numbers of passengers that converge on the system during morning and evening rush hours. This means that transit systems have to obtain and maintain more vehicles than are needed during off-peak hours. <br />
<br />
State and local governments are eligible to receive funds for capital costs, like vehicles, from the federal Department of Transportation through several programs, like the Surface Transportation Program, the Bus and Bus Facilities Program, and others, though they must follow certain guidelines and meet eligibility requirements<ref>[http://www.dot.gov/livability/grants-programs.html “Livability Grants and Programs.” US Department of Transportation.]</ref>. This is important to note because the availability of capital funding is the best predictor of the age at which transit agencies retire vehicles.<ref>Federal Transit Administration.[[media:Useful_Life_of_Buses.pdf |“Useful Life of Transit Buses and Vans.”]] 2007.</ref> Another important resource for California's transit providers is the California Transit Association. The Association's mission is to advocate for public transit and share resources, including research and surveys, among member organizations.<ref>California Transit Association.[http://www.caltransit.org/node/58 "Strategic Plan."] 2012.</ref><br />
<br />
=Regulations Affecting Procurement=<br />
One study by the Federal Transit Administration found that several federal and state policies and regulations affect procurement and service-life length. For example, the Americans with Disabilities Act has had an effect on the technology sought in vehicles, including on-board annunciators and reliable lifts. The FTA’s own minimum requirements for the span of time a vehicle must be in service before it can be retired without a penalty was also found to alter expectations for service-life of vehicles among practitioners - its 12-year minimum for 40-foot buses became the expectation of the service-life, rather than the minimum. Most importantly, though, they found that these regulations have a relatively minor effect on service-life of vehicles, especially when compared with the low-bid procurement process. The low-bid procurement process was found to degrade the lifespan and quality of the vehicles obtained in order to accept the lowest possible price. Accepting a low bid should not be prioritized over obtaining high-quality, long-lasting vehicles.<ref>Federal Transit Administration.[[media:Useful_Life_of_Buses.pdf |“Useful Life of Transit Buses and Vans.”]] 2007.</ref> <br />
<br />
==Emissions Regulations==<br />
The SAFETEA-LU transportation legislation specifically names diesel retrofits as a cost-effective method for reducing emissions to meet federal air quality standards, and this method has been studied by the EPA and the Transportation Research Board. New transit vehicle purchases may even be eligible for Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement funds (CMAQ). <ref>Federal Highway Administration. [http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/air_quality/cmaq/policy_and_guidance/2008_guidance/index.cfm “Final Program Guidance: The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Improvement Program under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users.”] 2008.</ref><br />
<br />
California’s air quality goals also affect the parameters that transit providers have to work within when procuring vehicles. The California Air Resources Board requires that fleets reduce their overall emissions, including particulate matter and nitrous oxide from fleet vehicles. The Air Resources Board also has specific requirements for urban buses, separate from an agency’s average fleet emissions.<ref>California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board. [http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/bus/bus.htm “Public Transit Agencies.”] 2011.</ref> Additionally, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has separate, specific requirements for Southern California transit agencies and other government agencies that manage fleets of 15 or more vehicles. It requires that new vehicle purchases must be lower emission vehicles or vehicles that use alternative fuels.<ref>US Department of Energy. Alternative Fuels Data Center. [http://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/laws/ELEC/CA California Incentives and Laws for Acquisition / Fuel Use.“] 2012.</ref> <br />
<br />
==Buy America Requirements==<br />
Agencies receiving funds from the Federal Transit Administration must purchase vehicles that are made up of 60 percent domestic parts and assembled in the United States under the US Department of Transportation’s Buy America requirement. There are three possible reasons for the FTA to waive this requirement: if the requirement is not in the public interest; if the parts or components are not produced in a sufficient enough quantity; and if fulfilling the requirement would add over 25 percent to the cost.<ref> United States Department of Transportation. [http://www.dot.gov/buyamerica/index.html “Buy America.”]</ref> Although waivers are available for this requirement, one study found that many small, rural providers had difficulty fulfilling it when procuring paratransit vehicles.<ref>National Cooperative Highway Research Program. [http://www.trb.org/main/blurbs/158998.aspx “Research Results Digest 319: Buy America Issues Associated with the State DOT Procurement of Paratransit Vehicles Using FTA Funds.”] 2007.</ref> <br />
<br />
=Fuel Considerations=<br />
Emissions regulations aside, the rising cost of traditional fuels makes using alternative fuels more attractive. However, it is important to consider the costs of vehicles and the wide variety of alternative fuels, such as ethanol or electricity. The majority of buses currently run on diesel gas, but natural gas and other alternatives are gaining footing because of their advantages in cost and availability. The benefits of making the switch to an alternative fuel must also be balanced with the possible costs of re-training staff to handle the fuel and retrofitting garages and fuel pumps.<ref>Transit Cooperative Research Program. [http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/165390.aspx "TCRP Report 146: Guidebook for Evaluating Fuel Choices for Post-2010 Bus Procurements."] 2011.</ref><br />
<br />
=Case Studies=<br />
==California Transit Finance Corporation==<br />
[http://www.caltransit.org/node/2160 CTFC] is a non-profit corporation established to assist California Transit Association members with capital finance and vehicle purchases. See more information at [[California Transit Finance Corporation]].<br />
==German Case Study==<br />
Buehler and Pucher examined the elements of a successful increase in transit efficiency in Germany in one case study. They found that purchasing new vehicles, and sharing them among transit agencies, was a part of improving the financial sustainability of Germany's transit system, along with reducing labor costs and [[fare reform]].<ref> Buehler, Ralph and John Pucher. [[media:MakingTransportFinanciallySustainable.pdf|"Making Public Transport Financially Sustainable."]] 2011.</ref><br />
<br />
[[Category:Investment and planning]]<br />
<br />
=References=<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
=Additional Reading=<br />
[https://www.transit.dot.gov/funding/procurement/best-practices-procurement-manual Federal Transit Administration. (2016). “Best Practices Procurement Manual.”] <br />
: The Federal Transit Administration created this manual to assist both grantees and contractors in navigating the process of administering contracts for the purpose of procuring capital investments for transit. The manual includes best practices for meeting federal requirements, as well as for long-term planning for procurement. <br />
<br />
[http://apps.trb.org/cmsfeed/trbnetprojectdisplay.asp?projectid=1036 KFH Group, Inc. et al. (2000). “Analyzing the Costs of Operating Small Transit Vehicles; User’s Guide.” Transit Cooperative Research Program. ] <br />
: Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration, this link includes both the report and the user-friendly Microsoft Excel tool for evaluating costs. The tool asks the user to input baseline information into an Excel form and it produces a report based on the type of vehicle being purchased and how the transit provider intends to use it. <br />
<br />
[http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/165390.aspx Science Applications International Corporation. (2011). "Guidebook for Evaluating Fuel Choices for Post-2010 Bus Procurements." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]<br />
: Because fuel-efficiency and use of alternative fuels have become so important to obtaining funding and to the missions of transit agencies, this guide is especially useful for comparing the many options of alternative fuels. The link also includes the Microsoft Excel-based tool that was developed for evaluating the [[Life-cycle assessment of transit|life-cycle costs]] and emissions of the different types of fuels and buses.<br />
<br />
[http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/156159.aspx Cambridge Systems, Inc. et al. (2005). "Analytical Tools for Asset Management" National Cooperative Highway Research Program.]<br />
: This report and accompanying ISO tool offer a framework for analyzing decisions across modes and goals. Because asset management can have a variety of goals - preservation or increasing efficiency, for example - state DOTs and other public agencies may need more complex decision-making tools. This report explains how to use the two tools developed by the authors - AssetManager NT and AssetManager PT, designed to analyze decisions for short- or long-term. The tools developed and this report address concerns beyond the scope of transit planners’ usual work (like pavement management, for example), but the tool is intended to be useful for a variety of uses within state and local DOTs. <br />
<br />
[http://www.trb.org/main/blurbs/158998.aspx National Cooperative Highway Research Program. (2007). “Research Results Digest 319: Buy America Issues Associated with the State DOT Procurement of Paratransit Vehicles Using FTA Funds.”] <br />
: This report is the result of an investigation into how Buy America requirements affect small, rural transit providers when procuring paratransit vehicles. The report uses a literature review and interviews to make suggestions for changes to the requirements that might make satisfying it easier for a wide range of transit providers. <br />
<br />
[http://www.apta.com/resources/standards/Documents/APTA-PS-TP-WP-001-11.pdf American Public Transportation Association. (2011). “Technology Terms and Conditions.”]<br />
: This white paper specifically addresses best practices for transit providers when procuring information technology. This can range from basic computers to complex software and mobile data collection systems. This guide is especially useful because it describes each common component of a contract for information technology and the benefits, risks, and common approaches associated with each. Although not about vehicle procurement, this topic is relevant as transit providers rely on intelligent transportation systems to improve service.</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Cost_effective_vehicle_purchases&diff=4236Cost effective vehicle purchases2017-05-30T02:51:21Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:MetroHybrid.jpg|right|thumb|500px|A hybrid Los Angeles Metro bus in 2009. Photo by Mike Bottone, via Flickr user Metro Transportation Library and Archive.]]<br />
=Introduction=<br />
The decision to purchase a vehicle requires careful consideration of up-front vehicle acquistion costs, and later vehicle operations and maintenance costs. With the increase in the costs of fuel and maintenance labor, fuel efficient, reliable vehicles are now more valuable than in the past. Cost-effective vehicle procurement is an important part of maintaining a reliable fleet that can run efficiently and for long hours. The problem of ‘peaking’ adds to these problems. Peaking refers to the high number of vehicles needed to accommodate the high numbers of passengers that converge on the system during morning and evening rush hours. This means that transit systems have to obtain and maintain more vehicles than are needed during off-peak hours. <br />
<br />
State and local governments are eligible to receive funds for capital costs, like vehicles, from the federal Department of Transportation through several programs, like the Surface Transportation Program, the Bus and Bus Facilities Program, and others, though they must follow certain guidelines and meet eligibility requirements<ref>[http://www.dot.gov/livability/grants-programs.html “Livability Grants and Programs.” US Department of Transportation.]</ref>. This is important to note because the availability of capital funding is the best predictor of the age at which transit agencies retire vehicles.<ref>Federal Transit Administration.[[media:Useful_Life_of_Buses.pdf |“Useful Life of Transit Buses and Vans.”]] 2007.</ref> Another important resource for California's transit providers is the California Transit Association. The Association's mission is to advocate for public transit and share resources, including research and surveys, among member organizations.<ref>California Transit Association.[http://www.caltransit.org/node/58 "Strategic Plan."] 2012.</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
=Regulations Affecting Procurement=<br />
One study by the Federal Transit Administration found that several federal and state policies and regulations affect procurement and service-life length. For example, the Americans with Disabilities Act has had an effect on the technology sought in vehicles, including on-board annunciators and reliable lifts. The FTA’s own minimum requirements for the span of time a vehicle must be in service before it can be retired without a penalty was also found to alter expectations for service-life of vehicles among practitioners - its 12-year minimum for 40-foot buses became the expectation of the service-life, rather than the minimum. Most importantly, though, they found that these regulations have a relatively minor effect on service-life of vehicles, especially when compared with the low-bid procurement process. The low-bid procurement process was found to degrade the lifespan and quality of the vehicles obtained in order to accept the lowest possible price. Accepting a low bid should not be prioritized over obtaining high-quality, long-lasting vehicles.<ref>Federal Transit Administration.[[media:Useful_Life_of_Buses.pdf |“Useful Life of Transit Buses and Vans.”]] 2007.</ref> <br />
<br />
==Emissions Regulations==<br />
The SAFETEA-LU transportation legislation specifically names diesel retrofits as a cost-effective method for reducing emissions to meet federal air quality standards, and this method has been studied by the EPA and the Transportation Research Board. New transit vehicle purchases may even be eligible for Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement funds (CMAQ). <ref>Federal Highway Administration. [http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/air_quality/cmaq/policy_and_guidance/2008_guidance/index.cfm “Final Program Guidance: The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Improvement Program under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users.”] 2008.</ref><br />
<br />
California’s air quality goals also affect the parameters that transit providers have to work within when procuring vehicles. The California Air Resources Board requires that fleets reduce their overall emissions, including particulate matter and nitrous oxide from fleet vehicles. The Air Resources Board also has specific requirements for urban buses, separate from an agency’s average fleet emissions.<ref>California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board. [http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/bus/bus.htm “Public Transit Agencies.”] 2011.</ref> Additionally, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has separate, specific requirements for Southern California transit agencies and other government agencies that manage fleets of 15 or more vehicles. It requires that new vehicle purchases must be lower emission vehicles or vehicles that use alternative fuels.<ref>US Department of Energy. Alternative Fuels Data Center. [http://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/laws/ELEC/CA California Incentives and Laws for Acquisition / Fuel Use.“] 2012.</ref> <br />
<br />
==Buy America Requirements==<br />
Agencies receiving funds from the Federal Transit Administration must purchase vehicles that are made up of 60 percent domestic parts and assembled in the United States under the US Department of Transportation’s Buy America requirement. There are three possible reasons for the FTA to waive this requirement: if the requirement is not in the public interest; if the parts or components are not produced in a sufficient enough quantity; and if fulfilling the requirement would add over 25 percent to the cost.<ref> United States Department of Transportation. [http://www.dot.gov/buyamerica/index.html “Buy America.”]</ref> Although waivers are available for this requirement, one study found that many small, rural providers had difficulty fulfilling it when procuring paratransit vehicles.<ref>National Cooperative Highway Research Program. [http://www.trb.org/main/blurbs/158998.aspx “Research Results Digest 319: Buy America Issues Associated with the State DOT Procurement of Paratransit Vehicles Using FTA Funds.”] 2007.</ref> <br />
<br />
=Fuel Considerations=<br />
Emissions regulations aside, the rising cost of traditional fuels makes using alternative fuels more attractive. However, it is important to consider the costs of vehicles and the wide variety of alternative fuels, such as ethanol or electricity. The majority of buses currently run on diesel gas, but natural gas and other alternatives are gaining footing because of their advantages in cost and availability. The benefits of making the switch to an alternative fuel must also be balanced with the possible costs of re-training staff to handle the fuel and retrofitting garages and fuel pumps.<ref>Transit Cooperative Research Program. [http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/165390.aspx "TCRP Report 146: Guidebook for Evaluating Fuel Choices for Post-2010 Bus Procurements."] 2011.</ref><br />
<br />
=Case Studies=<br />
==California Transit Finance Corporation==<br />
[http://www.caltransit.org/node/2160 CTFC] is a non-profit corporation established to assist California Transit Association members with capital finance and vehicle purchases. See more information at [[California Transit Finance Corporation]].<br />
==German Case Study==<br />
Buehler and Pucher examined the elements of a successful increase in transit efficiency in Germany in one case study. They found that purchasing new vehicles, and sharing them among transit agencies, was a part of improving the financial sustainability of Germany's transit system, along with reducing labor costs and [[fare reform]].<ref> Buehler, Ralph and John Pucher. [[media:MakingTransportFinanciallySustainable.pdf|"Making Public Transport Financially Sustainable."]] 2011.</ref><br />
<br />
[[Category:Investment and planning]]<br />
<br />
=References=<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
=Additional Reading=<br />
United States Department of Transportation. Federal Transit Administration. [http://www.fta.dot.gov/grants/13054_6037.html “Best Practices Procurement Manual.”] 2003.<br />
: The Federal Transit Administration created this manual to assist both grantees and contractors in navigating the process of administering contracts for the purpose of procuring capital investments for transit. The manual includes best practices for meeting federal requirements, as well as for long-term planning for procurement. <br />
<br />
<br />
Transit Cooperative Research Program. [http://apps.trb.org/cmsfeed/trbnetprojectdisplay.asp?projectid=1036 “TCRP Report 61: Analyzing the Costs of Operating Small Transit Vehicles; User’s Guide.”] 2000. <br />
: Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration, this link includes both the report and the user-friendly Microsoft Excel tool for evaluating costs. The tool asks the user to input baseline information into an Excel form and it produces a report based on the type of vehicle being purchased and how the transit provider intends to use it. <br />
<br />
<br />
Transit Cooperative Research Program. [http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/165390.aspx "TCRP Report 146: Guidebook for Evaluating Fuel Choices for Post-2010 Bus Procurements."] 2011.<br />
: Because fuel-efficiency and use of alternative fuels have become so important to obtaining funding and to the missions of transit agencies, this guide is especially useful for comparing the many options of alternative fuels. The link also includes the Microsoft Excel-based tool that was developed for evaluating the [[Life-cycle assessment of transit|life-cycle costs]] and emissions of the different types of fuels and buses.<br />
<br />
<br />
National Cooperative Highway Research Program. Transportation Research Board. [http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/156159.aspx “NCHRP Report 545: Analytical Tools for Asset Management.”] 2005.<br />
: This report and accompanying ISO tool offer a framework for analyzing decisions across modes and goals. Because asset management can have a variety of goals - preservation or increasing efficiency, for example - state DOTs and other public agencies may need more complex decision-making tools. This report explains how to use the two tools developed by the authors - AssetManager NT and AssetManager PT, designed to analyze decisions for short- or long-term. The tools developed and this report address concerns beyond the scope of transit planners’ usual work (like pavement management, for example), but the tool is intended to be useful for a variety of uses within state and local DOTs. <br />
<br />
<br />
National Cooperative Highway Research Program. [http://www.trb.org/main/blurbs/158998.aspx “Research Results Digest 319: Buy America Issues Associated with the State DOT Procurement of Paratransit Vehicles Using FTA Funds.”] 2007.<br />
: This report is the result of an investigation into how Buy America requirements affect small, rural transit providers when procuring paratransit vehicles. The report uses a literature review and interviews to make suggestions for changes to the requirements that might make satisfying it easier for a wide range of transit providers. <br />
<br />
<br />
American Public Transportation Association Standards Development Program. [http://www.aptastandards.com/Documents/PublishedStandards/Procurement/tabid/338/language/en-US/Default.aspx “Technology Terms and Conditions White Paper.”] 2011.<br />
: This white paper specifically addresses best practices for transit providers when procuring information technology. This can range from basic computers to complex software and mobile data collection systems. This guide is especially useful because it describes each common component of a contract for information technology and the benefits, risks, and common approaches associated with each. Although not about vehicle procurement, this topic is relevant as transit providers rely on intelligent transportation systems to improve service.</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Bicycle_connections&diff=4235Bicycle connections2017-05-30T02:49:42Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:Orange Line station.jpg|thumb|right|600px| The Metro Los Angeles Orange Line BRT features convenient connections for cyclists, including an adjacent bike path and bike lockers at the stations. Source: [https://www.metro.net/ Metro]]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Almost half of Americans live within a quarter mile of a transit stop and bicycling offers the potential to serve as a first- and last-mile connector to and from transit, and offers many benefits: riders occupy less road space than private autos, emit no harmful pollutants, users benefit from physical activity, and bicycles require significantly less storage space (parking) than a car.<ref>[http://www.transweb.sjsu.edu/project/2825.html Krizek, K. J., Stonebraker, E., & Tribbey, S. (2011). "Bicycling Access and Egress to Transit: Informing the Possibilities." Mineta Transportation Institute.]</ref> Allowing bicyclists to use the transit network also allows them to avoid riding uncomfortable environments, such as riding in tunnels, in bad weather, in highly congested areas, or places where there is little bicycle infrastructure.<ref name="bicycles">[http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/156477.aspx Schneider, R. (2005). "Integration of Bicycles and Transit." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]</ref> Bicycles can extend the geographic reach of transit services, enhancing the usefulness of the transit network. Similarly, high quality [[pedestrian connections]] provide safe, secure and comfortable access to the transit network. <br />
<br />
Transit agencies often have little control over the networks of infrastructure leading to stations and stops. However, there are some ways that transit agencies can influence bicycle access to transit by providing bicycle parking at stations and allowing passengers to transport their bicycles on train cars or bus-mounted bike racks. Indirectly, transportation agencies can provide funding to municipalities for building bicycle infrastructure (such as bike lanes and other street treatments). Despite the ability to allocate funding, however, transit agencies often lack direct control over the design, engineering, placement, and prioritization of bicycle and pedestrian facilities that connect to stations and stops. Transit agencies may also support changes to infrastructure through financial and technical assistance in creating bicycle and pedestrian master plans.<br />
<br />
==Bicycles and Buses==<br />
Allowing bicycles to be carried on board transit vehicles can be very cost-effective. In fact, according to one TCRP Synthesis, “Providing bicycle racks on a bus or vanpool vehicle typically costs between $500 and $1,000, which represents a small fraction of the cost of the entire vehicle.” Racks can be mounted on the front or the back of buses. However, rear-mounted bicycle racks can pose some problems for maintenance and safety. Agencies have found that rear-mounted racks can limit access to the bus’ engine and limiting bicyclists’ visibility to bus drivers as they mount their bicycles.<ref name="bicycles" /> <br />
In terms of bicycle storage, racks and lockers at bus stops and stations can be affordable and represents a tiny fraction of the cost of providing automobile parking.<ref name="bicycles" /> Providing bike storage facilities on public sidewalks may involve other challenges, such as ensuring there is enough space for them and that they do not interfere with other uses of those sidewalks.<br />
<br />
==Bicycles and Rail Transit==<br />
The primary concern when allowing bicycles on board light rail is storage: bikes may be stored on racks or hooks, in a single car, or space may be allocated for bicycles and their owners in each car.<ref name="bicycles" /><br />
<br />
==Other Considerations==<br />
Some bus drivers and maintenance workers unions have expressed concerns that adding bicycle racks to buses or other vehicles increases drivers’ workloads and may disagree with their addition. New features that allow also transit to accommodate bicyclists may also require some training of drivers and other transit workers.<ref name="bicycles" /> Finally, marketing and education campaigns are often necessary to inform passengers that bicycle accommodations are available and how to use them. <br />
<br />
==Case Study: Long Beach, California==<br />
Long Beach, California has, over the last several years, worked hard to become a bike-friendly city. By improving bike facilities, including bike parking near transit stations, creating separated bikeways, and supporting a safe routes to school program, the city has gained notoriety as a great place to bike. The City has also worked with business owners and the County Department of Public Health to create “bike-friendly business districts,” which include ample bike parking (in “bike corrals”) and cross-promotions with small businesses. Importantly, the City has also teamed up with the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority, with funding from the California Department of Transportation, to make improvements around the Metro Blue Line’s rail stations. The goal of the Blue Line Bike and Pedestrian Access Plan is to enhance safety for bicyclists and pedestrians within a half mile of all Blue Line stations. For more information about Long Beach and its bicycle planning, see [http://www.bikelongbeach.org BikeLongBeach.org].<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
[http://www.transweb.sjsu.edu/project/2825.html Krizek, K. J., Stonebraker, E., & Tribbey, S. (2011). "Bicycling Access and Egress to Transit: Informing the Possibilities." Mineta Transportation Institute.]<br />
: The authors explore the most cost-effective ways to encourage integration between bicycling and transit. Using an index to analyze a variety of possible methods for integration, they find that allowing riders to bring their bikes on board transit was the most cost-effective way to accomplish this goal. This report includes a brief description of the success that Caltrain had in integrating service for bicyclists in Santa Clara County, California into its operations. <br />
<br />
[http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/156477.aspx Schneider, R. (2005). "Integration of Bicycles and Transit." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]<br />
: This synthesis explains the benefits, costs, and technical specifications associated with making bicycle connections work together with public transit. It includes results from a survey and a discussion about how bicycles can be integrated with a wide variety of different transit's forms, including bus, rail, and even ferries and mountain transit systems. <br />
<br />
[http://calbike.org/ California Bicycle Coalition.]<br />
: The California Bicycle Coalition advocates for the interests of bicyclists in California. Its website offers policy resources, guidance for creating bikeways, and links to local bicycle advocacy groups. The group also often sponsors legislation to promote bicycling by making it safer. The site also includes a thorough section on [[complete streets]].<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Investment and planning]]<br />
[[Category:Transit and Public Health]]<br />
[[Category:First and Last Mile]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Human_resources&diff=4234Human resources2017-05-30T02:46:43Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{template:stub}}<br />
[[File:Transport workers union.png|thumbnail|right|Transport Workers Union of America Logo Source: www.nhlabornews.com]]<br />
[[Category:Managing transit]]<br />
<br />
<br />
==Productivity==<br />
Labor productivity in transportation service has declined in recent decades. Unions have grown in membership and influence and have often won workers such contract elements as the eight-hour work day. As an example, the eight-hour work day brings workers stable income and often benefits associated with full-time employment. Transit operation, however, does not lend its self well to eight-hour work shifts. Because transit demand peaks in the morning and afternoon commute times, more workers are needed during these periods than in the middle of the workday. Without part time or flexible shift workers, transit agencies are forced to staff full-time vehicle operators to their highest peak demand, losing many hours of productivity when these same workers are idle midday.<br />
<br />
===Strategies for increasing labor productivity===<br />
Several strategies exist for increasing labor productivity. Two of the most common strategies are [[contracting transit operations]] and [[altering labor regulations]].<br />
<br />
=== When to use contracted labor ===<br />
Though contracting service often leads to losses to labor, such as a decline in wages and benefits, contracting service can be beneficial to transit agencies in some cases. When significantly different labor laws exist for directly hired versus contract workers, transit agencies may benefit by contracting with more workers in order to achieve more schedule flexibility. Additionally, when transit agencies are expanding service or undergoing other temporary or experimental service increases, contract labor offers a good alternative to directly hired workers.</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Alternative_fuel_vehicles&diff=4232Alternative fuel vehicles2017-05-23T21:47:48Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:Soybeanbus.jpg|thumb|500px|Soybeans have been used to make biodiesel. Source: [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Soybeanbus.jpg US Department of Energy]]<br />
== Introduction ==<br />
Public transit is often called upon as a measure to reduce environmental impacts of travel, both by consolidating travelers from single-occupant vehicles into one environmentally-efficient vehicle, and by using modern technology for cleaner propulsion. The American Public Transportation Association (APTA) estimated that by 2011, about 35% of the transit fleet in America was using alternative fuels or hybrid technologies.<ref>[http://www.apta.com/mediacenter/pressreleases/2013/Pages/130422_Earth-Day.aspx Miller, V. (2013). "More than 35% of U.S. Public Transit Buses Use Alternative Fuels or Hybrid Technology." American Public Transportation Association]</ref> Many technologies have been adapted for bus and rail transit, including electricity and battery, natural gas, and hydrogen. <br />
<br />
== Propulsion Technologies ==<br />
=== Standard and Bio-fuels: Gasoline and Diesel ===<br />
Gasoline and diesel remain the most common fuels for all vehicles. Federal regulations attempting to reduce the impact of these fossil fuels on the environment have mandated supply of ultra-low sulfur diesel and the use of ethanol (also known as E85) in gasoline.<ref>[http://www.epa.gov/ncea/biofuels/basicinfo.htm US Environmental Protection Administration. "Biofuels and the Environment: Basic Information."]</ref> Biodiesel fuel blends can typically be used in any modern diesel engine, making an attractive opportunity for agencies to use alternative fuels while avoiding the high cost associated with other technologies such as hybrid-drive buses. However, in a 2011 report to Congress, the EPA warned that increased production of biomass, especially corn, to blend with fuel and decrease dependence on fossil fuels may not have overall positive effects on the environment.<ref>[https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/biofuels/recordisplay.cfm?deid=235881 National Center for Environmental Assessment. (2011). "Biofuels and the Environment: First Triennial Report to Congress." US Environmental Protection Agency.]</ref><br />
<br />
==== Diesel Environmental Concerns ====<br />
Although diesel engines are particularly efficient and one of the most common combustion-engine choices for buses and other commercial vehicles, they also cause significant harm to the environment in the form of '''particulate matter''' (PM) from engine exhaust. Research suggests that long-term exposure to diesel exhaust is linked to increases in asthma in children, exacerbation of allergies, and possibly premature death.<ref>[https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/300055PV.TXT?ZyActionD=ZyDocument&Client=EPA&Index=1986+Thru+1990&Docs=&Query=&Time=&EndTime=&SearchMethod=1&TocRestrict=n&Toc=&TocEntry=&QField=&QFieldYear=&QFieldMonth=&QFieldDay=&IntQFieldOp=0&ExtQFieldOp=0&XmlQuery=&File=D%3A%5Czyfiles%5CIndex%20Data%5C86thru90%5CTxt%5C00000006%5C300055PV.txt&User=ANONYMOUS&Password=anonymous&SortMethod=h%7C-&MaximumDocuments=1&FuzzyDegree=0&ImageQuality=r75g8/r75g8/x150y150g16/i425&Display=hpfr&DefSeekPage=x&SearchBack=ZyActionL&Back=ZyActionS&BackDesc=Results%20page&MaximumPages=1&ZyEntry=1&SeekPage=x&ZyPURL National Center for Environmental Assessment. (2002). "Health Assessment Document for Diesel Engine Exhaust." Environmental Protection Agency.]</ref> In response to research conducted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and others in the early 2000s, new regulations were placed into effect for diesel engines requiring fitting of diesel particulate filters (DPF). However, transit agencies are subject to different regulations than other buses and trucks<ref>[http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/bus/ub/ubfactsheet.pdf CARB. "Fact Sheet: Fleet Rule for Transit Agencies Urban Bus Requirements."]</ref>, which went into effect earlier than the recent standards for retrofitting DPF to trucks operating in California.<ref>[http://www.ttnews.com/articles/printopt.aspx?storyid=32092 Knee, R. (2013). "DPF Retrofits Growing Due to California Rule." Transport Topics.]</ref><br />
<br />
Regulations pertaining to transit agencies (defined as "urban bus") are found in title 13 of the California Administrative Code (13 CCR § 2020 - 2023.4), [http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/bus/sections2020-2023.4.pdf provided here by CARB]. <br />
<br />
==== Engine Manufacturers ====<br />
Practically all bus manufacturing firms offer diesel options, and cutaway buses are commonly available in either gasoline or diesel configurations. Cummins is an example of an engine manufacturer for transit buses that certifies their products for use with biodiesel fuel.<ref>[http://cumminsengines.com/biodiesel-faq Cummins. "Biodiesel FAQ."]</ref><br />
<br />
=== Natural Gases ===<br />
Natural gas is used as a fuel in both liquid (LNG) and compressed-gas forms (CNG). Santa Monica, California's Big Blue Bus includes a fleet of buses powered by LNG. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA, or Metro) operates the country's largest fleet of CNG buses.<br />
<br />
==== Bus Manufacturers with Natural Gas Offerings ====<br />
The Gillig Corporation introduced a CNG option for their buses in 2011. New Flyer and subsidiary NABI provide CNG vehicles.<br />
<br />
=== Propane ===<br />
Liquid Propane Gas (LPG) should not be confused with LNG, above. <br />
<br />
=== Electric ===<br />
Electric power for buses is one of the oldest propulsion technologies, adapted from electric streetcars. Buses powered by overhead wires are commonly called "trolley-buses" and still operate today in some cities such as Seattle, San Francisco, Dayton, Boston, and Philadelphia. Buses can also be powered by electric battery without external power such as overhead wires, but the range of these vehicles tends to be limited. San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) and King County Metro in Seattle jointly purchased new electric trolley-buses from New Flyer to replace aging fleets.<ref>[http://www.metro-magazine.com/news/story/2013/06/king-county-metro-purchase-all-electric-new-flyers.aspx Metro Magazine. (2013). "King County Metro purchase all-electric New Flyers."]</ref> <br />
<br />
The most common application of electric power for buses today is the hybrid-electric. SFMTA and Long Beach Transit operate fleets of hybrid-electric buses.<ref>[http://sfmta.com/vi/about-sfmta/our-history-and-fleet/sfmta-fleet/muni-hybrid-buses SFMTA. "MUNI Hybrid Buses."]</ref>. The Long Beach buses were purchased from New Flyer in 2005 for a published cost of $550,000 per vehicle.<ref>[http://lbtransit.com/about/pdf/epower-fact-sheet.pdf Long Beach Transit. "Hybrid E-Power Bus Fact Sheet."]</ref><ref>[http://www.lbtransit.com/About/Environment.aspx Long Beach Transit. "Environmental Issues."]</ref> Gillig and New Flyer both offer hybrid-electric bus options. <br />
<br />
In 2017, the Los Angeles Department of Transportation introduced the first all-electric bus in its DASH system.<ref>[http://la.streetsblog.org/2017/01/12/electric-dash-buses-to-begin-service-in-dtla-next-week/ Linton, J. (2017). "Electric DASH Buses To Begin Service In DTLA Next Week." Streetsblog Los Angeles.]</ref><br />
<br />
=== Hydrogen Fuel Cell ===<br />
Hydrogen fuel cells has been researched as a power source for buses using Federal funding. AC Transit of California has participated in a hydrogen fuel cell bus testing program since 2000 using Van Hool buses and a power plant developed by UTC Power of Connecticut. In 2013, UTC Power was sold to ClearEdge Power, and the future of the fuel cell bus program is unknown.<ref>[http://www.hartfordbusiness.com/article/20130212/NEWS01/130219966/utc-power-sold-to-oregon-fuel-cell-firm Kane, B. (2013). "UTC Power sold to Oregon fuel cell firm." Hartford Business Journal.]</ref><br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
[[Category:Transit's Low-Carbon Role]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Alternative_fuel_vehicles&diff=4226Alternative fuel vehicles2017-05-18T03:34:30Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:Soybeanbus.jpg|thumb|500px|Soybeans have been used to make biodiesel. Source: [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Soybeanbus.jpg US Department of Energy]]<br />
== Introduction ==<br />
Public transit is often called upon as a measure to reduce environmental impacts of travel, both by consolidating travelers from single-occupant vehicles into one environmentally-efficient vehicle, and by using modern technology for cleaner propulsion. The American Public Transportation Association (APTA) estimated that by 2011, about 35% of the transit fleet in America was using alternative fuels or hybrid technologies.<ref>[http://www.apta.com/mediacenter/pressreleases/2013/Pages/130422_Earth-Day.aspx Miller, V. (2013). "More than 35% of U.S. Public Transit Buses Use Alternative Fuels or Hybrid Technology." American Public Transportation Association]</ref> Many technologies have been adapted for bus and rail transit, including electricity and battery, natural gas, and hydrogen. <br />
<br />
== Propulsion Technologies ==<br />
=== Standard and Bio-fuels: Gasoline and Diesel ===<br />
Gasoline and diesel remain the most common fuels for all vehicles. Federal regulations attempting to reduce the impact of these fossil fuels on the environment have mandated supply of ultra-low sulfur diesel and the use of ethanol (also known as E85) in gasoline.<ref>[http://www.epa.gov/ncea/biofuels/basicinfo.htm US Environmental Protection Administration. "Biofuels and the Environment: Basic Information."]</ref> Biodiesel fuel blends can typically be used in any modern diesel engine, making an attractive opportunity for agencies to use alternative fuels while avoiding the high cost associated with other technologies such as hybrid-drive buses. However, in a 2011 report to Congress, the EPA warned that increased production of biomass, especially corn, to blend with fuel and decrease dependence on fossil fuels may not have overall positive effects on the environment.<ref>US EPA. "Biofuels and the Environment: First Triennial Report to Congress". December 2011.</ref><br />
<br />
==== Diesel Environmental Concerns ====<br />
Although diesel engines are particularly efficient and one of the most common combustion-engine choices for buses and other commercial vehicles, they also cause significant harm to the environment in the form of '''particulate matter''' (PM) from engine exhaust. Research suggests that long-term exposure to diesel exhaust is linked to increases in asthma in children, exacerbation of allergies, and possibly premature death <ref>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2002) Health assessment document for diesel engine exhaust. Prepared by the National Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC, for the Office of Transportation and Air Quality; EPA/600/8-90/057F. Available from: National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA; PB2002-107661, and http://www.epa.gov/ncea.</ref>. In response to research conducted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and others in the early 2000s, new regulations were placed into effect for diesel engines requiring fitting of diesel particulate filters (DPF). However, transit agencies are subject to different regulations than other buses and trucks<ref>CARB. "Fact Sheet: Fleet Rule for Transit Agencies Urban Bus Requirements". http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/bus/ub/ubfactsheet.pdf</ref>, which went into effect earlier than the recent standards for retrofitting DPF to trucks operating in California <ref> Transport Topics. "DPF Retrofits Growing Due to California Rule". 27 May 2013. http://www.ttnews.com/articles/printopt.aspx?storyid=32092</ref>.<br />
<br />
Regulations pertaining to transit agencies (defined as "urban bus") are found in title 13 of the California Administrative Code (13 CCR § 2020 - 2023.4), [http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/bus/sections2020-2023.4.pdf provided here by CARB]. <br />
<br />
==== Engine Manufacturers ====<br />
Practically all bus manufacturing firms offer diesel options, and cutaway buses are commonly available in either gasoline or diesel configurations. Cummins is an example of an engine manufacturer for transit buses that certifies their products for use with biodiesel fuel.<ref>Cummins. Website "Biodiesel Frequently Asked Questions". http://cumminsengines.com/biodiesel-faq. Accessed 15 April 2014.</ref><br />
<br />
=== Natural Gases ===<br />
Natural gas is used as a fuel in both liquid (LNG) and compressed-gas forms (CNG). Santa Monica, California's Big Blue Bus includes a fleet of buses powered by LNG. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA, or Metro) operates the country's largest fleet of CNG buses.<br />
<br />
==== Bus Manufacturers with Natural Gas Offerings ====<br />
The Gillig Corporation introduced a CNG option for their buses in 2011. New Flyer and subsidiary NABI provide CNG vehicles.<br />
<br />
=== Propane ===<br />
Liquid Propane Gas (LPG) should not be confused with LNG, above. <br />
<br />
=== Electric ===<br />
Electric power for buses is one of the oldest propulsion technologies, adapted from electric streetcars. Buses powered by overhead wires are commonly called "trolley-buses" and still operate today in some cities such as Seattle, San Francisco, Dayton, Boston, and Philadelphia. Buses can also be powered by electric battery without external power such as overhead wires, but the range of these vehicles tends to be limited. San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) and King County Metro in Seattle jointly purchased new electric trolley-buses from New Flyer to replace aging fleets.<ref>[http://www.metro-magazine.com/news/story/2013/06/king-county-metro-purchase-all-electric-new-flyers.aspx Metro Magazine. (2013). "King County Metro purchase all-electric New Flyers."]</ref> <br />
<br />
The most common application of electric power for buses today is the hybrid-electric. SFMTA and Long Beach Transit operate fleets of hybrid-electric buses.<ref>[http://sfmta.com/vi/about-sfmta/our-history-and-fleet/sfmta-fleet/muni-hybrid-buses SFMTA. "MUNI Hybrid Buses."]</ref>. The Long Beach buses were purchased from New Flyer in 2005 for a published cost of $550,000 per vehicle.<ref>[http://lbtransit.com/about/pdf/epower-fact-sheet.pdf Long Beach Transit. "Hybrid E-Power Bus Fact Sheet."]</ref><ref>[http://www.lbtransit.com/About/Environment.aspx Long Beach Transit. "Environmental Issues."]</ref> Gillig and New Flyer both offer hybrid-electric bus options. <br />
<br />
LACMTA, in partnership with the city and county of Los Angeles and the South Coast Air Quality Management District , form the [http://www.metro.net/projects/atvc/ Advanced Transit Vehicle Consortium (ATVC)]. Both LACMTA and Los Angeles Department of Transportation are testing all-electric buses supplied by manufacturer [http://www.byd.com/news/news-166.html BYD] <ref>LADOT. "LADOT to Test Electric Buses on Busy Downtown Los Angeles DASH". Press release 19 February 2014. http://ladot.lacity.org/stellent/groups/Departments/@LADOT_Contributor/documents/Contributor_Web_Content/LACITYP_027870.pdf</ref>.<br />
<br />
=== Hydrogen Fuel Cell ===<br />
Hydrogen fuel cells has been researched as a power source for buses using Federal funding <ref>http://www.fta.dot.gov/14617_15670.html</ref>. AC Transit of California has participated in a hydrogen fuel cell bus testing program since 2000 using Van Hool buses and a power plant developed by UTC Power of Connecticut. In 2013, UTC Power was sold to ClearEdge Power, and the future of the fuel cell bus program is unknown.<ref>Kane, Brad. Hartford Business Journal. "UTC Power sold to Oregon fuel cell firm". http://www.hartfordbusiness.com/article/20130212/NEWS01/130219966/utc-power-sold-to-oregon-fuel-cell-firm. February 2013. Accessed 15 April 2014.</ref><br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
[[Category:Transit's Low-Carbon Role]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Park-and-rides&diff=4225Park-and-rides2017-05-18T02:58:24Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:ParkingStructure.jpg|right|thumb|600px|This parking structure serves a Los Angeles Metro Gold Line station. Photo by Flickr user LA Wad.]] <br />
==Introduction==<br />
Many transit agencies choose to provide parking lots for passengers to use when they drive to transit stops or stations. These park-and-rides can range from small surface lots to large aboveground (or in some cases undergound) structures. Park-and-ride lots provide an alternative to driving the entire length of a commute, which serves to reduce vehicle miles traveled and the associated safety risks and pollution. Park-and-rides can reduce congestion and parking demand in central business districts and make transit more effective in low-density areas with few people living within walking distance of stations. However, park-and-rides require a lot of land and are expensive to build and maintain. It can sometimes be difficult to measure the “success” of park-and-ride lots because parking utilization is not necessarily indicative of whether it attracts or supports transit ridership.<ref name="tcrp95">[http://www.trb.org/main/blurbs/154973.aspx Turnbull, K. F. et al. (2004). “Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes Handbook, Third Edition: Chapter 3, Park-and-Ride/Pool.” Transportation Cooperative Research Program.]</ref> The Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) has developed a [http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/175966.aspx guidebook] to help transit agencies through the process of planning, implementing, and operating park-and-ride programs.<br />
<br />
==Planning==<br />
Park-and-rides are major capital investments often slated to last 40 year; as such, they should not be taken lightly. An agency looking to implement park-and-rides should have both a long-term plan and site-specific plans to ensure that facilities are built or leased as part of a larger vision.<br />
<br />
===Local Contexts===<br />
Park-and-rides are heavily dependent upon local land use and transit characteristics. Park-and-ride facilities are most practical where land is available and cheap; using eminent domain to create parking is likely to elicit community opposition, and in expensive areas park-and-rides might not be good investments. In addition, park-and-rides should be concentrated around high-service transit lines, which are most likely to attract drivers.<br />
<br />
===Long-Range Planning===<br />
Some agencies create specific park-and-ride master plans, while others incorporate the facilities into broader plans. Either way, long-range planning is essential for determining the best places for the facilities. Long-range transportation plans are typically created by regional planning organizations, so transit agencies need to work closely with these groups. Highlighting potential reductions in congestion and emissions can win support for park-and-rides at the regional level.<br />
<br />
===Site Planning===<br />
Site plans help formalize the planning process for individual park-and-ride facilities. These plans can include principles on location of facilities. Park-and-rides should be built at areas highly accessible by transit and car, far from city center, and before motorists would encounter congestion or tolls. Site plans also define the size of a facility. Size can be based both on estimated demand and a transit agency’s goals; some agencies want to maximize lot size to encourage transit ridership, while others want to balance ridership targets with the desire to not add additional car trips. <br />
<br />
==Implementation==<br />
Once the decision to incorporate park-and-rides into agency strategy is made, it is necessary to address implementation. Park-and-rides need to be safe, convenient, and efficient in order to be a worthwhile investment. A variety of considerations go into park-and-ride implementation, such as whether to build or lease and how to design the facility.<br />
<br />
===Build vs. Lease===<br />
In an effort to implement a park-and-ride strategy quickly and cheaply, some agencies choose to lease existing lots rather than build new ones. Spaced can be leased from other public organizations, private entities such as malls or theaters, or non-profits like churches. While leasing is an attractive short-term option, it has drawbacks. Lease agreements can be terminated with little notice, leaving agencies scrambling to maintain parking supply that customers have grown to rely on. In addition, constructing a new facility allows the agency to design it exactly to its specifications.<br />
<br />
===Design===<br />
There are a vast number of factors to keep in mind when designing a park-and-ride. The most obvious issue is what kind of parking it required - beyond standard car spaces, agencies must provide ADA-accessible parking and should consider parking for carpool and carshare vehicles, bicycles, and pick-up/drop-off. It is also necessary to consider the type of facility to provide. Surface lots are cheapest to construct, particularly in low-density areas with cheap land. As land values rise, it may make sense to consider parking structures. If land is worth more than $100 per square foot, underground parking may be cost effective.<br />
<br />
==Operation==<br />
It is of course not enough to simply build or lease a park-and-ride; the facility needs an ongoing commitment to operations. <br />
<br />
===Legal Issues===<br />
To maintain order at its park-and-rides, an agency must set clear rules for behavior and display them prominently at the facilities. Many of these rules will concern who can park in the facilities and for how long. Enforcement can be handled by local police, transit agency police, or other agency staff.<br />
<br />
Park-and-rides come with significant insurance liabilities that must be considered during planning. Insurance costs should be factored into the operating budget and all insurance claims must be carefully tracked.<br />
<br />
===Routine Maintenance===<br />
While individual needs will vary, most park-and-ride facilities will have a variety of maintenance requirements, including lighting and electrical systems, cleaning and trash removal, and general facility upkeep. Facilities with extra amenities like customer waiting areas, employee break rooms, or restrooms will have additional maintenance needs. <br />
<br />
===Security===<br />
Security is necessarily to protect customers, staff, and property. At the lowest level, CCTV can be used to monitor facilities. Roaming security guards traveling between sites can provide additional protection. In extreme cases a facility could have a dedicated on-site security officer, but it is rare for park-and-rides to have security risks great enough to justify this. In addition to responsive security, proactive security checks should be conducted periodically to identify risks such as broken lights or obstructed security cameras.<br />
<br />
===In-House vs. Contracting===<br />
Park-and-ride operations can be handled in house, contracted out, or some done in combination. Running operations in-house offers more control but requires more intensive staffing. When decided how to manage operations, an agency should project the cost of each option while keeping in mind current resources. One common solution is to manage daily operations such as customer service, parking fee collection, and security in-house while outsourcing less frequent operations such as pavement repair and landscaping. Every agency has different resources and needs and should make an individualized decision about operations.<br />
<br />
===Performance Metrics===<br />
Like all transit agency ventures, park-and-rides should be constantly evaluated using concrete performance metrics. Three main metrics are used to measure park-and-ride performance:<br />
* '''Utilization rate''' - The utilization rate is the percentage of available parking spaces occupied at a certain time. The most robust counts are conducted constantly using automatic counters, but annual or semiannual one-day counts can be enough to give the agency a rough idea of whether or not capacity matches demand.<br />
* '''Access mode share''' - If an agency is concerned with reducing the amount of driving alone, then it should measure access mode share, which captures the percentage of riders arriving at a park-and-ride by modes such as driving alone, carpooling, being dropped off, walking, and biking.<br />
* '''Daily cost per space''' - In order to measure the resource needs of a facility and manage operations and expansions, transit agencies need a clear picture of cost per space. This number is generally calculated by dividing the total annual operating cost of a facility by the number of spaces available and the number of days a year the lot is open.<br />
<br />
==Pricing==<br />
Some agencies choose to charge a fee for use of park-and-ride facilities, while others provide free parking. Free parking incentivizes use of the facilities, and in some cases is mandated by law. Charging should lower demand, which can be desirable if facilities are operating at or near capacity. Charging for parking can also help offset the costs of building and operating park-and-rides, though it is unusual for an agency to fund a park-and-ride program entirely through parking fees. If a park-and-ride facility charges a fee, care needs to be taken to ensure that riders do not simply use free spaces in the surrounding area.<br />
<br />
[[Transit and Civil Rights|Title VI]] does not mandate that agencies consider the equity impacts of parking pricing; however, some agencies chose to voluntary conduct equity analyses and implement mitigation strategies such as keeping some spots free and providing low-cost high-occupancy vehicle parking.<br />
<br />
==[http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/175966.aspx Decision-Making Toolbox to Plan and Manage Park-and-Ride Facilities for Public Transportation: Guidebook on Planning and Managing Park-and-Ride]==<br />
This article is largely based off of the [http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/175966.aspx TCRP Decision-Making Toolbox to Plan and Manage Park-and-Ride Facilities for Public Transportation: Guidebook on Planning and Managing Park-and-Ride]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
<br />
[http://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/tm/docs/Park_and_Ride_Program_Resource_Guide.pdf California Department of Transportation. (2010). "Park and Ride Program Research Guide."]<br />
<br />
: This handbook from Caltrans offers a wealth of information about how to implement a park and ride program. It includes key considerations about obtaining land, the laws that apply to typical park and ride projects, and possible sources of funding for them. This guide also includes references to Caltrans’ park and ride coordinators and other divisions that can offer technical assistance to local planners interested in creating a park and ride program. <br />
<br />
[http://www.trb.org/main/blurbs/154973.aspx Turnbull, K. F., Pratt, R. H., Evans, J.E., & Levinson, H. S. (2004). “Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes Handbook, Third Edition: Chapter 3, Park-and-Ride/Pool.” Transit Cooperative Research Program.]<br />
<br />
: This report, sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration, focuses primarily on remote or suburban park-and-ride services. It also goes into detail about how park-and-ride facilities complement commuter rail systems and it describes the problems of measuring the success or effectiveness of these facilities. The report also offers case studies of how park-and-ride facilities interact with the different transit modes - light rail, heavy rail, [[bus rapid transit]] and other bus services, and park-and-pools. The report examines mode choice for arriving at park-and-ride stations by distance of origin to the destination, as well as other usage characteristics. <br />
<br />
[https://drcog.org/documents/PavedOver-Final.pdf Center for Neighborhood Technology. (2006). "Paved Over: Surface Parking Lots or Opportunities for Tax-Generating, Sustainable Development?"]<br />
<br />
: This report by the Center for Neighborhood Technology focuses specifically on Chicago transit and its park-and-ride facilities. CNT is an advocacy group that works for sustainable urban communities and this report takes a critical look at surface parking lots around 9 of Chicago’s suburban Metra stations. The report examines the potential to develop those sites according to the principles of [[transit-oriented development]] and the possibility for reaping greater benefits from those sites than would be possible as simple parking lots. <br />
<br />
[[Category:Investment and planning]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Park-and-rides&diff=4211Park-and-rides2017-05-10T19:49:46Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:ParkingStructure.jpg|right|thumb|600px|This parking structure serves a Los Angeles Metro Gold Line station. Photo by Flickr user LA Wad.]] <br />
==Introduction==<br />
Many transit agencies choose to provide parking lots for passengers to use when they drive to transit stops or stations. These park-and-rides can range from small surface lots to large aboveground (or in some cases undergound) structures. Park-and-ride lots provide an alternative to driving the entire length of a commute, which serves to reduce vehicle miles traveled and the associated safety risks and pollution. Park-and-rides can reduce congestion and parking demand in central business districts and make transit more effective in low-density areas with few people living within walking distance of stations. However, park-and-rides require a lot of land and are expensive to build and maintain. It can sometimes be difficult to measure the “success” of park-and-ride lots because parking utilization is not necessarily indicative of whether it attracts or supports transit ridership.<ref name="tcrp95">[http://www.trb.org/main/blurbs/154973.aspx Turnbull, K. F. et al. (2004). “Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes Handbook, Third Edition: Chapter 3, Park-and-Ride/Pool.” Transportation Cooperative Research Program.]</ref> The Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) has developed a [http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/175966.aspx guidebook] to help transit agencies through the process of planning, implementing, and operating park-and-ride programs.<br />
<br />
==Planning==<br />
Park-and-rides are major capital investments often slated to last 40 year; as such, they should not be taken lightly. An agency looking to implement park-and-rides should have both a long-term plan and site-specific plans to ensure that facilities are built or leased as part of a larger vision.<br />
<br />
===Local Contexts===<br />
Park-and-rides are heavily dependent upon local land use and transit characteristics. Park-and-ride facilities are most practical where land is available and cheap; using eminent domain to create parking is likely to elicit community opposition, and in expensive areas park-and-rides might not be good investments. In addition, park-and-rides should be concentrated around high-service transit lines, which are most likely to attract drivers.<br />
<br />
===Long-Range Planning===<br />
Some agencies create specific park-and-ride master plans, while others incorporate the facilities into broader plans. Either way, long-range planning is essential for determining the best places for the facilities. Long-range transportation plans are typically created by regional planning organizations, so transit agencies need to work closely with these groups. Highlighting potential reductions in congestion and emissions can win support for park-and-rides at the regional level.<br />
<br />
===Site Planning===<br />
Site plans help formalize the planning process for individual park-and-ride facilities. These plans can include principles on location of facilities. Park-and-rides should be built at areas highly accessible by transit and car, far from city center, and before motorists would encounter congestion or tolls. Site plans also define the size of a facility. Size can be based both on estimated demand and a transit agency’s goals; some agencies want to maximize lot size to encourage transit ridership, while others want to balance ridership targets with the desire to not add additional car trips. <br />
<br />
==Implementation==<br />
Once the decision to incorporate park-and-rides into agency strategy is made, it is necessary to address implementation. Park-and-rides need to be safe, convenient, and efficient in order to be a worthwhile investment. A variety of considerations go into park-and-ride implementation, such as whether to build or lease and how to design the facility.<br />
<br />
===Build vs. Lease===<br />
In an effort to implement a park-and-ride strategy quickly and cheaply, some agencies choose to lease existing lots rather than build new ones. Spaced can be leased from other public organizations, private entities such as malls or theaters, or non-profits like churches. While leasing is an attractive short-term option, it has drawbacks. Lease agreements can be terminated with little notice, leaving agencies scrambling to maintain parking supply that customers have grown to rely on. In addition, constructing a new facility allows the agency to design it exactly to its specifications.<br />
<br />
===Design===<br />
There are a vast number of factors to keep in mind when designing a park-and-ride. The most obvious issue is what kind of parking it required - beyond standard car spaces, agencies must provide ADA-accessible parking and should consider parking for carpool and carshare vehicles, bicycles, and pick-up/drop-off. It is also necessary to consider the type of facility to provide. Surface lots are cheapest to construct, particularly in low-density areas with cheap land. As land values rise, it may make sense to consider parking structures. If land is worth more than $100 per square foot, underground parking may be cost effective.<br />
<br />
==Operation==<br />
It is of course not enough to simply build or lease a park-and-ride; the facility needs an ongoing commitment to operations. <br />
<br />
===Legal Issues===<br />
To maintain order at its park-and-rides, an agency must set clear rules for behavior and display them prominently at the facilities. Many of these rules will concern who can park in the facilities and for how long. Enforcement can be handled by local police, transit agency police, or other agency staff.<br />
<br />
Park-and-rides come with significant insurance liabilities that must be considered during planning. Insurance costs should be factored into the operating budget and all insurance claims must be carefully tracked.<br />
<br />
===Routine Maintenance===<br />
While individual needs will vary, most park-and-ride facilities will have a variety of maintenance requirements, including lighting and electrical systems, cleaning and trash removal, and general facility upkeep. Facilities with extra amenities like customer waiting areas, employee break rooms, or restrooms will have additional maintenance needs. <br />
<br />
===Security===<br />
Security is necessarily to protect customers, staff, and property. At the lowest level, CCTV can be used to monitor facilities. Roaming security guards traveling between sites can provide additional protection. In extreme cases a facility could have a dedicated on-site security officer, but it is rare for park-and-rides to have security risks great enough to justify this. In addition to responsive security, proactive security checks should be conducted periodically to identify risks such as broken lights or obstructed security cameras.<br />
<br />
===In-House vs. Contracting===<br />
Park-and-ride operations can be handled in house, contracted out, or some done in combination. Running operations in-house offers more control but requires more intensive staffing. When decided how to manage operations, an agency should project the cost of each option while keeping in mind current resources. One common solution is to manage daily operations such as customer service, parking fee collection, and security in-house while outsourcing less frequent operations such as pavement repair and landscaping. Every agency has different resources and needs and should make an individualized decision about operations.<br />
<br />
===Performance Metrics===<br />
Like all transit agency ventures, park-and-rides should be constantly evaluated using concrete performance metrics. Three main metrics are used to measure park-and-ride performance:<br />
* '''Utilization rate''' - The utilization rate is the percentage of available parking spaces occupied at a certain time. The most robust counts are conducted constantly using automatic counters, but annual or semiannual one-day counts can be enough to give the agency a rough idea of whether or not capacity matches demand.<br />
* '''Access mode share''' - If an agency is concerned with reducing the amount of driving alone, then it should measure access mode share, which captures the percentage of riders arriving at a park-and-ride by modes such as driving alone, carpooling, being dropped off, walking, and biking.<br />
* '''Daily cost per space''' - In order to measure the resource needs of a facility and manage operations and expansions, transit agencies need a clear picture of cost per space. This number is generally calculated by dividing the total annual operating cost of a facility by the number of spaces available and the number of days a year the lot is open.<br />
<br />
==[http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/175966.aspx Decision-Making Toolbox to Plan and Manage Park-and-Ride Facilities for Public Transportation: Guidebook on Planning and Managing Park-and-Ride]==<br />
This article is largely based off of the [http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/175966.aspx TCRP Decision-Making Toolbox to Plan and Manage Park-and-Ride Facilities for Public Transportation: Guidebook on Planning and Managing Park-and-Ride]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
<br />
[http://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/tm/docs/Park_and_Ride_Program_Resource_Guide.pdf California Department of Transportation. (2010). "Park and Ride Program Research Guide."]<br />
<br />
: This handbook from Caltrans offers a wealth of information about how to implement a park and ride program. It includes key considerations about obtaining land, the laws that apply to typical park and ride projects, and possible sources of funding for them. This guide also includes references to Caltrans’ park and ride coordinators and other divisions that can offer technical assistance to local planners interested in creating a park and ride program. <br />
<br />
[http://www.trb.org/main/blurbs/154973.aspx Turnbull, K. F., Pratt, R. H., Evans, J.E., & Levinson, H. S. (2004). “Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes Handbook, Third Edition: Chapter 3, Park-and-Ride/Pool.” Transit Cooperative Research Program.]<br />
<br />
: This report, sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration, focuses primarily on remote or suburban park-and-ride services. It also goes into detail about how park-and-ride facilities complement commuter rail systems and it describes the problems of measuring the success or effectiveness of these facilities. The report also offers case studies of how park-and-ride facilities interact with the different transit modes - light rail, heavy rail, [[bus rapid transit]] and other bus services, and park-and-pools. The report examines mode choice for arriving at park-and-ride stations by distance of origin to the destination, as well as other usage characteristics. <br />
<br />
[https://drcog.org/documents/PavedOver-Final.pdf Center for Neighborhood Technology. (2006). "Paved Over: Surface Parking Lots or Opportunities for Tax-Generating, Sustainable Development?"]<br />
<br />
: This report by the Center for Neighborhood Technology focuses specifically on Chicago transit and its park-and-ride facilities. CNT is an advocacy group that works for sustainable urban communities and this report takes a critical look at surface parking lots around 9 of Chicago’s suburban Metra stations. The report examines the potential to develop those sites according to the principles of [[transit-oriented development]] and the possibility for reaping greater benefits from those sites than would be possible as simple parking lots. <br />
<br />
[[Category:Investment and planning]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Park-and-rides&diff=4210Park-and-rides2017-05-09T22:44:30Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:ParkingStructure.jpg|right|thumb|600px|This parking structure serves a Los Angeles Metro Gold Line station. Photo by Flickr user LA Wad.]] <br />
==Introduction==<br />
Many transit agencies choose to provide parking lots for passengers to use when they drive to transit stops or stations. These park-and-rides can range from small surface lots to large aboveground (or in some cases undergound) structures. Park-and-ride lots provide an alternative to driving the entire length of a commute, which serves to reduce vehicle miles traveled and the associated safety risks and pollution. Park-and-rides can reduce driving in central business districts and make transit more effective in low-density areas with few people living within walking distance of stations. However, park-and-rides require a lot of land and are expensive to build and maintain. It can sometimes be difficult to measure the “success” of park-and-ride lots because parking utilization is not necessarily indicative of whether it attracts or supports transit ridership.<ref name="tcrp95">[http://www.trb.org/main/blurbs/154973.aspx Turnbull, K. F. et al. (2004). “Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes Handbook, Third Edition: Chapter 3, Park-and-Ride/Pool.” Transportation Cooperative Research Program.]</ref> The Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) has developed a [http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/175966.aspx guidebook] to help transit agencies through the process of planning, implementing, and operating park-and-ride programs.<br />
<br />
==Objectives==<br />
Often, the objective of park-and-ride facilities is to concentrate riders along a transit line. These facilities can allow transit to serve low-density areas more efficiently and expand transit’s reach. Park-and-ride facilities can also shift parking away from the central business district. When they provide space for bicycle storage, they can also facilitate [[bicycle connections]] to transit.<ref name="tcrp95" /><br />
<br />
==Types of Park-and-Ride Facilities==<br />
Park-and-ride facilities may take a range of forms - from simple surface parking lots to large automated garages. Their location in relation to the city center makes a difference in how they perform, as well. Peripheral lots are those located on the edge of the city center, which provides easy access to the central business district via transit, but offers motorists an alternative to driving into the congested center. Other park-and-ride lots are considered to be ‘suburban’ or ‘remote’ and serve low-density areas. These low-density, remote stops may attract many riders. Another important distinction between types of facilities is whether they are exclusively used for park-and-ride transit customers or shared-use. There is not evidence that shared-use park-and-ride faciilities are any more or less successful at accommodating the needs of passengers than exclusive use lots. However, sharing the cost of construction and maintenance among other businesses and uses can help to offset the burden on the transit agency.<ref name="tcrp95" /><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
<br />
[http://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/tm/docs/Park_and_Ride_Program_Resource_Guide.pdf California Department of Transportation. (2010). "Park and Ride Program Research Guide."]<br />
<br />
: This handbook from Caltrans offers a wealth of information about how to implement a park and ride program. It includes key considerations about obtaining land, the laws that apply to typical park and ride projects, and possible sources of funding for them. This guide also includes references to Caltrans’ park and ride coordinators and other divisions that can offer technical assistance to local planners interested in creating a park and ride program. <br />
<br />
[http://www.trb.org/main/blurbs/154973.aspx Turnbull, K. F., Pratt, R. H., Evans, J.E., & Levinson, H. S. (2004). “Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes Handbook, Third Edition: Chapter 3, Park-and-Ride/Pool.” Transit Cooperative Research Program.]<br />
<br />
: This report, sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration, focuses primarily on remote or suburban park-and-ride services. It also goes into detail about how park-and-ride facilities complement commuter rail systems and it describes the problems of measuring the success or effectiveness of these facilities. The report also offers case studies of how park-and-ride facilities interact with the different transit modes - light rail, heavy rail, [[bus rapid transit]] and other bus services, and park-and-pools. The report examines mode choice for arriving at park-and-ride stations by distance of origin to the destination, as well as other usage characteristics. <br />
<br />
[https://drcog.org/documents/PavedOver-Final.pdf Center for Neighborhood Technology. (2006). "Paved Over: Surface Parking Lots or Opportunities for Tax-Generating, Sustainable Development?"]<br />
<br />
: This report by the Center for Neighborhood Technology focuses specifically on Chicago transit and its park-and-ride facilities. CNT is an advocacy group that works for sustainable urban communities and this report takes a critical look at surface parking lots around 9 of Chicago’s suburban Metra stations. The report examines the potential to develop those sites according to the principles of [[transit-oriented development]] and the possibility for reaping greater benefits from those sites than would be possible as simple parking lots. <br />
<br />
[[Category:Investment and planning]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Low_Carbon_Fuel_Standard&diff=4202Low Carbon Fuel Standard2017-04-30T03:25:11Z<p>Rabiabonour: /* Carbon Intensity */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:LACMTA 9583.jpg|thumb|500px|Most of LA Metro's bus fleet runs on low carbon intensity compressed natural gas. Souce:[https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:LACMTA_9583.jpg The Port of Authority]]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
The [https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/lcfs.htm Low Carbon Fuel Standard] (LCFS) is a program by the [https://www.arb.ca.gov/homepage.htm California Air Resources Board] (ARB) to mitigate the greenhouse gas (GHG) effects of transportation fuels.<ref>[https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/guidance/regguidance_16-07.pdf California Air Resources Board. (2016). "Regulatory Guidance: LCFS for Transit Agencies."]</ref> The transportation sector accounts for 40% of GHG emissions and therefore is critical to environmental protection efforts.<ref>[https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/background/basics-notes.pdf California Air Resources Board. "Low Carbon Fuel Standard."]</ref> The LCFS works by evaluating the carbon intensity of fuels and setting up a credit system similar to cap-and-trade. An organization gets credits for fuels with lower carbon intensity than a predetermined standard and deficits for fuels with higher carbon intensity; at the end of the year these number have to match up. Agencies can purchase credits if necessary to make up a deficit. The program started in 2011; carbon intensity reported by producers has fallen at an increasing rate ever since.<ref>[https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/dashboard/dashboard.htm California Air Resources Board. "Data Dashboard."]</ref><br />
<br />
===Carbon Intensity===<br />
Carbon Intensity is a measure of GHG emissions associated with the lifecycle of a fuel, from production to consumption. The carbon intensity of a fuel is measured in grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per megajoule of energy that it provides. Fuels such as biodiesel and compressed natural gas have significantly lower carbon intensity values than traditional diesel.<ref>[https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/121409lcfs_lutables.pdf California Air Resources Board. "Carbon Intensity Lookup Table for Diesel and Fuels that Substitute for Diesel."]</ref><br />
<br />
==Implications for Transit Agencies==<br />
The LCFS is aimed at producers of fuel, so transit agencies generally do not need to worry about being bound by it and will not be penalized for using high carbon intensity fuels. However, transit agencies can qualify as producers of low-CI fuels such as electricity, hydrogen, and natural gas if they have large fleets running on these cleaner fuels. If an agency opts into the program it can receive credits for these fuels and sell those credits to producers. Prices vary, but credits for some fuels can be worth more than $100 (one credit corresponds to one metric ton of fuel).<br />
<br />
==Reporting==<br />
After opting into the program, agencies provide reports to the ARB on a quarterly and annual basis using a specialized online tool. The reports must contain the amount of fuel dispensed in the reporting period and the number of electric vehicles in the agency’s fleet.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /></div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Low_Carbon_Fuel_Standard&diff=4201Low Carbon Fuel Standard2017-04-30T03:23:10Z<p>Rabiabonour: Created page with "File:LACMTA 9583.jpg|thumb|500px|Most of LA Metro's bus fleet runs on low carbon intensity compressed natural gas. Souce:[https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:LACMTA_9583..."</p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:LACMTA 9583.jpg|thumb|500px|Most of LA Metro's bus fleet runs on low carbon intensity compressed natural gas. Souce:[https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:LACMTA_9583.jpg The Port of Authority]]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
The [https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/lcfs.htm Low Carbon Fuel Standard] (LCFS) is a program by the [https://www.arb.ca.gov/homepage.htm California Air Resources Board] (ARB) to mitigate the greenhouse gas (GHG) effects of transportation fuels.<ref>[https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/guidance/regguidance_16-07.pdf California Air Resources Board. (2016). "Regulatory Guidance: LCFS for Transit Agencies."]</ref> The transportation sector accounts for 40% of GHG emissions and therefore is critical to environmental protection efforts.<ref>[https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/background/basics-notes.pdf California Air Resources Board. "Low Carbon Fuel Standard."]</ref> The LCFS works by evaluating the carbon intensity of fuels and setting up a credit system similar to cap-and-trade. An organization gets credits for fuels with lower carbon intensity than a predetermined standard and deficits for fuels with higher carbon intensity; at the end of the year these number have to match up. Agencies can purchase credits if necessary to make up a deficit. The program started in 2011; carbon intensity reported by producers has fallen at an increasing rate ever since.<ref>[https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/dashboard/dashboard.htm California Air Resources Board. "Data Dashboard."]</ref><br />
<br />
===Carbon Intensity===<br />
Carbon Intensity is a measure of GHG emissions associated with the lifecycle of a fuel, from production to consumption. The carbon intensity of fuel is measured in grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per megajoule of energy that it provides. Fuels such as biodiesel and compressed natural gas have significantly lower carbon intensity values than traditional diesel.<ref>[https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/121409lcfs_lutables.pdf California Air Resources Board. "Carbon Intensity Lookup Table for Diesel and Fuels that Substitute for Diesel."]</ref><br />
<br />
==Implications for Transit Agencies==<br />
The LCFS is aimed at producers of fuel, so transit agencies generally do not need to worry about being bound by it and will not be penalized for using high carbon intensity fuels. However, transit agencies can qualify as producers of low-CI fuels such as electricity, hydrogen, and natural gas if they have large fleets running on these cleaner fuels. If an agency opts into the program it can receive credits for these fuels and sell those credits to producers. Prices vary, but credits for some fuels can be worth more than $100 (one credit corresponds to one metric ton of fuel).<br />
<br />
==Reporting==<br />
After opting into the program, agencies provide reports to the ARB on a quarterly and annual basis using a specialized online tool. The reports must contain the amount of fuel dispensed in the reporting period and the number of electric vehicles in the agency’s fleet.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /></div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Park-and-rides&diff=4168Park-and-rides2017-04-19T20:29:32Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:ParkingStructure.jpg|right|thumb|600px|This parking structure serves a Los Angeles Metro Gold Line station. Photo by Flickr user LA Wad.]] <br />
==Introduction==<br />
Many transit agencies choose to provide parking lots for passengers to use when they drive to transit stops or stations. On one hand, people who drive may find that having free or cheap parking at the station encourages transit use. This can be a beneficial arrangement for low-density communities, where it would be difficult to serve many people efficiently with transit. People may be attracted to use a transit trunk line if they can drive to a station and park, though. However, there is a great deal of cost associated with buying land and building parking structures to serve transit. It is also important to remember that it is sometimes difficult to measure the ‘success’ of park-and-ride lots because parking utilization is not necessarily indicative of whether it attracts or supports transit ridership.<ref name="tcrp95">Transportation Cooperative Research Program. [http://www.trb.org/main/blurbs/154973.aspx “TCRP Report 95, Chapter 3: Park-and-Ride/Pool -- Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes.” 2004.</ref> <br />
==Objectives==<br />
Often, the objective of park-and-ride facilities is to concentrate riders along a transit line. These facilities can allow transit to serve low-density areas more efficiently and expand transit’s reach. Park-and-ride facilities can also shift parking away from the central business district. When they provide space for bicycle storage, they can also facilitate [[bicycle connections]] to transit.<ref name="tcrp95" /><br />
<br />
==Types of Park-and-Ride Facilities==<br />
Park-and-ride facilities may take a range of forms - from simple surface parking lots to large automated garages. Their location in relation to the city center makes a difference in how they perform, as well. Peripheral lots are those located on the edge of the city center, which provides easy access to the central business district via transit, but offers motorists an alternative to driving into the congested center. Other park-and-ride lots are considered to be ‘suburban’ or ‘remote’ and serve low-density areas. These low-density, remote stops may attract many riders. Another important distinction between types of facilities is whether they are exclusively used for park-and-ride transit customers or shared-use. There is not evidence that shared-use park-and-ride faciilities are any more or less successful at accommodating the needs of passengers than exclusive use lots. However, sharing the cost of construction and maintenance among other businesses and uses can help to offset the burden on the transit agency.<ref name="tcrp95" /><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
<br />
[http://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/tm/docs/Park_and_Ride_Program_Resource_Guide.pdf California Department of Transportation. (2010). "Park and Ride Program Research Guide."]<br />
<br />
: This handbook from Caltrans offers a wealth of information about how to implement a park and ride program. It includes key considerations about obtaining land, the laws that apply to typical park and ride projects, and possible sources of funding for them. This guide also includes references to Caltrans’ park and ride coordinators and other divisions that can offer technical assistance to local planners interested in creating a park and ride program. <br />
<br />
[http://www.trb.org/main/blurbs/154973.aspx Turnbull, K. F., Pratt, R. H., Evans, J.E., & Levinson, H. S. (2004). “Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes Handbook, Third Edition: Chapter 3, Park-and-Ride/Pool.” Transit Cooperative Research Program.]<br />
<br />
: This report, sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration, focuses primarily on remote or suburban park-and-ride services. It also goes into detail about how park-and-ride facilities complement commuter rail systems and it describes the problems of measuring the success or effectiveness of these facilities. The report also offers case studies of how park-and-ride facilities interact with the different transit modes - light rail, heavy rail, [[bus rapid transit]] and other bus services, and park-and-pools. The report examines mode choice for arriving at park-and-ride stations by distance of origin to the destination, as well as other usage characteristics. <br />
<br />
[https://drcog.org/documents/PavedOver-Final.pdf Center for Neighborhood Technology. (2006). "Paved Over: Surface Parking Lots or Opportunities for Tax-Generating, Sustainable Development?"]<br />
<br />
: This report by the Center for Neighborhood Technology focuses specifically on Chicago transit and its park-and-ride facilities. CNT is an advocacy group that works for sustainable urban communities and this report takes a critical look at surface parking lots around 9 of Chicago’s suburban Metra stations. The report examines the potential to develop those sites according to the principles of [[transit-oriented development]] and the possibility for reaping greater benefits from those sites than would be possible as simple parking lots. <br />
<br />
[[Category:Investment and planning]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Bicycle_connections&diff=4167Bicycle connections2017-04-19T20:25:50Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:Orange Line station.jpg|thumb|right|600px| The Metro Los Angeles Orange Line BRT features convenient connections for cyclists, including an adjacent bike path and bike lockers at the stations. Source: [https://www.metro.net/ Metro]]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Almost half of Americans live within a quarter mile of a transit stop and bicycling offers the potential to serve as a first- and last-mile connector to and from transit, and offers many benefits: riders occupy less road space than private autos, emit no harmful pollutants, users benefit from physical activity, and bicycles require significantly less storage space (parking) than a car.<ref>[http://www.transweb.sjsu.edu/project/2825.html Krizek, K. J., Stonebraker, E., & Tribbey, S. (2011). "Bicycling Access and Egress to Transit: Informing the Possibilities." Mineta Transportation Institute.]</ref> Allowing bicyclists to use the transit network also allows them to avoid riding uncomfortable environments, such as riding in tunnels, in bad weather, in highly congested areas, or places where there is little bicycle infrastructure.<ref name="bicycles">[http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/156477.aspx Schneider, R. (2005). "Integration of Bicycles and Transit." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]</ref> Bicycles can extend the geographic reach of transit services, enhancing the usefulness of the transit network. Similarly, high quality [[pedestrian connections]] provide safe, secure and comfortable access to the transit network. <br />
<br />
Transit agencies often have little control over the networks of infrastructure leading to stations and stops. However, there are some ways that transit agencies can influence bicycle access to transit by providing bicycle parking at stations and allowing passengers to transport their bicycles on train cars or bus-mounted bike racks. Indirectly, transportation agencies can provide funding to municipalities for building bicycle infrastructure (such as bike lanes and other street treatments). Despite the ability to allocate funding, however, transit agencies often lack direct control over the design, engineering, placement, and prioritization of bicycle and pedestrian facilities that connect to stations and stops. Transit agencies may also support changes to infrastructure through financial and technical assistance in creating bicycle and pedestrian master plans.<br />
<br />
==Bicycles and Buses==<br />
Allowing bicycles to be carried on board transit vehicles can be very cost-effective. In fact, according to one TCRP Synthesis, “Providing bicycle racks on a bus or vanpool vehicle typically costs between $500 and $1,000, which represents a small fraction of the cost of the entire vehicle.” Racks can be mounted on the front or the back of buses. However, rear-mounted bicycle racks can pose some problems for maintenance and safety. Agencies have found that rear-mounted racks can limit access to the bus’ engine and limiting bicyclists’ visibility to bus drivers as they mount their bicycles.<ref name="bicycles" /> <br />
In terms of bicycle storage, racks and lockers at bus stops and stations can be affordable and represents a tiny fraction of the cost of providing automobile parking.<ref name="bicycles" /> Providing bike storage facilities on public sidewalks may involve other challenges, such as ensuring there is enough space for them and that they do not interfere with other uses of those sidewalks.<br />
<br />
==Bicycles and Rail Transit==<br />
The primary concern when allowing bicycles on board light rail is storage: bikes may be stored on racks or hooks, in a single car, or space may be allocated for bicycles and their owners in each car.<ref name="bicycles" /><br />
<br />
==Other Considerations==<br />
Some bus drivers and maintenance workers unions have expressed concerns that adding bicycle racks to buses or other vehicles increases drivers’ workloads and may disagree with their addition. New features that allow also transit to accommodate bicyclists may also require some training of drivers and other transit workers.<ref name="bicycles" /> Finally, marketing and education campaigns are often necessary to inform passengers that bicycle accommodations are available and how to use them. <br />
<br />
==Long Beach, California Example==<br />
Long Beach, California has, over the last several years, worked hard to become a bike-friendly city. By improving bike facilities, including bike parking near transit stations, creating separated bikeways, and supporting a safe routes to school program, the city has gained notoriety as a great place to bike. The City has also worked with business owners and the County Department of Public Health to create “bike-friendly business districts,” which include ample bike parking (in “bike corrals”) and cross-promotions with small businesses. Importantly, the City has also teamed up with the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority, with funding from the California Department of Transportation, to make improvements around the Metro Blue Line’s rail stations. The goal of the Blue Line Bike and Pedestrian Access Plan is to enhance safety for bicyclists and pedestrians within a half mile of all Blue Line stations. For more information about Long Beach and its bicycle planning, see [http://www.bikelongbeach.org BikeLongBeach.org].<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
[http://www.transweb.sjsu.edu/project/2825.html Krizek, K. J., Stonebraker, E., & Tribbey, S. (2011). "Bicycling Access and Egress to Transit: Informing the Possibilities." Mineta Transportation Institute.]<br />
: The authors explore the most cost-effective ways to encourage integration between bicycling and transit. Using an index to analyze a variety of possible methods for integration, they find that allowing riders to bring their bikes on board transit was the most cost-effective way to accomplish this goal. This report includes a brief description of the success that Caltrain had in integrating service for bicyclists in Santa Clara County, California into its operations. <br />
<br />
[http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/156477.aspx Schneider, R. (2005). "Integration of Bicycles and Transit." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]<br />
: This synthesis explains the benefits, costs, and technical specifications associated with making bicycle connections work together with public transit. It includes results from a survey and a discussion about how bicycles can be integrated with a wide variety of different transit's forms, including bus, rail, and even ferries and mountain transit systems. <br />
<br />
[http://calbike.org/ California Bicycle Coalition.]<br />
: The California Bicycle Coalition advocates for the interests of bicyclists in California. Its website offers policy resources, guidance for creating bikeways, and links to local bicycle advocacy groups. The group also often sponsors legislation to promote bicycling by making it safer. The site also includes a thorough section on [[complete streets]].<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Investment and planning]]<br />
[[Category:Transit and Public Health]]<br />
[[Category:First and Last Mile]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Fare_pricing_and_reform&diff=4166Fare pricing and reform2017-04-19T20:15:47Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:Got-bus-pass.jpeg|right|thumb|300px|A member of the public at a rally for Free/Reduced Student Passes in Oakland, Photo by J. Moses Ceasar 2005]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Finance and revenue]]<br />
[[Category:Market Response]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Most transit agencies employ largely flat fare systems, which charge the same price, regardless of time of day, distance or direction traveled, or quality of service. However, they do not reflect the actual costs of providing service, which constantly fluctuate throughout the day. Peak period operation, longer trip routes, and premium service all cost the agency more money to operate, and require more capital investments. Additionally, there is the issue of "cross-subsidization"; since flat fares do not distinguish between time, type, or distance of travel, transit users traveling shorter distances, during off-peak hours, and using non-premium services “cross-subsidize” riders on more expensive routes. There is a considerable body of research that argue in favor of flexible, differentiated fares. There are also other fare strategies that transit agencies can consider, such as using smartcard technology, eliminating fares altogether, or providing group fares or other discounts.<br />
<br />
==Differentiated Pricing==<br />
Most transit systems have flat fares, but others use differentiated fares based on time (peak vs. off-peak) or distance traveled. Differentiated fares are more efficient because they better reflect the variable costs of transit service, encourage riders to travel when excess capacity is available, and subsidize all types of riders roughly equally. Some transit agencies worry about losing riders after switching to differentiated pricing, but new fare system can incentivize additional short rides by making them cheaper. More research is needed to draw broader conclusions on the effect on ridership of moving from flat to differentiated fares.<br />
<br />
Any new fare system is going to raise concerns about equity; if low-income riders have longer trips then they will be disproportionately impacted by differentiated pricing. This effect is highly dependent on local settlement patterns. One study in Utah found that a switch to differentiated pricing in a certain part of the Utah Transit Authority's service area would be progressive, reducing fares for low-income and minority riders.<ref>[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856414001785 Farber, S. et al. (2014). "Assessing social equity in distance based transit fares using a model of travel behavior." Transportation Research Part A.]</ref> This isn't necessarily transferable to other areas, though; agencies looking to make the switch will have to do their own [[Transit and Civil Rights|Title VI analyses]].<br />
<br />
In recent decades [[automated fare media]] has greatly simplified the process of collecting differentiated fares. However, many agencies are still wary of the perceived complexity and unpopularity of time- and distance- based fares, and if anything in recent years more agencies have returned to flat fare systems. <ref>[http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_94.pdf Multisystems, Inc., Mundle & Associates, Inc., & Simon & Simon Research Associates, Inc. (2003). "Fare Policies, Structures, and Technologies: Update." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]</ref><br />
<br />
*'''Los Angeles MTA Study'''<br />
:In 2010, Los Angeles Metro looked at the potential for time and distance-based fares for the MTA bus and rail system<ref>[http://media.metro.net/board/Items/2010/09_september/20100915OPItem10.pdf Evaluation of Time and Distance-Based Fare Policies]</ref>.<br />
<br />
:The time-based system would give riders a window of time during which subsequent boardings would not require payment. Transfer fees would be eliminated during that time period. A simple way to implement this would be to use the TAP cards, although the agency would have to look into additional hardware to vend receipts if it wanted to accommodate cash-paying riders as well. One important implication is this system would encourage riders to use the fastest services available, since they would be granted a narrow time window of free transfers. Base fares may have to be increased, since transfer fare revenues will be lost.<br />
<br />
:The distance-based system could apply to Rapid and Express buses, to heavy rail, or to all rail lines. Fares would be based on increments of distance, with corresponding fare zone boundaries identified for each route. While existing hardware and fare media could be used, the agency might have to install fare gates or hire additional people for fare enforcement. An overall concern with a distance-based system is some riders may choose slower, cheaper parallel services because they cannot afford to pay a premium fare.<br />
<br />
==Group Fares==<br />
<br />
Transit agencies can offer [[Deep Discount Group Pass|deep discount group passes]] to employers and universities. In a 2004 dissertation, Cornelius Nuworsoo explores the benefits of discounted fare programs for groups and summarizes the outcomes of unlimited-ride pass programs in Berkeley and Denver.<ref> [http://www.its.berkeley.edu/publications/UCB/2004/DS/UCB-ITS-DS-2004-2.pdf "Deep Discount Group Pass Programs as Instruments for Increasing Transit Revenue and Ridership."] </ref> There is an associated Access Magazine article that can be found on the Access website at http://www.accessmagazine.org<br />
<br />
==Fares Based on Ability to Pay==<br />
The SFMTA is currently conducting a study on developing a fare system that takes into account passengers' ability to pay, rather than simply on their ages. The SFMTA does have a Lifeline pass program, which provides a 50 percent discount on the monthly pass for residents whose incomes are below 200% of the federal poverty level. However, fewer than 20,000 people use the Lifeline system, since it is burdensome and requires a lot of paperwork for all parties. <ref> [http://www.planetizen.com/node/59552 Bay Area Considers Basing Transit Fares on Need] </ref> The proposed fare system would ideally cut down on red tape and provide discounts for those in financial need.<br />
<br />
==Fare-Free Transit==<br />
Cities provide a variety of services, such as parks and libraries, to everyone with no direct fee. Proponents of fare-free transit argue that public transportation should be provided in the same way.<ref>[http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/167498.aspx Volinski, J. (2012). "Implementation and Outcomes of Fare-Free Transit Systems." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]</ref> Fare-free transit would be beneficial to low-income riders, especially to people of color who are more likely to be stopped for farebeating. Fare-free transit is also seen by supporters as a way to reduce dwell times, lower administrative costs, and grow transit ridership. Opponents of of fare-free transit argue that the lost revenue, when coupled with additional demand, would stretch agency resources too thin and harm service quality. There are also concerns about loitering and vandalism, though the extent to which this is a serious problem is a matter of debate.<br />
<br />
The practicality of fare-free transit seems to be tied in part to the size of the system. There are multiple possible reasons for this, but farebox recovery ratios play a role. Large transit systems like those in New York City or the San Francisco Bay can have farebox recovery ratios of more than 40%, meaning that switching to fare-free service would represent a huge loss in revenue.<ref>[http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/15/07/05/the-list-the-10-u-s-transit-agencies-that-rely-most-on-fare-revenues/ Rinde, Meir. (2015). "The List: The 10 U.S. Transit Agencies that Rely Most on Fare Revenues." NJ Spotlight.]</ref> On the other hand, for small systems that number might be less than 10%. Given the cost of collecting fares (fareboxes, payment processing systems, increased dwell time), it's possible that moving fare-free could actually improve system finances. Successful fare-free system are typically in small areas dominated by either universities or resorts.<br />
<br />
===Fare-Free Case Studies=== <br />
<br />
* '''Corvallis Transit System''' - CTS serves a Corvallis, OR, a city of 55,000 people (including 20,000 Oregon State University students). In 2011 CTS made the decision to go fare-free as a way to reduce car dependency. Funding, which had previous come from fares and student fees at OSU, was replaced with a $2.75 a month charge to Corvallis Utility customers. The program has been seen as a success; ridership grew nearly 38% in the first year and schedule performance improved. The program is relatively new, but seems to be performing well.<br />
* '''Breckenridge Free Ride''' - Breckenridge, CO is a ski resort town with a population of just a couple thousand people, but 50,000 visitors a weekend during peak season. The city set up a fare-free transit system to ease tourist congestion and help residents get around. Free Ride had 670,000 riders in 2009. Operational expenses come out of the town's general fund. This has worked so far but is susceptible to economic downtown, so the town is looking for new funding mechanisms. Ridership is steadily growing, and strict anti-loitering rules keep the buses moving smoothly.<br />
* '''Link Transit''' - Washington State's Link Transit is a larger rural system serving 105,000 people over and area of 3,500 miles. It currently operates 55 buses and 22 paratransit vehicles with a budget of $11 million per year. It was established in 1989 and had no problems operating fare-free for the next decade. However, in 1999 voters eliminated the motor vehicle excise tax that had provided Link Transit with most of its funding. The agency lost 45% of its operating revenue and was forced to charge fares. The conservative area had never fully embraced the fare-free system. The current fares account for 6% of operating expenses and disproportionately effect minorities and the elderly.<br />
* '''San Francisco Municipal Railway''' - In 2008, San Francisco Muni conducted a study on the cost-effectiveness of a fare-free system. The study concluded that Muni would see increased operating expenses and capital investments, even though the costs of fare collection would be eliminated. Muni would need an additional $184 million a year for operations, as well as an additional $519 million to procure the vehicles, facilities, and infrastructure needed to accommodate the ridership increase. The city abandoned its fare-free plan after seeing the results of the study.<ref>[http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Free-ride-Fat-chance-Muni-fares-will-stay-3229342.php Gordon, R. (2008). "Free Ride? Fat Chance: Muni Fares Will Stay." SFGate.]</ref><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
Cervero, Robert. [http://www.springerlink.com/index/r52126220g7t501.pdf| "Flat versus differentiated pricing: What's a fair fare?"] 1981. <br />
: Cervero explores the efficiency and equity of different pricing structure by comparing transit fares and the cost to provide service. He finds that flat fare structures generally result in short-distance, off-peak riders subsidizing long-distance, peak hour customers. A subscription is required to access this article.<br />
<br />
Transit Cooperative Research Program. [http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_94.pdf|"Fare Policies, Structures, and Technologies: Update."] 2003. <br />
:The Federal Transit Administration commissioned this report to identify and evaluate different approaches to fare policy, structure, and collection technologies, with special consideration given to the customer benefits and challenges and equity concerns of each approach.<br />
<br />
Transit Cooperative Research Program. [http://www.trb.org/publications/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_95c12.pdf|"Transit Pricing and Fares: Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes."] 2004.<br />
: This document summarizes literature on ridership changes in response to different fare adjustments, including the introduction of variable fares and differentiating peak and off-peak fares. Few studies explore the relationship between transitioning to differential pricing and ridership levels.</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Bus_operator_training&diff=4165Bus operator training2017-04-19T20:06:26Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:bus_training.jpg|right|thumb|600px|A Santa Barbara Metropolitan Transit District driver trains on an articulated bus. Source: [https://www.flickr.com/photos/viriyincy/16421779015 Oran Viriyincy]]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Once an agency has [[bus operator recruitment|recruited drivers]], these new drivers need to be trained. Most new transit hires are inexperienced in public transit operations, so transit agencies must be prepared to provide adequate instruction.<ref name="bustraining">[http://www.tcrponline.org/PDFDocuments/tsyn40.pdf Moffat, G.K., Ashton, A. H., & Blackburn, D.R. (2001). "A Challenged Employment System: Hiring, Training, Performance Evaluation, and Retention of Bus Operators." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]</ref> Current employees can also benefit from continuing education programs, especially when new equipment is introduced to a fleet. A good training program is important for [[employee retention]]. <br />
<br />
==New Hires==<br />
New operator training varies greatly from agency to agency. Some agencies may be able to individually tailor training programs to the experience of the new hire, but many agencies hire trainees in groups in which everyone must pass through the same basic training program. An average training program is approximately 32 days.<ref name="bustraining" /> Agencies with numerous routes find they can reduce initial training time by focusing on the routes which the applicant is most likely to drive initially, introducing other routes over time. Small systems may wish or need to train new employees on every route before releasing them to work. <br />
<br />
=== Classroom Versus Road Training ===<br />
Agencies should be aware of the trade-off between in-class and in-bus training time. While classroom and book- or video-based training is necessary to some extent, new hires can become disinterested and frustrated with perceived delays in getting on the road. All agencies spend a large portion of training on out-of-service buses, and most include in-service training as part of their program. Some agencies may also use various forms of simulators. While applicants may come in with varying needs for driving skills, many agency managers have cautioned that customer service skills are the most important portion of new operator training.<br />
<br />
Computer, video or paper-based training can be effective for reinforcing agency policy, rules and regulations. <br />
<br />
On-bus training often includes a mix of agency professional training staff and peer-led operator training. Some agencies may have operator-led training guided by a professional trainer, and should take care that the operators providing training are doing so in accordance with agency policy and expectations. Techniques can include incentives for becoming a peer trainer and requirements to uphold certain expectations to maintain that status. Peer training can include a mentorship program, which may be helpful in improving retention and transitioning a new hire into the regular workforce.<br />
<br />
=== Training Tools ===<br />
The Transportation Safety Institute (TSI) provides a train-the-trainer certification program for [http://www.tsi.dot.gov/Transit.aspx bus and paratransit operator training]. <br />
<br />
== Refresher training ==<br />
Relatively few agencies include a regular refresher training program as part of their work environment. Refresher training programs may be required by some states. Opportunities exist for refresher training to involve or be led by experienced operators who have demonstrated exemplary work. <br />
<br />
== Further Reading ==<br />
[http://www.apta.com/resources/standards/Documents/APTA-BTS-BO-RP-001-07.pdf American Public Transit Association. (2007). "Recommended Practice for Transit Bus Operator Training."]<br />
: This guide presents industry-developed best practices on bus operator training.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
[[Category:Managing transit]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=File:Bus_training.jpg&diff=4164File:Bus training.jpg2017-04-19T19:43:47Z<p>Rabiabonour: A Santa Barbara Metropolitan Transit District driver trains on an articulated bus. Source: [https://www.flickr.com/photos/viriyincy/16421779015 Oran Viriyincy]</p>
<hr />
<div>A Santa Barbara Metropolitan Transit District driver trains on an articulated bus. Source: [https://www.flickr.com/photos/viriyincy/16421779015 Oran Viriyincy]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Reliability_of_service&diff=4163Reliability of service2017-04-16T17:06:14Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:MTA NYC Bus Nova Bus LFS (TL40102A) 8470.jpg|thumb|600px|An out-of-service bus in New York City. Source: [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MTA_NYC_Bus_Nova_Bus_LFS_(TL40102A)_8470.jpg Mtattrain]]]<br />
== Introduction ==<br />
A common theme among articles within TransitWiki is strategies to improve reliability of transit service (see [[Off-vehicle fare payment]], [[Transit signal priority (TSP)|Transit signal priority]], and [[Internet communications]], for example). To understand how to improve reliability of service, transit planners should understand the perception of unreliability among passengers and common responses to such factors. Many people may consider transit were it not for fear of perceived or true unreliability. Reliability can be an objective, performance-based measure, but what is most important for passengers making a decision about how to travel is the subjective perception of reliability <ref>Prashker, J.N. "Direct Analysis of the Perceived Importance of Attributes of Reliability of Travel Modes in Urban Travel." Transportation 8, pp 329-346. 1979.</ref>. Users do not typically consider the reported statistical performance of a roadway when making a trip; they rely on their personal recollection of typical circumstance or from reputation and other subjective information sources. Therefore, it is in the best interest of transit planners to consider passenger perceptions of the travel experience and, to the extent possible, plan to mitigate factors of unreliability.<br />
<br />
== Research ==<br />
In 2013, student researchers from the University of California at Berkeley (UCB) conducted a survey of current and former users of the San Francisco area public transportation system<ref>Carrel, Andre, Anne Halvorsen and Joan Walker. Transportation Research Board: Transit 2013, Volume 2. "Passengers' Perception of and Behavioral Adaptation to Unreliability in Public Transportation." pp 153-162. 2013. http://trid.trb.org/view/1243072</ref>. Survey respondents rated the importance of reliability factors, including the time waiting at a transfer and possibility of waiting for less than 10 minutes for a bus after walking to a stop.<br />
<br />
The researchers also gathered information on how passengers handled anticipated unreliability. [[Real-time information]] is a tool for mitigating unreliability, for example, but planners should remember that not all riders have access to real-time information. Most important in considering passenger response is that negative experiences can actually reduce transit use by individuals; regaining those lost customers could be more challenging than simply addressing problems of reliability.<br />
<br />
=== Factors of Unreliability ===<br />
Reliability may seem like an intuitive concept: can I depend on the transit service to be there on schedule and arrive at my destination on time? However there are many other factors that passengers may consider. The availability of seats on a bus, or [[Bicycle connections|bike rack space at certain stops]] could be one factor. The UCB report contrasts two riders: one typically travels every day at peak-hours and experiences longer, but predictable travel times. This rider might consider their trips reliable even in congestion, because it is expected. Another rider might typically take the bus during the off-peak time with shorter travel times; they may consider an experience riding during peak-period to be highly unreliable. Therefore, reliability can be affected by predictable circumstances such as congestion, and unpredictable, non-recurring circumstances. <br />
<br />
According to passengers surveyed in San Francisco, 10 minutes is the maximum amount of time between buses and trains still considered frequent. In other words, a headway longer than 10 minutes is considered infrequent, and by association, unreliable.<br />
<br />
Reliability aspects for work and non-work trips were measured by survey respondents in terms of importance. Reliability is more important for work trips, intuitively. Many reliability factors in choosing transit are the same for work and non-work trips:<br />
* Making connections that are possible according to the published schedule<br />
* Ability to walk to a stop and leave within 10 minutes<br />
* Waiting 10 minutes or less for transfers<br />
* Actual trip time matches published schedule<br />
* Each trip takes the same amount of time<br />
* Checking real-time information shows departure within 10 minutes of desired time<br />
* Service leaves at the time on the published schedule<br />
* Service departs at the same time daily<br />
* Availability of seating and space on the vehicle<br />
<br />
Below is a selection of experiences reported by riders in order of frequency of occurrence on MUNI:<br />
# Waited at least twice as long as scheduled for vehicles on a frequent route (in other words, a scheduled bus fails to arrive)<br />
# Real-time information showed a bus arriving that never did<br />
# Bus unexpectedly arrived that was not on real-time info<br />
# Service delayed by traffic<br />
# Service delayed by unknown issue further ahead on the route<br />
# Passenger missed bus because the real-time info was incorrect<br />
# Delayed by other agency [MUNI] vehicles blocking bus passenger is riding<br />
# Bus pulls away from stop as passenger is running to it<br />
# Vehicle delayed by mechanical problem or other on-board emergency<br />
# Waited 20 or more minutes past the scheduled time for an infrequent route (>10 minute headways)<br />
# Bus was too crowded to board or did not stop because of crowding<br />
# Bus turned around before reaching passenger's destination<br />
# Waiting for long periods when transferring to an infrequent route<br />
# Bus did not stop at passenger's requested stop<br />
# Bus did not see passenger waiting at stop<br />
# Bus switched routes or made a route diversion and didn't serve intended destination<br />
# Missed last bus because it wasn't following schedule<br />
# No available space on bus bike rack<br />
<br />
=== Passenger Behavior in Response to Unreliability ===<br />
Passengers facing unreliable service can either employ their own strategy for absorbing the consequence (such as leaving earlier or perhaps walking to a different route), or they can choose to reduce their use of public transit. People reducing their use of transit are more likely to be shifting travel modes than simply giving up a trip they would have made.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
[[Category:Operating effectiveness]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Lane_assist_technology&diff=4162Lane assist technology2017-04-16T16:55:46Z<p>Rabiabonour: /* Additional Reading */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:LaneAssistTechnology.jpg|right|thumb|350px|Lane Assist Technology in Subaru Eyesight-enabled Vehicles Source: youtube]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Technology]]<br />
[[Category:Bus rapid transit]]<br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Lane assist technology helps prevent car accidents caused when the driver unintentionally drifts out of the lane. The system can alert the driver and even provide countersteering force to the wheel to keep the vehicle from deviating. <br />
<ref> [http://www.toyota-global.com/innovation/safety_technology/safety_technology/technology_file/active/lka.html Toyota. "Lane Keeping Assist"] </ref> This technology has been deployed in private vehicles, but is still an emerging technology for transit vehicles.<br />
<br />
==Benefits to Transit==<br />
Lane assist technology has the potential to deploy more [[bus rapid transit]] (BRT) systems. Because of the limited right-of-way available to build new lanes for BRT operations, lane assist technology can allow the vehicles to be operated in lanes barely wider than the vehicles themselves, such as in freeway shoulders. In addition to allowing for narrower lane construction, the technology can help buses pull up to stops with an accuracy within centimeters, allowing for faster loading and unloading of passengers, especially those with special needs.<br />
<br />
==Lane Assist Technologies==<br />
The technology can take many forms, each with different advantages and disadvantages in cost, ease of implementation, and reliability.<br />
<br />
===Optical Guidance===<br />
[[Image:Opticalguidance.JPG|right|thumb|250px|Optical guidance device]] Vision-based systems use machine vision equipment (cameras, image processing equipment, pattern recognition algorithms, etc.) to track a painted line in the road, which allows the on-board system to determine the vehicle's position. The system then steers the vehicle, following the trajectory of the painted line. Optically guided bus systems do not require significant infrastructure outlays, but maintenance costs can be high and it is very sensitive to weather conditions that might affect visibility.<ref> [http://www.path.berkeley.edu/PATH/Publications/PDF/PRR/2007/PRR-2007-21.pdf Shladover. "Lane Assist Systems for Bus Rapid Transit, Volume I: Technology Assessment"] </ref><br />
The TEOR bus system in Rouen, France is the most well-known example of an optically guided BRT system, even though they use it primarily for precision docking. Cameras track a dashed line on the road, while drivers only control the vehicle's speed. Rouen has not applied the technology to automatic steering between stations, instead using it for only short stretches. Drivers have reported satisfaction with the technology, since it reduces stress and allows them to interact with passengers more. <br />
<br />
===Mechanical Guidance===<br />
[[Image:Curbguidedbus.jpeg|right|thumb|250px|Curb guided bus]]<br />
Curb guided buses, also referred to as kerb guided buses, have small guide-wheels attached to the front steering mechanism of the bus. The wheels engage with the vertical side of a guideway curb, which is specifically constructed to guide the vehicle along its route. Away from the curb, the operator controls the vehicle as normal. Curb guidance has been successfully used in many cities and has many advantages. It is extremely reliable to operate, and the mechanical components are easy and straightforward to maintain. However, the infrastructure costs are high, and in many cities there is not enough right-of-way to create a dedicated lane. <br />
<br />
Rail guided buses have a large rubber wheel that is guided by a rail embedded within the pavement. It provides an experience closer to that of a light rail or trolley, and has high infrastructure costs.<br />
<br />
===GPS Guidance===<br />
Minnesota's MetroTransit uses a combination of GPS and other technologies to operate express buses in freeway shoulders. There are many advantages to operating buses on shoulders, such as low infrastructure costs, increased reliability, and faster operations. However, shoulder use is at the driver's discretion and depends on traffic speeds and weather conditions.<ref name=MetroTransit>[http://www.metrotransit.org/transit-advantages.aspx MetroTransit. "Bus-only shoulders move you past congestion"] </ref> Lane assist technology has greatly helped drivers safely operate 9.5 ft. wide buses on 10 ft. wide lanes. <ref>[http://www.its.umn.edu/Research/FeaturedStudies/brt/index.html University of Minnesota ITS Institute. "Bus Rapid Transit-Driver Assist Technology"] </ref><br />
<br />
The system uses GPS satellite positioning technology and an on-board map database of the bus route to continuously identify the location of the bus on the roadway with centimeter-level accuracy <ref name=MetroTransit />. A head-up display (HUD) mounted between the driver’s face and the windshield shows the location of lane boundaries, helping drivers remain safely on the shoulder even when roads are snow-covered or visibility is low. Information about other vehicles or objects on the roadway, detected by laser sensors mounted on the front and sides of the bus, is also displayed on the HUD to help drivers avoid potential collisions. The HUD displays warnings if the bus starts to drift, and provides countersteering force to keep the vehicle within the lane.<br />
<br />
===Magnetic Guidance===<br />
Magnetic material, such as tape or plugs, are placed in the center of the bus lane, and magnetometers in the vehicle sense the strength of the magnetic field. <ref> [http://www.its.umn.edu/Research/FeaturedStudies/brt/laneassist/LAfinal1.pdf FTA. "Bus Rapid Transit Lane Assist Technology Systems. Volume 1: Technology Assessment"] </ref> Onboard software calculates the location of the vehicle, and then steers it according to the magnetic field. The technology operates well under different weather conditions and can correctly calculate the vehicle's position within centimeters. However, all experiments with magnetically guided buses have been very costly. Additionally, installation of magnetic plugs requires the pavement to be broken, which can cause future pavement problems in cold climates. <br />
<br />
For many years, California PATH has been testing magnetic guidance systems, and they recently have improved the technology's potential for bus steering and precision docking <ref> [http://www.path.berkeley.edu/PATH/Publications/PDF/PRR/2009/PRR-2009-12.pdf California PATH Program. "Field Demonstration and Tests of Lane Assist/Guidance and Precision Docking Technology"] </ref> In test tracks, PATH has shown the technology's ability to not only steer but also control the speed of the vehicle, creating a true "auto-pilot" system for the bus. Researchers suggest magnetic guidance is a relatively inexpensive addition to a BRT project which would create a light rail-like system at a fraction of the cost of true light rail <ref>[http://berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2008/09/05_autobus.shtml UC Berkeley News. "Researchers showcase automated bus that uses magnets to steer through city streets"] </ref>.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
[http://www.path.berkeley.edu/PATH/Publications/PDF/PRR/2009/PRR-2009-12.pdf Tan, H.S. et al. (2009). "Field Demonstration and Tests of Lane Assist/Guidance and Precision Docking Technology." California PATH Program at University of California, Berkeley.]<br />
: This California PATH document reports the improvement and implementation of the magnetic lane guidance and precision docking system on a 60ft articulated bus and the extensive testing in a real-world operation setting. The field studies provided valuable lessons that for the future deployment of the technology on a large, public scale.<br />
<br />
[http://www.its.umn.edu/Research/FeaturedStudies/brt/laneassist/LAfinal1.pdf Donath, M. et al. (2003). "Bus Rapid Transit Lane Assist Technology Systems. Volume 1: Technology Assessment." Federal Transit Administration.]<br />
: This report asses various lane assist technologies available for BRT.<br />
<br />
[http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/24000/24900/24937/CTS-04-12Vol1.pdf Alexander, L. (2005). "Bus Rapid Transit Technologies: Assisting Drivers Operating Buses on Road Shoulders Volume 1." Intelligent Transportation System Institute.]<br />
: This technical report looks at existing lane assist technologies for buses, and suggests improvements to GPS driver assist systems.</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Privacy_Issues&diff=4161Privacy Issues2017-04-16T16:48:38Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:LA tap card.jpg|thumbnail|right|Los Angeles' smart card, the "Tap Card," in use at a ticket vending machine. Source: www.latimes.com/]]<br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
<br />
Americans have an expectation that their private information will not be subject to collection and disclosure by government entities, including public transportation providers. The Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution prohibits "unreasonable searches and seizures" and this includes not just evidence of criminal activity but any information for which there is a "reasonable expectation of privacy." Generally speaking, activities undertaken in public, in plain view of others, such as riding on public transit is not entitled to the expectation that one's conduct is private. However, the increasing development of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) capable of collecting large amounts of data about individual passengers raises questions whether some degree of privacy protection may be not only warranted but expected by the public at large.<ref>TRCP Legal Research Digest 14, March 2000</ref><br />
<br />
==Use of Smart Cards==<br />
A Smart Card is a credit card-sized piece of plastic that contains an automatic identification system such as a bar code, magnetic strip, optical character recognition system, or radio frequency identification (RFID) chip, that can be used as a fare payment media or to otherwise access transit services. It may need to be inserted into a reader, though newer versions are "contactless" and can be read as long as they are in proximity to the interface device. The card may contain only limited information, such as a monetary balance, or have saved information about the user including credit information used to purchase the card, or other personal, financial, and biometric data, or provide a link to other data sources containing such information. This could include a person's name, address, phone number, age, gender, social security number, or other identifying information. The more personally identifiable information (PII) that is either stored on the card or that can be accessed using it, the greater potential that privacy concerns may be raised.<ref> TCRP Legal Research Digest 25.</ref><br />
<br />
Information from Smart Cards can be used for fare collection, billing, marketing and planning, and security purposes. The most significant factor for privacy purposes is that Smart Cards can provide location data on where the card, and by implication the card's user, is located at any particular time. This data may be collected when the card it used to access transit services, or it may eventually be possible to link the card with Global Positioning System (GPS) technology to track its whereabouts at any time (like cellphone data) or at least within a transit venue or vehicle.<ref> TCRP Legal Research Digest 25, p. 5.</ref> If this location information can be linked to other personal information about the user privacy concerns may increase. Highly detailed information about individual travel patterns can be extremely useful for transit planning and programming purposes, but those needs should be balanced against individuals' right to privacy. The key issues will include what type of information is being collection, whether the individual has reasonable expectation of privacy in that information, the reasonableness of the government's purpose in collecting the information, who will have access to it, and how long it will be stored. Courts will give greater latitude where public safety and security are involved, but transit agencies should consider adopting policy guidelines governing the collection, use and storage of personal information. Some states have adopted statutes that may affect information gathering by transit agencies.<ref>TCRP Legal Research Digest 25, pp. 17-23.</ref> A 2006 survey conducted by the Transportation Research Board found few agencies that had adopted Smart Cards but many which were considering it, and of those which had most limited the type of personal information collected and whether it could be correlated with outside information.<ref>TCRP Legal Brief 15, pp. 20-21.</ref> Caltrans has privacy guidelines that may be useful to transit agencies in developing appropriate policies.<ref>http://www.dot.ca.gov/privacy.html</ref><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
<br />
[http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_lrd_14.pdf McNulty, M. (2000). "Treatment of Privacy Issues in the Public Transportation Industry." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]<br />
<br />
: This report discusses various privacy issues that may arise within the public transportation industry both in the workplace and involving customers and their private information.<br />
<br />
[http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_lrd_25.pdf Dempsey, P. S. (2008). "Privacy Issues with the Use of Smart Cards." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]<br />
<br />
: This report examines basic privacy issues associated with the collection, use, and storage of financial and trip data associated with the use of transit smart cards.<br />
<br />
[[Category:Managing transit]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Streetcar_alternatives&diff=4160Streetcar alternatives2017-04-16T16:43:22Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{template:stub}}<br />
[[File:MPLS-Streetcar.jpg|right|thumb|350px|Rendering of a proposed streetcar in Minneapolis, MN.]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Thanks to the recent revival of neighborhoods served by streetcars in cities like Portland, Oregon, there’s a common conception that streetcars are a magic development bullet. The conventional wisdom suggests that the presence of “rails in the ground” sends a signal to developers that the transit infrastructure in question is permanent, while buses lack this sense of permanence. Like any claim of cause and effect, this assertion should be viewed skeptically on a number of grounds.<br />
<br />
Foremost, new streetcars are typically accompanied with a number of other public investments in the street-scape that are independent from the vehicle technology, i.e. transit stop enhancements like improved shelters, signage and aesthetic features; these other investments could help explain investments by the private sector. Furthermore, many of these street-scape enhancements could be implemented just as easily to enhance existing bus service to obtain virtually all of the mobility benefits. Various treatments associated with BRT can provide a transit experience that is similar -- if not identical -- to streetcar service at a fraction of the cost of embedding rails in the streets and installing overhead wires.<br />
<br />
==Strategies==<br />
<br />
===Right of way enhancements===<br />
<br />
Enhancements to the right-of-way in which the vehicle travels can improve the speed and comfort of the ride.<br />
<br />
*'''Exclusive travel lanes''' principally reduce costs for agencies and improve service by allowing transit vehicles to bypass congested corridors without traffic delay. Transit-only lanes can also reduce conflicts between transit vehicles and other traffic, i.e. lane changes and turning movements.<br />
*'''[[Transit signal priority (TSP)]]''' systems provide transit vehicles with preferential treatment at intersections, extending green lights for approaching transit vehicles and shortening red light cycles for stopped transit vehicles. The system typically works via transponders on transit vehicles that communicate the vehicle's position to the traffic signal.<br />
<br />
===Station stop enhancements===<br />
<br />
[[File:Portland_Bus_Stop.jpg|thumb|right|300px|A bus stop featuring all the amenities as one might expect at streetcar stop.]]<br />
<br />
Enhancements to the transit stop/station can [[improve out-of-vehicle experience for transit users]] and increase the sense of permanence.<br />
<br />
* '''Shelters''' and other street furniture provide a more pleasant waiting environment for transit patrons.<br />
* '''Level boarding''' facilitates faster and easier boarding, especially for those with limited physical mobility.<br />
* '''Curb extensions''' allows the bus to pick up and drop off passengers without having to pull out of and back into traffic.<br />
<br />
===Vehicle enhancements===<br />
Use of special vehicles<br />
* '''Iconic vehicles and livery''' can help better brand bus service to make it more recognizable and legible to the community.<br />
* '''Articulated buses''' can provide much of the capacity benefits of a streetcar.<br />
* '''[[Alternative fuel vehicles]]''' such as Natural Gas or Electric Buses to reduce noise and/or emissions.<br />
<br />
===Service enhancements===<br />
Enhancements to the frequency and duration of service, or specialized routes to serve certain corridors.<br />
* Increased frequency<br />
* Increased span of service<br />
* Specialized routes<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
[[Category:Investment and planning]]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Complete_streets&diff=4159Complete streets2017-04-16T16:20:00Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Category:First and Last Mile]]<br />
[[Image:Completestreet.jpg|right|thumb|600px|A complete street with a two-way protected cycletrack in Vancouver. Source: [https://www.flickr.com/photos/pwkrueger/5862131243 Paul Krueger]]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
For the better part of the last century, streets have been designed around the automobile at the expense of pedestrians and cyclists. The complete streets movement aims to redesign the nation's streets so that they are equally welcoming to all road users. Complete streets increase safety, create more livable communities, stimulate economic activity, and improve the environment.<br />
<br />
Caltrans defines a complete street as: “a transportation facility that is planned, designed, operated, and maintained to provide safe mobility for all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, transit vehicles, truckers, and motorists, appropriate to the function and context of the facility."<ref>[http://www.dot.ca.gov/transplanning/ocp/complete-streets.html Caltrans. "Complete Streets Program."]</ref><br />
<br />
==Complete Street Strategies==<br />
There are a wide variety of techniques that cities can use to redesign their streets. Three of the main areas of complete streets projects are roadways, intersections, and sidewalks.<ref>[http://planning.lacity.org/documents/policy/CompleteStreetDesignGuide.pdf City of Los Angeles. "Complete Streets Design Guide."]</ref><br />
<br />
===Roadways===<br />
* '''Lane reconfigurations''' - Complete streets are, at their heart, about redesigning streets to work better for more users. One of the best ways to do this is through a road diet - removing automobile travel lanes to make room for other road users, shorten crossing distances, and encourage safer speeds. If removing lanes is infeasible, these goals can be accomplished by narrowing the lanes.<br />
* '''Bicycle lanes''' - Road space reclaimed by a road diet or lane narrowing can be used to create safe bike infrastructure. Basic painted bicycle lanes are a start, but lanes protected by medians or posts further increase safety. Sharrows painted in the travel lane can help alert cars to the presence of cyclists on roads without room for dedicated bicycle lanes.<br />
* '''Bus lanes''' - Bus lanes are another use for reclaimed road space. If mid-day bus service is relatively infrequent, then designating lanes as bus-only during just peak hours can be an efficient use of space. On major bus corridors, fully separated median-running lanes will allow for the best service.<br />
* '''Pedestrian plazas''' - Some unsafe or low-volume streets can be closed to automobiles entirely, creating vibrant pedestrian spaces. Plazas should be well marked to prevent cars from entering them, and the implementing agency should find a community partner to help keep the space clean.<br />
[[Image:Roundabout 1.jpg|right|thumb|350px|Mini traffic circles can slow vehicles on low-volume streets. Source: [https://www.flickr.com/photos/drdul/180850940 Richard Drdul]]]<br />
===Intersections===<br />
* '''Crosswalk improvements''' - At a minimum, crosswalks should be striped to promote visibility. For midblock crossings, consider raising crosswalks to the level of the sidewalk. Raised crosswalks improve visibility, make the crossing easier (especially for people with physical impairments), and act as speed humps to slow cars. <br />
* '''Signal changes''' - A leading pedestrian interval is a signaling strategy that gives pedestrians a head start at crossings to reduce crash risk. At intersections with especially high volumes of pedestrian traffic consider installing exclusive pedestrian phases. Also known as scramble crosswalks, these block vehicle traffic and let pedestrians cross in any direction, including diagonally. <br />
* '''Curb extensions''' - Many modern intersections have very wide curbs. This encourages faster turning by drivers and increases crossing distances for pedestrians. Corner bulbouts extend the sidewalk into the street to solve these problems. Curb extensions can also be installed mid-block to encourage slower speeds.<br />
* '''Traffic circles and roundabouts''' - Conventional four-way intersections are inefficient, confusing, and come with the risk of head-on collisions. Roundabouts regulate traffic in a way that simultaneously decreases speeds while improving intersection throughput. On smaller streets, mini traffic circles can be used to reduce speeds.<br />
<br />
===Sidewalks===<br />
* '''Public seating''' - Seating reinforces the idea that sidewalks are public space to be enjoyed, not just transportation corridors. Seating encourages socialization and promotes pedestrian activity, which makes areas more pleasant, safer, and better for local businesses. In most cases public seating should be permanently affixed to the ground to keep it in place.<br />
* '''Outdoor dining''' - Rather than being an inappropriate private use of public space, sidewalk dining is a highly desirable driver of urban activity and should be encouraged. Because it does use the public right-of-way, strict rules must be in place to preserve pedestrian access to the sidewalk. Fully enclosed sidewalk dining should be prohibited, as it allows restaurants to use public space without stimulating street life.<br />
* '''Landscaping''' - Street trees and other landscaping elements are hugely beneficial to a street. Not only are they pretty, but they can provide shade, reduce stormwater runoff, improve air quality, and even reduce vehicle speeds by visually narrowing the street. Pick plants that are compatible with the local climate with minimal irrigation and that will not grow too big for the area in which they are planted. <br />
* '''Bicycle parking''' - Providing abundant bike parking encourages more people to ride because they know they will have a place to lock their bike when they reach their destinations. By providing a dedicated space for bike parking, racks reduce the likelihood that people will clutter the sidewalk by haphazardly locking to fences or street poles. Racks should have two points of contact to keep bicycles upright and allow riders to easily lock both the wheels and frame; inverted-U racks are a good choice.<br />
<br />
==Living Streets and Shared Streets ==<br />
<br />
Living streets are policies similar to complete streets in that they promote roads for different types of travel.<ref>[http://www.modelstreetdesignmanual.com/ Bogert, S. (2011). "Living Streets Design Manual." Model Design Manual for Living Streets. LA County Department of Public Health.]</ref> Livable Streets has additional aims including:<br />
<br />
* Promoting economic growth "without inviting gentrification of longtime residents and businesses"<br />
* Transforming important streets into public spaces for walking, biking, and interaction.<br />
* Inviting people to interact with street furniture, public art, architecture and landscaping to promote the community's brand.<br />
* Sustaining and restoring environments by introducing infrastructure that catches rainwater and cleans runoff.<br />
* Encourage healthy and active transportation such as walking and biking and healthy lifestyles<br />
* Introduce traffic calming measures appropriate to the environment (e.g. in residential areas).<br />
<br />
Shared streets are street layouts in which pedestrian and automobile traffic in integrated. The model is popular in Europe, Israel, Japan, and Australia.<ref>[http://web.mit.edu/ebj/www/doc/JAPAv61n4.pdf Ben-Joseph, E. (1995). "Changing the residential street scene: Adapting the shared street (woonerf) concept to the suburban environment." Journal of the American Planning Association.]</ref><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/></div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Complete_streets&diff=4158Complete streets2017-04-16T16:10:02Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Category:First and Last Mile]]<br />
[[Image:Completestreet.jpg|right|thumb|600px|A complete street with a two-way protected cycletrack in Vancouver. Source: [https://www.flickr.com/photos/pwkrueger/5862131243 Paul Krueger]]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
For the better part of the last century, streets have been designed around the automobile at the expense of pedestrians and cyclists. The complete streets movement aims to redesign the nation's streets so that they are equally welcoming to all road users. Complete streets increase safety, create more livable communities, stimulate economic activity, and improve the environment.<br />
<br />
Caltrans defines a complete street as: “a transportation facility that is planned, designed, operated, and maintained to provide safe mobility for all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, transit vehicles, truckers, and motorists, appropriate to the function and context of the facility. Complete street concepts apply to all roadways in all contexts including local roads and state highways in rural, suburban, and urban areas.”<br />
<br />
==Complete Street Strategies==<br />
There are a wide variety of techniques that cities can use to redesign their streets. Three of the main areas of complete streets projects are roadways, intersections, and sidewalks.<br />
<br />
===Roadways===<br />
* '''Lane reconfigurations''' - Complete streets are, at their heart, about redesigning streets to work better for more users. One of the best ways to do this is through a road diet - removing automobile travel lanes to make room for other road users, shorten crossing distances, and encourage safer speeds. If removing lanes is infeasible, these goals can be accomplished by narrowing the lanes.<br />
* '''Bicycle lanes''' - Road space reclaimed by a road diet or lane narrowing can be used to create safe bike infrastructure. Basic painted bicycle lanes are a start, but lanes protected by medians or posts further increase safety. Sharrows painted in the travel lane can help alert cars to the presence of cyclists on roads without room for dedicated bicycle lanes.<br />
* '''Bus lanes''' - Bus lanes are another use for reclaimed road space. If mid-day bus service is relatively infrequent, then designating lanes as bus-only during just peak hours can be an efficient use of space. On major bus corridors, fully separated median-running lanes will allow for the best service.<br />
* '''Pedestrian plazas''' - Some unsafe or low-volume streets can be closed to automobiles entirely, creating vibrant pedestrian spaces. Plazas should be well marked to prevent cars from entering them, and the implementing agency should find a community partner to help keep the space clean.<br />
[[Image:Roundabout 1.jpg|right|thumb|350px|Mini traffic circles can slow vehicles on low-volume streets. Source: [https://www.flickr.com/photos/drdul/180850940 Richard Drdul]]]<br />
===Intersections===<br />
* '''Crosswalk improvements''' - At a minimum, crosswalks should be striped to promote visibility. For midblock crossings, consider raising crosswalks to the level of the sidewalk. Raised crosswalks improve visibility, make the crossing easier (especially for people with physical impairments), and act as speed humps to slow cars. <br />
* '''Signal changes''' - A leading pedestrian interval is a signaling strategy that gives pedestrians a head start at crossings to reduce crash risk. At intersections with especially high volumes of pedestrian traffic consider installing exclusive pedestrian phases. Also known as scramble crosswalks, these block vehicle traffic and let pedestrians cross in any direction, including diagonally. <br />
* '''Curb extensions''' - Many modern intersections have very wide curbs. This encourages faster turning by drivers and increases crossing distances for pedestrians. Corner bulbouts extend the sidewalk into the street to solve these problems. Curb extensions can also be installed mid-block to encourage slower speeds.<br />
* '''Traffic circles and roundabouts''' - Conventional four-way intersections are inefficient, confusing, and come with the risk of head-on collisions. Roundabouts regulate traffic in a way that simultaneously decreases speeds while improving intersection throughput. On smaller streets, mini traffic circles can be used to reduce speeds.<br />
<br />
===Sidewalks===<br />
* '''Public seating''' - Seating reinforces the idea that sidewalks are public space to be enjoyed, not just transportation corridors. Seating encourages socialization and promotes pedestrian activity, which makes areas more pleasant, safer, and better for local businesses. In most cases public seating should be permanently affixed to the ground to keep it in place.<br />
* '''Outdoor dining''' - Rather than being an inappropriate private use of public space, sidewalk dining is a highly desirable driver of urban activity and should be encouraged. Because it does use the public right-of-way, strict rules must be in place to preserve pedestrian access to the sidewalk. Fully enclosed sidewalk dining should be prohibited, as it allows restaurants to use public space without stimulating street life.<br />
* '''Landscaping''' - Street trees and other landscaping elements are hugely beneficial to a street. Not only are they pretty, but they can provide shade, reduce stormwater runoff, improve air quality, and even reduce vehicle speeds by visually narrowing the street. Pick plants that are compatible with the local climate with minimal irrigation and that will not grow too big for the area in which they are planted. <br />
* '''Bicycle parking''' - Providing abundant bike parking encourages more people to ride because they know they will have a place to lock their bike when they reach their destinations. By providing a dedicated space for bike parking, racks reduce the likelihood that people will clutter the sidewalk by haphazardly locking to fences or street poles. Racks should have two points of contact to keep bicycles upright and allow riders to easily lock both the wheels and frame; inverted-U racks are a good choice.<br />
<br />
==Living Streets and Shared Streets ==<br />
<br />
Living streets are policies similar to complete streets in that they promote roads for different types of travel.<ref>[http://www.modelstreetdesignmanual.com/ Bogert, S. (2011). "Living Streets Design Manual." Model Design Manual for Living Streets. LA County Department of Public Health.]</ref> Livable Streets has additional aims including:<br />
<br />
* Promoting economic growth "without inviting gentrification of longtime residents and businesses"<br />
* Transforming important streets into public spaces for walking, biking, and interaction.<br />
* Inviting people to interact with street furniture, public art, architecture and landscaping to promote the community's brand.<br />
* Sustaining and restoring environments by introducing infrastructure that catches rainwater and cleans runoff.<br />
* Encourage healthy and active transportation such as walking and biking and healthy lifestyles<br />
* Introduce traffic calming measures appropriate to the environment (e.g. in residential areas).<br />
<br />
Shared streets are street layouts in which pedestrian and automobile traffic in integrated. The model is popular in Europe, Israel, Japan, and Australia <ref> Ben-Joseph, Eran. "Changing the residential street scene: Adapting the shared street (woonerf) concept to the suburban environment." Journal of the American Planning Association 61.4 (1995): 504-515 </ref>. <br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/></div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=File:Completestreet.jpg&diff=4157File:Completestreet.jpg2017-04-16T15:58:40Z<p>Rabiabonour: A complete street with a two-way protected cycletrack in Vancouver. Source: [https://www.flickr.com/photos/pwkrueger/5862131243 Paul Krueger]</p>
<hr />
<div>A complete street with a two-way protected cycletrack in Vancouver. Source: [https://www.flickr.com/photos/pwkrueger/5862131243 Paul Krueger]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Complete_streets&diff=4156Complete streets2017-04-15T04:03:43Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Template:Stub}}[[Category:First and Last Mile]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
For the better part of the last century, streets have been designed around the automobile at the expense of pedestrians and cyclists. The complete streets movement aims to redesign the nation's streets so that they are equally welcoming to all road users. Complete streets increase safety, create more livable communities, stimulate economic activity, and improve the environment.<br />
<br />
Caltrans defines a complete street as: “a transportation facility that is planned, designed, operated, and maintained to provide safe mobility for all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, transit vehicles, truckers, and motorists, appropriate to the function and context of the facility. Complete street concepts apply to all roadways in all contexts including local roads and state highways in rural, suburban, and urban areas.”<br />
<br />
==Complete Street Strategies==<br />
There are a wide variety of techniques that cities can use to redesign their streets. Three of the main areas of complete streets projects are roadways, intersections, and sidewalks.<br />
<br />
===Roadways===<br />
* '''Lane reconfigurations''' - Complete streets are, at their heart, about redesigning streets to work better for more users. One of the best ways to do this is through a road diet - removing automobile travel lanes to make room for other road users, shorten crossing distances, and encourage safer speeds. If removing lanes is infeasible, these goals can be accomplished by narrowing the lanes.<br />
* '''Bicycle lanes''' - Road space reclaimed by a road diet or lane narrowing can be used to create safe bike infrastructure. Basic painted bicycle lanes are a start, but lanes protected by medians or posts further increase safety. Sharrows painted in the travel lane can help alert cars to the presence of cyclists on roads without room for dedicated bicycle lanes.<br />
* '''Bus lanes''' - Bus lanes are another use for reclaimed road space. If mid-day bus service is relatively infrequent, then designating lanes as bus-only during just peak hours can be an efficient use of space. On major bus corridors, fully separated median-running lanes will allow for the best service.<br />
* '''Pedestrian plazas''' - Some unsafe or low-volume streets can be closed to automobiles entirely, creating vibrant pedestrian spaces. Plazas should be well marked to prevent cars from entering them, and the implementing agency should find a community partner to help keep the space clean.<br />
<br />
===Intersections===<br />
* '''Crosswalk improvements''' - At a minimum, crosswalks should be striped to promote visibility. For midblock crossings, consider raising crosswalks to the level of the sidewalk. Raised crosswalks improve visibility, make the crossing easier (especially for people with physical impairments), and act as speed humps to slow cars. <br />
* '''Signal changes''' - A leading pedestrian interval is a signaling strategy that gives pedestrians a head start at crossings to reduce crash risk. At intersections with especially high volumes of pedestrian traffic consider installing exclusive pedestrian phases. Also known as scramble crosswalks, these block vehicle traffic and let pedestrians cross in any direction, including diagonally. <br />
* '''Curb extensions''' - Many modern intersections have very wide curbs. This encourages faster turning by drivers and increases crossing distances for pedestrians. Corner bulbouts extend the sidewalk into the street to solve these problems. Curb extensions can also be installed mid-block to encourage slower speeds.<br />
* '''Traffic circles and roundabouts''' - Conventional four-way intersections are inefficient, confusing, and come with the risk of head-on collisions. Roundabouts regulate traffic in a way that simultaneously decreases speeds while improving intersection throughput. On smaller streets, mini traffic circles can be used to reduce speeds.<br />
<br />
===Sidewalks===<br />
* '''Public seating''' - Seating reinforces the idea that sidewalks are public space to be enjoyed, not just transportation corridors. Seating encourages socialization and promotes pedestrian activity, which makes areas more pleasant, safer, and better for local businesses. In most cases public seating should be permanently affixed to the ground to keep it in place.<br />
* '''Outdoor dining''' - Rather than being an inappropriate private use of public space, sidewalk dining is a highly desirable driver of urban activity and should be encouraged. Because it does use the public right-of-way, strict rules must be in place to preserve pedestrian access to the sidewalk. Fully enclosed sidewalk dining should be prohibited, as it allows restaurants to use public space without stimulating street life.<br />
* '''Landscaping''' - Street trees and other landscaping elements are hugely beneficial to a street. Not only are they pretty, but they can provide shade, reduce stormwater runoff, improve air quality, and even reduce vehicle speeds by visually narrowing the street. Pick plants that are compatible with the local climate with minimal irrigation and that will not grow too big for the area in which they are planted. <br />
* '''Bicycle parking''' - Providing abundant bike parking encourages more people to ride because they know they will have a place to lock their bike when they reach their destinations. By providing a dedicated space for bike parking, racks reduce the likelihood that people will clutter the sidewalk by haphazardly locking to fences or street poles. Racks should have two points of contact to keep bicycles upright and allow riders to easily lock both the wheels and frame; inverted-U racks are a good choice.<br />
<br />
==Living Streets and Shared Streets ==<br />
<br />
Living streets are policies similar to complete streets in that they promote roads for different types of travel.<ref>[http://www.modelstreetdesignmanual.com/ Bogert, S. (2011). "Living Streets Design Manual." Model Design Manual for Living Streets. LA County Department of Public Health.]</ref> Livable Streets has additional aims including:<br />
<br />
* Promoting economic growth "without inviting gentrification of longtime residents and businesses"<br />
* Transforming important streets into public spaces for walking, biking, and interaction.<br />
* Inviting people to interact with street furniture, public art, architecture and landscaping to promote the community's brand.<br />
* Sustaining and restoring environments by introducing infrastructure that catches rainwater and cleans runoff.<br />
* Encourage healthy and active transportation such as walking and biking and healthy lifestyles<br />
* Introduce traffic calming measures appropriate to the environment (e.g. in residential areas).<br />
<br />
Shared streets are street layouts in which pedestrian and automobile traffic in integrated. The model is popular in Europe, Israel, Japan, and Australia <ref> Ben-Joseph, Eran. "Changing the residential street scene: Adapting the shared street (woonerf) concept to the suburban environment." Journal of the American Planning Association 61.4 (1995): 504-515 </ref>. <br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/></div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Complete_streets&diff=4155Complete streets2017-04-15T04:03:16Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Template:Stub}}[[Category:First and Last Mile]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
For the better part of the last century, streets have been designed around the automobile at the expense of pedestrians and cyclists. The complete streets movement aims to redesign the nation's streets so that they are equally welcoming to all road users. Complete streets increase safety, create more livable communities, stimulate economic activity, and improve the environment.<br />
<br />
Caltrans defines a complete street as: “a transportation facility that is planned, designed, operated, and maintained to provide safe mobility for all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, transit vehicles, truckers, and motorists, appropriate to the function and context of the facility. Complete street concepts apply to all roadways in all contexts including local roads and state highways in rural, suburban, and urban areas.”<br />
<br />
==Complete Street Strategies==<br />
There are a wide variety of techniques that cities can use to redesign their streets. Three of the main areas of complete streets projects are roadways, intersections, and sidewalks.<br />
<br />
===Roadways===<br />
* '''Lane reconfigurations''' - Complete streets are, at their heart, about redesigning streets to work better for more users. One of the best ways to do this is through a road diet - removing automobile travel lanes to make room for other road users, shorten crossing distances, and encourage safer speeds. If removing lanes is infeasible, these goals can be accomplished by narrowing the lanes.<br />
* '''Bicycle lanes''' - Road space reclaimed by a road diet or lane narrowing can be used to create safe bike infrastructure. Basic painted bicycle lanes are a start, but lanes protected by medians or posts further increase safety. Sharrows painted in the travel lane can help alert cars to the presence of cyclists on roads without room for dedicated bicycle lanes.<br />
* '''Bus lanes''' - Bus lanes are another use for reclaimed road space. If mid-day bus service is relatively infrequent, then designating lanes as bus-only during just peak hours can be an efficient use of space. On major bus corridors, fully separated median-running lanes will allow for the best service.<br />
* '''Pedestrian plazas''' - Some unsafe or low-volume streets can be closed to automobiles entirely, creating vibrant pedestrian spaces. Plazas should be well marked to prevent cars from entering them, and the implementing agency should find a community partner to help keep the space clean.<br />
<br />
===Intersections===<br />
* '''Crosswalk improvements''' - At a minimum, crosswalks should be striped to promote visibility. For midblock crossings, consider raising crosswalks to the level of the sidewalk. Raised crosswalks improve visibility, make the crossing easier (especially for people with physical impairments), and act as speed humps to slow cars. <br />
* '''Signal changes''' - A leading pedestrian interval is a signaling strategy that gives pedestrians a head start at crossings to reduce crash risk. At intersections with especially high volumes of pedestrian traffic consider installing exclusive pedestrian phases. Also known as scramble crosswalks, these block vehicle traffic and let pedestrians cross in any direction, including diagonally. <br />
* '''Curb extensions''' - Many modern intersections have very wide curbs. This encourages faster turning by drivers and increases crossing distances for pedestrians. Corner bulbouts extend the sidewalk into the street to solve these problems. Curb extensions can also be installed mid-block to encourage slower speeds.<br />
* '''Traffic circles and roundabouts''' - Conventional four-way intersections are inefficient, confusing, and come with the risk of head-on collisions. Roundabouts regulate traffic in a way that simultaneously decreases speeds while improving intersection throughput. On smaller streets, mini traffic circles can be used to reduce speeds.<br />
<br />
===Sidewalks===<br />
* '''Public seating''' - Seating reinforces the idea that sidewalks are public space to be enjoyed, not just transportation corridors. Seating encourages socialization and promotes pedestrian activity, which makes areas more pleasant, safer, and better for local businesses. In most cases public seating should be permanently affixed to the ground to keep it in place.<br />
* '''Outdoor dining''' - Rather than being an inappropriate private use of public space, sidewalk dining is a highly desirable driver of urban activity and should be encouraged. Because it does use the public right-of-way, strict rules must be in place to preserve pedestrian access to the sidewalk. Fully enclosed sidewalk dining should be prohibited, as it allows restaurants to use public space without stimulating street life.<br />
* '''Landscaping''' - Street trees and other landscaping elements are hugely beneficial to a street. Not only are they pretty, but they can provide shade, reduce stormwater runoff, improve air quality, and even reduce vehicle speeds by visually narrowing the street. Pick plants that are compatible with the local climate with minimal irrigation and that will not grow too big for the area in which they are planted. <br />
* '''Bicycle parking''' - Providing abundant bike parking encourages more people to ride because they know they will have a place to lock their bike when they reach their destinations. By providing a dedicated space for bike parking, racks reduce the likelihood that people will clutter the sidewalk by haphazardly locking to fences or street poles. Racks should have two points of contact to keep bicycles upright and allow riders to easily lock both the wheels and frame; inverted-U racks are a good choice.<br />
<br />
==Living Streets and Shared Streets ==<br />
<br />
Living streets are policies similar to complete streets in that they promote roads for different types of travel.<ref>[http://www.modelstreetdesignmanual.com/ Bogert, S. (2011). "Living Streets Design Manual." Model Design Manual for Living Streets. LA County Department of Public Health.]</ref> Livable Streets has additional aims including:<br />
<br />
* Promote economic growth "without inviting gentrification of longtime residents and businesses"<br />
* Transforming important streets into public spaces for walking, biking, and interaction.<br />
* Inviting people to interact with street furniture, public art, architecture and landscaping to promote the community's brand.<br />
* Sustaining and restoring environments by introducing infrastructure that catches rainwater and cleans runoff.<br />
* Encourage healthy and active transportation such as walking and biking and healthy lifestyles<br />
* Introduce traffic calming measures appropriate to the environment (e.g. in residential areas).<br />
<br />
Shared streets are street layouts in which pedestrian and automobile traffic in integrated. The model is popular in Europe, Israel, Japan, and Australia <ref> Ben-Joseph, Eran. "Changing the residential street scene: Adapting the shared street (woonerf) concept to the suburban environment." Journal of the American Planning Association 61.4 (1995): 504-515 </ref>. <br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/></div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Small-scale_public-private_partnerships&diff=4147Small-scale public-private partnerships2017-04-11T15:58:14Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Artic2.jpg|right|thumb|500px|The Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center is operated as a P3 between the City of Anaheim and Lincoln Property Co. Source: [https://rabiabonour.com/ Rabi Abonour]]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
[[Public private partnership|Public-private partnerships]] (P3s) have become a common way for transit agencies to manage risk and increase efficiency. As popular as P3s are, most of the existing research into them focuses on large projects. While some of this research can be applied to small- to mid-sized P3s, these P3s come with their own challenges. A recent Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) [http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/175901.aspx guidebook] aims to examine what specific strategies can maximize the chance that smaller P3s will succeed. The guidebook includes an Excel-based checklist to help agencies determine if the P3 model is appropriate for a specific project.<br />
<br />
==Public-Private Partnerships==<br />
A public-private partnership is at its simplest a joint effort between a public agency and private corporation. However, this could describe any sort of contracted operations. The guidebook lays out two conditions that have to be met for a project to be considered a P3:<br />
* '''Service provision''' - A P3 must involve a continuous service rather than a one-time transaction. Building a facility does not generally constitute a P3, but building and operating one could.<br />
* '''Risk transfer''' - The core purpose of a P3 for a transit agency is to transfer risk to the private sector. The private entity accepts this risk because of the potential returns on investment.<br />
<br />
Transit agency P3s generally fall into five broad categories: capital improvements, operations and maintenance, real estate development, marketing agreements, and innovative technology (such as the provision of wifi service).<br />
<br />
==Best Practices==<br />
In creating the guidebook the team conducted 16 interviews with the public and private partners in various P3s. From these interviews they assembled a list of nine best practices that agencies should keep in mind when pursuing a public-private partnership:<br />
* '''Identify champions early''' - P3s are most likely to succeed when there are individuals on both sides championing the project. The public champion is vital for connecting departments within the agency and getting approvals, while the private champion can influence approval and secure funding.<br />
* '''Leverage public assets''' - The public partner should never lose sight of its bargaining power. The private partner is coming to the table because of the public sector’s assets (often real estate). These unique assets are a more powerful contribution than cash, which the private sector is capable of providing.<br />
* '''Transfer as much risk as possible''' - The private sector has the ability to take on more upfront risk than the public sector, and this is fundamentally what makes P3s work. A P3 should be structured to minimize the public agency’s financial risk. As seen in the previous point, the public agency can instead leverage assets such as land easements.<br />
* '''Set formal objectives''' - For a P3 to be successful, it needs to benefit both parties. Setting clear objectives and performance targets at the start of the project is important for defining success. The transit agency should determine its goals before issuing a request for proposals and looking for a partner.<br />
* '''Draw on private-sector expertise''' - Transit agencies are knowledgeable about operating transportation systems. They are not always as skilled in the areas of real estate, sponsorship, or technology. In pursuing a P3, an agency should try to recognize its blind spots and let the private partner step up with its specialized expertise.<br />
* '''Select an appropriate, tailored contract method''' - A proper contract forms the base of every good P3. This is the legal expression of the goals, costs, and responsibilities established during the planning process. A contract should be explicit about evaluation, especially in regards to risk transfer and performance monitoring. In a P3 with multiple private partners, consistent contracts build mutual trust.<br />
* '''Involve operational staff early''' - A P3’s public-sector champion is likely going to be someone high at the agency removed from the actual operations of the project. Getting input across the agency early on will both improve the quality of the plan and promote broad buy-in.<br />
* '''Create a realistic schedule''' - Because they involve multiple agencies, P3s have a large number of moving parts and layers of complicated approval processes. These issues should be carefully considered at the planning stage in order to create an appropriate timeline. Committing to an overly ambitious timeline sets both parties up for costly delays.<br />
* '''Establish formal methods of communication and monitoring''' - Communication is critical to the success of a P3. There should be a single project lead at each organization, and these leads should have formal weekly meetings to track progress. Once a project has been implemented, weekly or monthly reports are necessary to monitor progress.<br />
<br />
==P3 Project Screening Checklist==<br />
The P3 Project Screening Checklist is an Excel-based tool developed from the guidebook’s research. While the checklist cannot provide a definitive answer on whether or not an agency should pursue a P3, it can help the agency consider all of the factors that go into making an informed decision. The checklist consists of 57 questions that can be answered with pull-down responses; the selected response will prompt the user to provide an explanation. The questions are divided into five sections: project definition, partnership definition, initiation, planning, implementation, benefits, and other.<br />
<br />
==Case Studies==<br />
===ARTIC===<br />
The Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC) is a $200 million transportation hub in Anaheim, CA. The 67,000 square-foot facility was envisioned as a regional connector, but also as a destination within a redeveloping downtown. The project included 12,000 square feet of retail space, which the city recognized it was unprepared to manage itself. The city contracted management of the retail space (as well as the rest of ARTIC) to Lincoln Property Co. (LPC). LPC was considered a desirable partner because it had experience both with national transportation centers of similar scale and with local Anaheim development. While LPC is proving to be an effective partner, it would have been better to bring the company on before constructing ARTIC to utilize its expertise in designing retail spaces.<br />
<br />
===MBTA Boston Landing Station===<br />
The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) and Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MDOT) partnered with NB Development Group to build an infill commuter rail station in Brighton, MA. NB actually instigated the project, as it wanted transit access for its new headquarters. The owner of the company lived in the area and served as a strong champion for the project. MBTA and MDOT agreed that there could be a station in the area, but could not prioritize it. NB made the project a reality by committing to fund, design, and build the $20 million station and provide some of the operations and maintenance funding for the ten years. As of April 2017 the station is still under construction; the project was delayed because technical staff were not involved early enough, leading to cost underestimates. <br />
<br />
===SamTrans===<br />
The relationship between San Mateo County Transit and MV Transportation is an example of an incentive-based contract that lacks the necessary risk transfer to be categorized as a P3. MV Transportation currently operates various transit services for SamTrans. The contract specifies a variety of performance standards. MV can receive bonuses for exceeding these standards or be penalized for failing to meet them. While this system has led to cost savings and improved service flexibility, a system of revenue sharing would transfer more risk to MV, incentivize even better performance, and make the relationship a true P3.<br />
<br />
==[http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/175901.aspx Public Transportation Guidebook for Small- and Medium-Sized Public-Private Partnerships]==<br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
[https://www.transit.dot.gov/funding/funding-finance-resources/private-sector-participation/private-sector-participation-1 Federal Transit Administration. "Private Sector Participation."]<br />
: The FTA provides guidance on appropriate public-private partnership activities.<br />
<br />
[http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/170953.aspx Thomas, L. W. (2014). "Transit Public-Private Partnerships: Legal Issues." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]<br />
: This publication gives a substantial background into the legal issues involved with P3s, including taxation, bonding, and leasing.</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=File:Artic2.jpg&diff=4146File:Artic2.jpg2017-04-11T15:40:09Z<p>Rabiabonour: The Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center is operated as a P3 between the City of Anaheim and Lincoln Property Co. Source: [https://rabiabonour.com/ Rabi Abonour]</p>
<hr />
<div>The Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center is operated as a P3 between the City of Anaheim and Lincoln Property Co. Source: [https://rabiabonour.com/ Rabi Abonour]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Small-scale_public-private_partnerships&diff=4144Small-scale public-private partnerships2017-04-09T20:38:47Z<p>Rabiabonour: Created page with "==Introduction== Public-private partnerships (P3s) have become a common way for transit agencies to manage risk and increase efficiency. As popu..."</p>
<hr />
<div>==Introduction==<br />
[[Public private partnership|Public-private partnerships]] (P3s) have become a common way for transit agencies to manage risk and increase efficiency. As popular as P3s are, most of the existing research into them focuses on large projects. While some of this research can be applied to small- to mid-sized P3s, these P3s come with their own challenges. A recent Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) [http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/175901.aspx guidebook] aims to examine what specific strategies can maximize the chance that smaller P3s will succeed. The guidebook includes an Excel-based checklist to help agencies determine if the P3 model is appropriate for a specific project.<br />
<br />
==Public-Private Partnerships==<br />
A public-private partnership is at its simplest a joint effort between a public agency and private corporation. However, this could describe any sort of contracted operations. The guidebook lays out two conditions that have to be met for a project to be considered a P3:<br />
* '''Service provision''' - A P3 must involve a continuous service rather than a one-time transaction. Building a facility does not generally constitute a P3, but building and operating one could.<br />
* '''Risk transfer''' - The core purpose of a P3 for a transit agency is to transfer risk to the private sector. The private entity accepts this risk because of the potential returns on investment.<br />
<br />
Transit agency P3s generally fall into five broad categories: capital improvements, operations and maintenance, real estate development, marketing agreements, and innovative technology (such as the provision of wifi service).<br />
<br />
==Best Practices==<br />
In creating the guidebook the team conducted 16 interviews with the public and private partners in various P3s. From these interviews they assembled a list of nine best practices that agencies should keep in mind when pursuing a public-private partnership:<br />
* '''Identify champions early''' - P3s are most likely to succeed when there are individuals on both sides championing the project. The public champion is vital for connecting departments within the agency and getting approvals, while the private champion can influence approval and secure funding.<br />
* '''Leverage public assets''' - The public partner should never lose sight of its bargaining power. The private partner is coming to the table because of the public sector’s assets (often real estate). These unique assets are a more powerful contribution than cash, which the private sector is capable of providing.<br />
* '''Transfer as much risk as possible''' - The private sector has the ability to take on more upfront risk than the public sector, and this is fundamentally what makes P3s work. A P3 should be structured to minimize the public agency’s financial risk. As seen in the previous point, the public agency can instead leverage assets such as land easements.<br />
* '''Set formal objectives''' - For a P3 to be successful, it needs to benefit both parties. Setting clear objectives and performance targets at the start of the project is important for defining success. The transit agency determine its goals before issuing a request for proposals and looking for a partner.<br />
* '''Draw on private-sector expertise''' - Transit agencies are knowledgeable about operating transportation systems. They are not always as skilled in the areas of real estate, sponsorship, or technology. In pursuing a P3, an agency should try to recognize its blind spots and let the private partner step up with its specialized expertise.<br />
* '''Select an appropriate, tailored contract method''' - A proper contract forms the base of every good P3. This is the legal expression of the goals, costs, and responsibilities established during the planning process. A contract should be explicit about evaluation, especially in regards to risk transfer and performance monitoring. In a P3 with multiple private partners, consistent contracts build mutual trust.<br />
* '''Involve operational staff early''' - A P3’s public-sector champion is likely going to be someone high at the agency removed from the actual operations of the project. Getting input across the agency early on will both improve the quality of the plan and promote broad buy-in for the project.<br />
* '''Create a realistic schedule''' - Because they involve multiple agencies, P3s have a large number of moving parts and layers of complicated approval processes. These issues should be carefully considered at the planning stage in order to create an appropriate timeline. Committing to an overly ambitious timeline sets both parties up for costly delays.<br />
* '''Establish formal methods of communication and monitoring''' - Communication is critical to the success of a P3. There should be a single project lead at each organization, and these leads should have formal weekly meetings to track progress. Once a project has been implemented, weekly or monthly reports are necessary to monitor progress.<br />
<br />
==P3 Project Screening Checklist==<br />
The P3 Project Screening Checklist is an Excel-based tool developed from the guidebook’s research. While the checklist cannot provide a definitive answer on whether or not an agency should pursue a P3, it can help the agency consider all of the factors that go into making an informed decision. The checklist consists of 57 questions that can be answered with pull-down responses; the selected response will prompt the user to provide an explanation. The questions are divided into five sections: project definition, partnership definition, initiation, planning, implementation, benefits, and other.<br />
<br />
==Case Studies==<br />
===ARTIC===<br />
The Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center is a $200 million transportation hub in Anaheim, CA. The 67,000 square-foot facility was envisioned as a regional connector, but also as a destination within a redeveloping downtown. The project included 12,000 square feet of retail space, which the city recognized it was unprepared to manage itself. The city contracted management of the retail space (as well as the rest of ARTIC) to Lincoln Property Co. (LPC). LPC was considered a desirable partner because it had experience both with national transportation centers of similar scale and with local Anaheim development. While LPC is proving to be an effective partner, it would have been better to bring the company on before constructing ARTIC to utilize its expertise in designing retail spaces.<br />
<br />
===MBTA Boston Landing Station===<br />
The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority and Massachusetts Department of Transportation partnered with NB Development Group to build an infill commuter rail station in Brighton, MA. NB actually instigated the project, as it wanted transit access for its new headquarters. The owner of the company lived in the area and served as a strong champion for the project. MBTA and MDOT agreed that there could be a station in the area, but could not prioritize it. NB made the project a reality by committing to fund, design, and build the $20 million station and provide some of the operations and maintenance funding for the first decade of the stations existence. As of April 2017 the station is still under construction; the project was delayed because technical staff were not involved early enough, leading to cost underestimates. <br />
<br />
===SamTrans===<br />
The relationship between San Mateo County Transit and MV Transportation is an example of an incentive-based contract that lacks the necessary risk transfer to be categorized as a P3. MV Transportation currently operates various transit services for SamTrans. The contract specifies a variety of performance standards. MV can receive bonuses for exceeding these standards or be penalized for failing to meet them. While this system has led to cost savings and improved service flexibility, a system of revenue sharing would transfer more risk to MV, incentivize even better performance, and make the relationship a true P3.<br />
<br />
==[http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/175901.aspx Public Transportation Guidebook for Small- and Medium-Sized Public-Private Partnerships]==</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=File:Artic.JPG&diff=4143File:Artic.JPG2017-04-09T20:37:35Z<p>Rabiabonour: The Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center is operated as a P3 between the City of Anaheim and Lincoln Property Co. Source: [https://rabiabonour.com/ Rabi Abonour]</p>
<hr />
<div>The Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center is operated as a P3 between the City of Anaheim and Lincoln Property Co. Source: [https://rabiabonour.com/ Rabi Abonour]</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Fare_pricing_and_reform&diff=4104Fare pricing and reform2017-04-01T21:14:57Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:Got-bus-pass.jpeg|right|thumb|x250px|A member of the public at a rally for Free/Reduced Student Passes in Oakland, Photo by J. Moses Ceasar 2005]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Finance and revenue]]<br />
[[Category:Market Response]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Most transit agencies employ largely flat fare systems, which charge the same price, regardless of time of day, distance or direction traveled, or quality of service. However, they do not reflect the actual costs of providing service, which constantly fluctuate throughout the day. Peak period operation, longer trip routes, and premium service all cost the agency more money to operate, and require more capital investments. Additionally, there is the issue of "cross-subsidization"; since flat fares do not distinguish between time, type, or distance of travel, transit users traveling shorter distances, during off-peak hours, and using non-premium services “cross-subsidize” riders on more expensive routes. There is a considerable body of research that argue in favor of flexible, differentiated fares. There are also other fare strategies that transit agencies can consider, such as using smartcard technology, eliminating fares altogether, or providing group fares or other discounts.<br />
<br />
==Differentiated Pricing==<br />
Most transit systems have flat fares, but others use differentiated fares based on time (peak vs. off-peak) or distance traveled. Differentiated fares are more efficient because they better reflect the variable costs of transit service, encourage riders to travel when excess capacity is available, and subsidize all types of riders roughly equally. Some transit agencies worry about losing riders after switching to differentiated pricing, but new fare system can incentivize additional short rides by making them cheaper. More research is needed to draw broader conclusions on the effect on ridership of moving from flat to differentiated fares.<br />
<br />
Any new fare system is going to raise concerns about equity; if low-income riders have longer trips then they will be disproportionately impacted by differentiated pricing. This effect is highly dependent on local settlement patterns. One study in Utah found that a switch to differentiated pricing in a certain part of the Utah Transit Authority's service area would be progressive, reducing fares for low-income and minority riders.<ref>[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856414001785 Farber, S. et al. (2014). "Assessing social equity in distance based transit fares using a model of travel behavior." Transportation Research Part A.]</ref> This isn't necessarily transferable to other areas, though; agencies looking to make the switch will have to do their own [[Transit and Civil Rights|Title VI analyses]].<br />
<br />
In recent decades [[automated fare media]] has greatly simplified the process of collecting differentiated fares. However, many agencies are still wary of the perceived complexity and unpopularity of time- and distance- based fares, and if anything in recent years more agencies have returned to flat fare systems. <ref>[http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_94.pdf Multisystems, Inc., Mundle & Associates, Inc., & Simon & Simon Research Associates, Inc. (2003). "Fare Policies, Structures, and Technologies: Update." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]</ref><br />
<br />
*'''Los Angeles MTA Study'''<br />
:In 2010, Los Angeles Metro looked at the potential for time and distance-based fares for the MTA bus and rail system<ref>[http://media.metro.net/board/Items/2010/09_september/20100915OPItem10.pdf Evaluation of Time and Distance-Based Fare Policies]</ref>.<br />
<br />
:The time-based system would give riders a window of time during which subsequent boardings would not require payment. Transfer fees would be eliminated during that time period. A simple way to implement this would be to use the TAP cards, although the agency would have to look into additional hardware to vend receipts if it wanted to accommodate cash-paying riders as well. One important implication is this system would encourage riders to use the fastest services available, since they would be granted a narrow time window of free transfers. Base fares may have to be increased, since transfer fare revenues will be lost.<br />
<br />
:The distance-based system could apply to Rapid and Express buses, to heavy rail, or to all rail lines. Fares would be based on increments of distance, with corresponding fare zone boundaries identified for each route. While existing hardware and fare media could be used, the agency might have to install fare gates or hire additional people for fare enforcement. An overall concern with a distance-based system is some riders may choose slower, cheaper parallel services because they cannot afford to pay a premium fare.<br />
<br />
==Group Fares==<br />
<br />
Transit agencies can offer [[Deep Discount Group Pass|deep discount group passes]] to employers and universities. In a 2004 dissertation, Cornelius Nuworsoo explores the benefits of discounted fare programs for groups and summarizes the outcomes of unlimited-ride pass programs in Berkeley and Denver.<ref> [http://www.its.berkeley.edu/publications/UCB/2004/DS/UCB-ITS-DS-2004-2.pdf "Deep Discount Group Pass Programs as Instruments for Increasing Transit Revenue and Ridership."] </ref> There is an associated Access Magazine article that can be found on the Access website at http://www.accessmagazine.org<br />
<br />
==Fares Based on Ability to Pay==<br />
The SFMTA is currently conducting a study on developing a fare system that takes into account passengers' ability to pay, rather than simply on their ages. The SFMTA does have a Lifeline pass program, which provides a 50 percent discount on the monthly pass for residents whose incomes are below 200% of the federal poverty level. However, fewer than 20,000 people use the Lifeline system, since it is burdensome and requires a lot of paperwork for all parties. <ref> [http://www.planetizen.com/node/59552 Bay Area Considers Basing Transit Fares on Need] </ref> The proposed fare system would ideally cut down on red tape and provide discounts for those in financial need.<br />
<br />
==Fare-Free Transit==<br />
Cities provide a variety of services, such as parks and libraries, to everyone with no direct fee. Proponents of fare-free transit argue that public transportation should be provided in the same way.<ref>[http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/167498.aspx Volinski, J. (2012). "Implementation and Outcomes of Fare-Free Transit Systems." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]</ref> Fare-free transit would be beneficial to low-income riders, especially to people of color who are more likely to be stopped for farebeating. Fare-free transit is also seen by supporters as a way to reduce dwell times, lower administrative costs, and grow transit ridership. Opponents of of fare-free transit argue that the lost revenue, when coupled with additional demand, would stretch agency resources too thin and harm service quality. There are also concerns about loitering and vandalism, though the extent to which this is a serious problem is a matter of debate.<br />
<br />
The practicality of fare-free transit seems to be tied in part to the size of the system. There are multiple possible reasons for this, but farebox recovery ratios play a role. Large transit systems like those in New York City or the San Francisco Bay can have farebox recovery ratios of more than 40%, meaning that switching to fare-free service would represent a huge loss in revenue.<ref>[http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/15/07/05/the-list-the-10-u-s-transit-agencies-that-rely-most-on-fare-revenues/ Rinde, Meir. (2015). "The List: The 10 U.S. Transit Agencies that Rely Most on Fare Revenues." NJ Spotlight.]</ref> On the other hand, for small systems that number might be less than 10%. Given the cost of collecting fares (fareboxes, payment processing systems, increased dwell time), it's possible that moving fare-free could actually improve system finances. Successful fare-free system are typically in small areas dominated by either universities or resorts.<br />
<br />
===Fare-Free Case Studies=== <br />
<br />
* '''Corvallis Transit System''' - CTS serves a Corvallis, OR, a city of 55,000 people (including 20,000 Oregon State University students). In 2011 CTS made the decision to go fare-free as a way to reduce car dependency. Funding, which had previous come from fares and student fees at OSU, was replaced with a $2.75 a month charge to Corvallis Utility customers. The program has been seen as a success; ridership grew nearly 38% in the first year and schedule performance improved. The program is relatively new, but seems to be performing well.<br />
* '''Breckenridge Free Ride''' - Breckenridge, CO is a ski resort town with a population of just a couple thousand people, but 50,000 visitors a weekend during peak season. The city set up a fare-free transit system to ease tourist congestion and help residents get around. Free Ride had 670,000 riders in 2009. Operational expenses come out of the town's general fund. This has worked so far but is susceptible to economic downtown, so the town is looking for new funding mechanisms. Ridership is steadily growing, and strict anti-loitering rules keep the buses moving smoothly.<br />
* '''Link Transit''' - Washington State's Link Transit is a larger rural system serving 105,000 people over and area of 3,500 miles. It currently operates 55 buses and 22 paratransit vehicles with a budget of $11 million per year. It was established in 1989 and had no problems operating fare-free for the next decade. However, in 1999 voters eliminated the motor vehicle excise tax that had provided Link Transit with most of its funding. The agency lost 45% of its operating revenue and was forced to charge fares. The conservative area had never fully embraced the fare-free system. The current fares account for 6% of operating expenses and disproportionately effect minorities and the elderly.<br />
* '''San Francisco Municipal Railway''' - In 2008, San Francisco Muni conducted a study on the cost-effectiveness of a fare-free system. The study concluded that Muni would see increased operating expenses and capital investments, even though the costs of fare collection would be eliminated. Muni would need an additional $184 million a year for operations, as well as an additional $519 million to procure the vehicles, facilities, and infrastructure needed to accommodate the ridership increase. The city abandoned its fare-free plan after seeing the results of the study.<ref>[http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Free-ride-Fat-chance-Muni-fares-will-stay-3229342.php Gordon, R. (2008). "Free Ride? Fat Chance: Muni Fares Will Stay." SFGate.]</ref><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
Cervero, Robert. [http://www.springerlink.com/index/r52126220g7t501.pdf| "Flat versus differentiated pricing: What's a fair fare?"] 1981. <br />
: Cervero explores the efficiency and equity of different pricing structure by comparing transit fares and the cost to provide service. He finds that flat fare structures generally result in short-distance, off-peak riders subsidizing long-distance, peak hour customers. A subscription is required to access this article.<br />
<br />
Transit Cooperative Research Program. [http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_94.pdf|"Fare Policies, Structures, and Technologies: Update."] 2003. <br />
:The Federal Transit Administration commissioned this report to identify and evaluate different approaches to fare policy, structure, and collection technologies, with special consideration given to the customer benefits and challenges and equity concerns of each approach.<br />
<br />
Transit Cooperative Research Program. [http://www.trb.org/publications/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_95c12.pdf|"Transit Pricing and Fares: Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes."] 2004.<br />
: This document summarizes literature on ridership changes in response to different fare adjustments, including the introduction of variable fares and differentiating peak and off-peak fares. Few studies explore the relationship between transitioning to differential pricing and ridership levels.</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Fare_pricing_and_reform&diff=4103Fare pricing and reform2017-04-01T20:00:14Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:Got-bus-pass.jpeg|right|thumb|x250px|A member of the public at a rally for Free/Reduced Student Passes in Oakland, Photo by J. Moses Ceasar 2005]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Finance and revenue]]<br />
[[Category:Market Response]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Most transit agencies employ largely flat fare systems, which charge the same price, regardless of time of day, distance or direction traveled, or quality of service. However, they do not reflect the actual costs of providing service, which constantly fluctuate throughout the day. Peak period operation, longer trip routes, and premium service all cost the agency more money to operate, and require more capital investments. Additionally, there is the issue of "cross-subsidization"; since flat fares do not distinguish between time, type, or distance of travel, transit users traveling shorter distances, during off-peak hours, and using non-premium services “cross-subsidize” riders on more expensive routes. There is a considerable body of research that argue in favor of flexible, differentiated fares. There are also other fare strategies that transit agencies can consider, such as using smartcard technology, eliminating fares altogether, or providing group fares or other discounts.<br />
<br />
==Differentiated Pricing==<br />
Most transit systems have flat fares, but others use differentiated fares based on time or distance traveled. Differentiated fares are more efficient because they better reflect the variable costs of transit service, encourage riders to travel when excess capacity is available, and subsidize all types of riders roughly equally. Some transit agencies worry about losing riders after switching to differentiated pricing, but new fare system can incentivize additional short rides by making them cheaper. More research is needed to draw broader conclusions on the effect on ridership of moving from flat to differentiated fares.<br />
<br />
Any new fare system is going to raise concerns about equity; if low-income riders have longer trips then they will be disproportionately impacted by differentiated pricing. This effect is highly dependent on local settlement patterns. One study in Utah found that a switch to differentiated pricing in a certain part of the Utah Transit Authority's service area would be progressive, reducing fares for low-income and minority riders.<ref>[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856414001785 Farber, S. et al. (2014). "Assessing social equity in distance based transit fares using a model of travel behavior." Transportation Research Part A.]</ref> This isn't necessarily transferable to other areas, though; agencies looking to make the switch will have to do their own [[Transit and Civil Rights|Title VI analyses]].<br />
<br />
Additionally, recent technology has made it much more feasible to collect differentiated fares. [[Automated fare media]] such as electronic, magnetic stripe contact cards, smart cards, and even cell phones enable differential fare collection in a way that a paper based system cannot. Because automated fare media provide the technological base for more complex fare structures, agencies should consider the possibility of adopting different pricing structures in the future when making capital investments in fareboxes and turnstiles. This may eliminate or reduce expensive barriers to implementing differential pricing.<br />
<br />
*'''Los Angeles MTA Study'''<br />
:In 2010, Los Angeles Metro looked at the potential for time and distance-based fares for the MTA bus and rail system<ref>[http://media.metro.net/board/Items/2010/09_september/20100915OPItem10.pdf Evaluation of Time and Distance-Based Fare Policies]</ref>.<br />
<br />
:The time-based system would give riders a window of time during which subsequent boardings would not require payment. Transfer fees would be eliminated during that time period. A simple way to implement this would be to use the TAP cards, although the agency would have to look into additional hardware to vend receipts if it wanted to accommodate cash-paying riders as well. One important implication is this system would encourage riders to use the fastest services available, since they would be granted a narrow time window of free transfers. Base fares may have to be increased, since transfer fare revenues will be lost.<br />
<br />
:The distance-based system could apply to Rapid and Express buses, to heavy rail, or to all rail lines. Fares would be based on increments of distance, with corresponding fare zone boundaries identified for each route. While existing hardware and fare media could be used, the agency might have to install fare gates or hire additional people for fare enforcement. An overall concern with a distance-based system is some riders may choose slower, cheaper parallel services because they cannot afford to pay a premium fare.<br />
<br />
==Group Fares==<br />
<br />
Transit agencies can offer [[Deep Discount Group Pass|deep discount group passes]] to employers and universities. In a 2004 dissertation, Cornelius Nuworsoo explores the benefits of discounted fare programs for groups and summarizes the outcomes of unlimited-ride pass programs in Berkeley and Denver.<ref> [http://www.its.berkeley.edu/publications/UCB/2004/DS/UCB-ITS-DS-2004-2.pdf "Deep Discount Group Pass Programs as Instruments for Increasing Transit Revenue and Ridership."] </ref> There is an associated Access Magazine article that can be found on the Access website at http://www.accessmagazine.org<br />
<br />
==Fares Based on Ability to Pay==<br />
The SFMTA is currently conducting a study on developing a fare system that takes into account passengers' ability to pay, rather than simply on their ages. The SFMTA does have a Lifeline pass program, which provides a 50 percent discount on the monthly pass for residents whose incomes are below 200% of the federal poverty level. However, fewer than 20,000 people use the Lifeline system, since it is burdensome and requires a lot of paperwork for all parties. <ref> [http://www.planetizen.com/node/59552 Bay Area Considers Basing Transit Fares on Need] </ref> The proposed fare system would ideally cut down on red tape and provide discounts for those in financial need.<br />
<br />
==Fare-Free Transit==<br />
Cities provide a variety of services, such as parks and libraries, to everyone with no direct fee. Proponents of fare-free transit argue that public transportation should be provided in the same way.<ref>[http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/167498.aspx Volinski, J. (2012). "Implementation and Outcomes of Fare-Free Transit Systems." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]</ref> Fare-free transit would be beneficial to low-income riders, especially to people of color who are more likely to be stopped for farebeating. Fare-free transit is also seen by supporters as a way to reduce dwell times, lower administrative costs, and grow transit ridership. Opponents of of fare-free transit argue that the lost revenue, when coupled with additional demand, would stretch agency resources too thin and harm service quality. There are also concerns about loitering and vandalism, though the extent to which this is a serious problem is a matter of debate.<br />
<br />
The practicality of fare-free transit seems to be tied in part to the size of the system. There are multiple possible reasons for this, but farebox recovery ratios play a role. Large transit systems like those in New York City or the San Francisco Bay can have farebox recovery ratios of more than 40%, meaning that switching to fare-free service would represent a huge loss in revenue.<ref>[http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/15/07/05/the-list-the-10-u-s-transit-agencies-that-rely-most-on-fare-revenues/ Rinde, Meir. (2015). "The List: The 10 U.S. Transit Agencies that Rely Most on Fare Revenues." NJ Spotlight.]</ref> On the other hand, for small systems that number might be less than 10%. Given the cost of collecting fares (fareboxes, payment processing systems, increased dwell time), it's possible that moving fare-free could actually improve system finances. Successful fare-free system are typically in small areas dominated by either universities or resorts.<br />
<br />
===Fare-Free Case Studies=== <br />
<br />
* '''Corvallis Transit System''' - CTS serves a Corvallis, OR, a city of 55,000 people (including 20,000 Oregon State University students). In 2011 CTS made the decision to go fare-free as a way to reduce car dependency. Funding, which had previous come from fares and student fees at OSU, was replaced with a $2.75 a month charge to Corvallis Utility customers. The program has been seen as a success; ridership grew nearly 38% in the first year and schedule performance improved. The program is relatively new, but seems to be performing well.<br />
* '''Breckenridge Free Ride''' - Breckenridge, CO is a ski resort town with a population of just a couple thousand people, but 50,000 visitors a weekend during peak season. The city set up a fare-free transit system to ease tourist congestion and help residents get around. Free Ride had 670,000 riders in 2009. Operational expenses come out of the town's general fund. This has worked so far but is susceptible to economic downtown, so the town is looking for new funding mechanisms. Ridership is steadily growing, and strict anti-loitering rules keep the buses moving smoothly.<br />
* '''Link Transit''' - Washington State's Link Transit is a larger rural system serving 105,000 people over and area of 3,500 miles. It currently operates 55 buses and 22 paratransit vehicles with a budget of $11 million per year. It was established in 1989 and had no problems operating fare-free for the next decade. However, in 1999 voters eliminated the motor vehicle excise tax that had provided Link Transit with most of its funding. The agency lost 45% of its operating revenue and was forced to charge fares. The conservative area had never fully embraced the fare-free system. The current fares account for 6% of operating expenses and disproportionately effect minorities and the elderly.<br />
* '''San Francisco Municipal Railway''' - In 2008, San Francisco Muni conducted a study on the cost-effectiveness of a fare-free system. The study concluded that Muni would see increased operating expenses and capital investments, even though the costs of fare collection would be eliminated. Muni would need an additional $184 million a year for operations, as well as an additional $519 million to procure the vehicles, facilities, and infrastructure needed to accommodate the ridership increase. The city abandoned its fare-free plan after seeing the results of the study.<ref>[http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Free-ride-Fat-chance-Muni-fares-will-stay-3229342.php Gordon, R. (2008). "Free Ride? Fat Chance: Muni Fares Will Stay." SFGate.]</ref><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
Cervero, Robert. [http://www.springerlink.com/index/r52126220g7t501.pdf| "Flat versus differentiated pricing: What's a fair fare?"] 1981. <br />
: Cervero explores the efficiency and equity of different pricing structure by comparing transit fares and the cost to provide service. He finds that flat fare structures generally result in short-distance, off-peak riders subsidizing long-distance, peak hour customers. A subscription is required to access this article.<br />
<br />
Transit Cooperative Research Program. [http://www.trb.org/publications/tcrp/tcrp_rpt-94.pdf|"Fare Policies, Structures, and Technologies: Update."] 2003. <br />
:The Federal Transit Administration commissioned this report to identify and evaluate different approaches to fare policy, structure, and collection technologies, with special consideration given to the customer benefits and challenges and equity concerns of each approach.<br />
<br />
Transit Cooperative Research Program. [http://www.trb.org/publications/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_95c12.pdf|"Transit Pricing and Fares: Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes."] 2004.<br />
: This document summarizes literature on ridership changes in response to different fare adjustments, including the introduction of variable fares and differentiating peak and off-peak fares. Few studies explore the relationship between transitioning to differential pricing and ridership levels.</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Fare_pricing_and_reform&diff=4102Fare pricing and reform2017-03-31T22:44:17Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:Got-bus-pass.jpeg|right|thumb|x250px|A member of the public at a rally for Free/Reduced Student Passes in Oakland, Photo by J. Moses Ceasar 2005]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Finance and revenue]]<br />
[[Category:Market Response]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Most transit agencies employ largely flat fare systems, which charge the same price, regardless of time of day, distance or direction traveled, or quality of service. However, they do not reflect the actual costs of providing service, which constantly fluctuate throughout the day. Peak period operation, longer trip routes, and premium service all cost the agency more money to operate, and require more capital investments. Additionally, there is the issue of "cross-subsidization"; since flat fares do not distinguish between time, type, or distance of travel, transit users traveling shorter distances, during off-peak hours, and using non-premium services “cross-subsidize” riders on more expensive routes. There is a considerable body of research that argue in favor of flexible, differentiated fares. There are also other fare strategies that transit agencies can consider, such as using smartcard technology, eliminating fares altogether, or providing group fares or other discounts.<br />
<br />
==Differentiated Pricing==<br />
Differentiated fares are considered by many analysts to be more efficient, effective, and equitable. They better reflect the variable costs of transit service, encourage riders to travel when excess capacity is available, and subsidize all types of riders roughly equally. However, differentiated fares would be a radical departure from flat fares and many agencies are wary of potentially harming low-income and/or transit-dependent riders, not to mention wary of potential negative media attention. According to the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) in 2012, 23 percent of transit operators nationwide currently use distance-based pricing, and only 6 percent use time-based pricing. <ref> [http://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/pages/transitstats.aspx "2012 Transit Fact Book"] </ref> <br />
<br />
Transit agencies are understandably worried about losing riders if fares were based on distance traveled. However, distance-based fares could also attract new passengers for inexpensively priced short trips, whereas before they may have found $1.50 too much for a four block ride. Ridership gains and losses depend on many factors, and most transit agencies have not conducted market research on customer responses to fare reform; nevertheless, this suggests that there are ample opportunities to gain more information on the likely gains and losses that would accompany differentiated pricing.<br />
<br />
Additionally, recent technology has made it much more feasible to collect differentiated fares. [[Automated fare media]] such as electronic, magnetic stripe contact cards, smart cards, and even cell phones enable differential fare collection in a way that a paper based system cannot. Because automated fare media provide the technological base for more complex fare structures, agencies should consider the possibility of adopting different pricing structures in the future when making capital investments in fareboxes and turnstiles. This may eliminate or reduce expensive barriers to implementing differential pricing.<br />
<br />
*'''Los Angeles MTA Study'''<br />
:In 2010, Los Angeles Metro looked at the potential for time and distance-based fares for the MTA bus and rail system<ref>[http://media.metro.net/board/Items/2010/09_september/20100915OPItem10.pdf Evaluation of Time and Distance-Based Fare Policies]</ref>.<br />
<br />
:The time-based system would give riders a window of time during which subsequent boardings would not require payment. Transfer fees would be eliminated during that time period. A simple way to implement this would be to use the TAP cards, although the agency would have to look into additional hardware to vend receipts if it wanted to accommodate cash-paying riders as well. One important implication is this system would encourage riders to use the fastest services available, since they would be granted a narrow time window of free transfers. Base fares may have to be increased, since transfer fare revenues will be lost.<br />
<br />
:The distance-based system could apply to Rapid and Express buses, to heavy rail, or to all rail lines. Fares would be based on increments of distance, with corresponding fare zone boundaries identified for each route. While existing hardware and fare media could be used, the agency might have to install fare gates or hire additional people for fare enforcement. An overall concern with a distance-based system is some riders may choose slower, cheaper parallel services because they cannot afford to pay a premium fare.<br />
<br />
==Group Fares==<br />
<br />
Transit agencies can offer [[Deep Discount Group Pass|deep discount group passes]] to employers and universities. In a 2004 dissertation, Cornelius Nuworsoo explores the benefits of discounted fare programs for groups and summarizes the outcomes of unlimited-ride pass programs in Berkeley and Denver.<ref> [http://www.its.berkeley.edu/publications/UCB/2004/DS/UCB-ITS-DS-2004-2.pdf "Deep Discount Group Pass Programs as Instruments for Increasing Transit Revenue and Ridership."] </ref> There is an associated Access Magazine article that can be found on the Access website at http://www.accessmagazine.org<br />
<br />
==Fares Based on Ability to Pay==<br />
The SFMTA is currently conducting a study on developing a fare system that takes into account passengers' ability to pay, rather than simply on their ages. The SFMTA does have a Lifeline pass program, which provides a 50 percent discount on the monthly pass for residents whose incomes are below 200% of the federal poverty level. However, fewer than 20,000 people use the Lifeline system, since it is burdensome and requires a lot of paperwork for all parties. <ref> [http://www.planetizen.com/node/59552 Bay Area Considers Basing Transit Fares on Need] </ref> The proposed fare system would ideally cut down on red tape and provide discounts for those in financial need.<br />
<br />
==Fare-Free Transit==<br />
Cities provide a variety of services, such as parks and libraries, to everyone with no direct fee. Proponents of fare-free transit argue that public transportation should be provided in the same way.<ref>[http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/167498.aspx Volinski, J. (2012). "Implementation and Outcomes of Fare-Free Transit Systems." Transit Cooperative Research Program.]</ref> Fare-free transit would be beneficial to low-income riders, especially to people of color who are more likely to be stopped for farebeating. Fare-free transit is also seen by supporters as a way to reduce dwell times, lower administrative costs, and grow transit ridership. Opponents of of fare-free transit argue that the lost revenue, when coupled with additional demand, would stretch agency resources too thin and harm service quality. There are also concerns about loitering and vandalism, though the extent to which this is a serious problem is a matter of debate.<br />
<br />
The practicality of fare-free transit seems to be tied in part to the size of the system. There are multiple possible reasons for this, but farebox recovery ratios play a role. Large transit systems like those in New York City or the San Francisco Bay can have farebox recovery ratios of more than 40%, meaning that switching to fare-free service would represent a huge loss in revenue.<ref>[http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/15/07/05/the-list-the-10-u-s-transit-agencies-that-rely-most-on-fare-revenues/ Rinde, Meir. (2015). "The List: The 10 U.S. Transit Agencies that Rely Most on Fare Revenues." NJ Spotlight.]</ref> On the other hand, for small systems that number might be less than 10%. Given the cost of collecting fares (fareboxes, payment processing systems, increased dwell time), it's possible that moving fare-free could actually improve system finances. Successful fare-free system are typically in small areas dominated by either universities or resorts.<br />
<br />
===Fare-Free Case Studies=== <br />
<br />
* '''Corvallis Transit System''' - CTS serves a Corvallis, OR, a city of 55,000 people (including 20,000 Oregon State University students). In 2011 CTS made the decision to go fare-free as a way to reduce car dependency. Funding, which had previous come from fares and student fees at OSU, was replaced with a $2.75 a month charge to Corvallis Utility customers. The program has been seen as a success; ridership grew nearly 38% in the first year and schedule performance improved. The program is relatively new, but seems to be performing well.<br />
* '''Breckenridge Free Ride''' - Breckenridge, CO is a ski resort town with a population of just a couple thousand people, but 50,000 visitors a weekend during peak season. The city set up a fare-free transit system to ease tourist congestion and help residents get around. Free Ride had 670,000 riders in 2009. Operational expenses come out of the town's general fund. This has worked so far but is susceptible to economic downtown, so the town is looking for new funding mechanisms. Ridership is steadily growing, and strict anti-loitering rules keep the buses moving smoothly.<br />
* '''Link Transit''' - Washington State's Link Transit is a larger rural system serving 105,000 people over and area of 3,500 miles. It currently operates 55 buses and 22 paratransit vehicles with a budget of $11 million per year. It was established in 1989 and had no problems operating fare-free for the next decade. However, in 1999 voters eliminated the motor vehicle excise tax that had provided Link Transit with most of its funding. The agency lost 45% of its operating revenue and was forced to charge fares. The conservative area had never fully embraced the fare-free system. The current fares account for 6% of operating expenses and disproportionately effect minorities and the elderly.<br />
* '''San Francisco Municipal Railway''' - In 2008, San Francisco Muni conducted a study on the cost-effectiveness of a fare-free system. The study concluded that Muni would see increased operating expenses and capital investments, even though the costs of fare collection would be eliminated. Muni would need an additional $184 million a year for operations, as well as an additional $519 million to procure the vehicles, facilities, and infrastructure needed to accommodate the ridership increase. The city abandoned its fare-free plan after seeing the results of the study.<ref>[http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Free-ride-Fat-chance-Muni-fares-will-stay-3229342.php Gordon, R. (2008). "Free Ride? Fat Chance: Muni Fares Will Stay." SFGate.]</ref><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
Cervero, Robert. [http://www.springerlink.com/index/r52126220g7t501.pdf| "Flat versus differentiated pricing: What's a fair fare?"] 1981. <br />
: Cervero explores the efficiency and equity of different pricing structure by comparing transit fares and the cost to provide service. He finds that flat fare structures generally result in short-distance, off-peak riders subsidizing long-distance, peak hour customers. A subscription is required to access this article.<br />
<br />
Transit Cooperative Research Program. [http://www.trb.org/publications/tcrp/tcrp_rpt-94.pdf|"Fare Policies, Structures, and Technologies: Update."] 2003. <br />
:The Federal Transit Administration commissioned this report to identify and evaluate different approaches to fare policy, structure, and collection technologies, with special consideration given to the customer benefits and challenges and equity concerns of each approach.<br />
<br />
Transit Cooperative Research Program. [http://www.trb.org/publications/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_95c12.pdf|"Transit Pricing and Fares: Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes."] 2004.<br />
: This document summarizes literature on ridership changes in response to different fare adjustments, including the introduction of variable fares and differentiating peak and off-peak fares. Few studies explore the relationship between transitioning to differential pricing and ridership levels.</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Bikeshare&diff=4089Bikeshare2017-03-29T20:37:01Z<p>Rabiabonour: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:Capital Bikeshare DC 2010 10 544.JPG|right|thumb|600px|Capital Bikeshare in Washington, D.C. Source: [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Capital_Bikeshare_DC_2010_10_544.JPG Mario Roberto Duran Ortiz]]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Cities are increasingly recognizing the potential of bicycle transportation to reduce congestion, improve environmental and public health, increase accessibility, and complement transit. Along with infrastructure improvements, bikeshare is one of the best ways to encourage cycling in a city. The number of bikeshare systems around the world has grown exponentially in the past decade. The Institute for Transportation & Development Policy’s [https://www.itdp.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/ITDP_Bike_Share_Planning_Guide.pdf Bike-Share Planning Guide] offers a comprehensive look the process of developing and implementing a bikeshare system.<br />
<br />
==First Steps==<br />
Once a city has decided to consider bikeshare, the first step is performing a feasibility study. The most basic, but important, part of the feasibility study is outlining objectives for the system. Specific objectives (e.g. providing first-mile last-mile service, alleviating transit crowding) are necessary to guide the study. <br />
<br />
The feasibility study itself is comprised of three main elements:<br />
* Demand analysis - Starting from current demand, the organization needs to predict future demand, establish the system’s coverage area, and decide what performance metrics to focus on.<br />
* Financial feasibility analysis - A detailed budget cannot be created until later in system development, but the feasibility study should include a high-level estimation of the capital and operational costs of the system.<br />
* Risk and barrier analysis - It is important to identify early any potential barriers to implementation, such as political opposition, traffic laws, and advertising contracts.<br />
<br />
===Metrics===<br />
Two main metrics are used to judge the performance of bikeshare systems: average number of daily uses per bike and average daily trips per resident (of the coverage area). These two metrics tend to have an inverse relationship. A system with a low number of bikes could have high per-bike usage because demand is high, but fail to meet that demand and therefore have a lower number of trips per resident. On the other hand, a system could have a high number of trips per resident but also a very high number of bikes, and therefore a low number of trips per bike. Both of these extremes are inefficient; a sustainable system should find a balance of having just enough bikes to satisfy demand with around 4 daily trips per bike. <br />
<br />
===System Coverage===<br />
A successful bikeshare system needs to be large enough to serve a range of destinations and have stations close enough to each other to make them easily accessible. A system should start out at least five square miles, but station density is even more important than system size. Bikeshare systems become exponentially more effective as stations get closer together, with 28 stations per square mile being a good goal. Keeping stations no more than a couple blocks apart ensures that there is always a station near a potential destination. ITDP recommends a system have 10-30 bikes for every 1,000 residents and 2.5 docking spaces for every bike so that there is always somewhere to return a bike.<br />
<br />
===Financial Analysis===<br />
The initial financial analysis should include estimates of capital costs, operational costs, and revenues. It is also important to consider funding mechanisms at this stage. Cost-per-bike is a common metric; while it might be useful in the planning stages, cost-per-bike is a flawed long-term metric because of the way the number of bikes in service fluctuates. Looking at operating costs per trip is a better metric, in line with the way traditional transit systems are evaluated.<br />
<br />
==Planning and Design==<br />
Once the feasibility study is complete, system planning can begin in earnest. This involves specific station siting and choosing hardware and software.<br />
<br />
===Siting===<br />
[[File:BayArea Bikeshare 04 2015 SFO 2388.JPG|right|thumb|400px|Bikeshare stations should be placed near major destinations like San Francisco's Ferry Building. Source: [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:BayArea_Bikeshare_04_2015_SFO_2388.JPG Mario Roberto Duran Ortiz]]]<br />
Proper station siting is crucial to the success of a bikeshare system. Docks should be close together and concentrated in dense, mixed-use areas where there will be consistent demand. Placing stations near transit help bikeshare interface with the larger transportation ecosystem. Stations should be placed in sunny, well-trafficked areas and not block pedestrian movement. Picking station locations will typically require community outreach so as to build support for the project. <br />
<br />
===Station Type===<br />
In the US, virtually all bike share stations are automated and use docking spaces as opposed to bike parking areas. While some stations are permanently installed into the ground, modular systems are increasingly common. Modular stations are built on a base that can be bolted to the ground, making them relatively easy to move. Rather than being connected to a power source, they run on solar energy.<br />
<br />
===Bikes===<br />
You of course can’t have bikeshare without bikes. Modern bikeshare systems use robust, one-size-fits all bikes with lights, storage, and features like fenders and chain guards to keep riders clean. Most bike-share bikes are made with distinctive, non-standard parts to deter theft.<br />
<br />
Traditionally, most US bikeshare systems have used a “smart dock” system where bikes are stored at docks containing the system’s electronics. However, “smart bike” systems in which all the technology is stored within the bikes themselves have become popular. This system, used in cities like Portland, Oregon, is cheaper and lets users lock bikes anywhere. On the other hand, smart bikes are more maintenance-intensive and the systems generally require a smartphone to be used to their full potential. <br />
<br />
==Business Model==<br />
Bikeshare should be thought of like other transit; it is aimed at providing a public service rather than generating profit. Most successful bikeshare systems are public-private partnerships, with the government entity leading the project and a private firm running operations. <br />
<br />
===Organizational structure===<br />
There are two main entities involved with a typical bikeshare system: the implementing agency and operator. In some cases these are the same, but more often there is a division of labor. The implementing agency is typically a government group such as a department of transportation or parks department and oversees the entire system. Departments of transportation have an advantage running bikeshare systems because they have authority over the roadbeds and sidewalks where stations will be placed. Day-to-day operations of a bikeshare system are the responsibility of the operator, which could be either a government agency or private company. Government agencies have the advantage of being closer to the implementing agency and are committed to working for the public good; private companies can be more efficient, but their profit motives might run counter to the government’s goals for the system. <br />
<br />
===Contracting===<br />
Running a bikeshare system requires coordination between multiple groups. In some cases the implementing agency will only have to contract with a single supplier, but often times separate specialized vendors are used for each component. In either case, contracts are important. There are three main contracting structures to consider:<br />
* Publicly owned and operated - In this system, the government implements and operates the whole system and takes on all the risk involved. Keeping everything in-house is simple, but parts of a bikeshare system might be operated more efficiently by the private sector. <br />
* Publicly owned and privately operated - Bringing in a private operator diffuses some risk and responsibility while allowing the government to maintain control over the system’s assets and direction.<br />
* Privately owned and operated - Private systems built to government specifications require no public funding, but there is a risk that the profit-minded operator will not act in a way that makes the system as publicly beneficial as possible.<br />
<br />
==Financial Model==<br />
[[File:San Jose Diridon Caltrain bike share station installation 02.jpg|right|thumb|275px|Bikeshare systems are complex and expensive to set up. Source: [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:San_Jose_Diridon_Caltrain_bike_share_station_installation_02.jpg Richard Masoner]]]<br />
Bikeshare is a large investment, and for a system to be successful it must be started with a clear picture of the costs and revenues that will be associated with it.<br />
<br />
===Capital Costs===<br />
Setting up a bikeshare system means purchasing bikes, stations, IT systems, maintenance equipment, and redistribution vehicles. In the US bikes alone typically cost more than $4,000 each. There is also a large amount of labor necessary before a system can open.<br />
<br />
===Operating Costs===<br />
Operating costs vary widely depending on the size and sophistication of a system and involve generally staffing, redistribution, maintenance, customer service, marketing, and insurance. Operating costs are best represented on a per-bike basis to reflect that fact that a larger system serves the public better (assuming that the trips per bike number is high enough).<br />
<br />
===Revenue Streams===<br />
Funding for bikeshare usually comes from some combination of advertising, sponsorship, membership fees, and/or taxes. Given that bikeshare is a public service just like transit, it is reasonable to expect the government to subsidize it to some degree. Government funds are often used for initial capital expenses. Sponsorship is also a major funding source; Citigroup spent more than $40 million dollars for six-year naming rights to New York City’s system. Revenue from subscriptions, single rides, and overage fees do not fully fund any US system; Capital Bikeshare in Washington, D.C. comes closest with 97% farebox recovery, but most systems have a significantly lower percentage.<br />
<br />
==Implementation==<br />
Once the contracts are signed, the process of actually launching the system can begin. While working on procuring hardware and software the implementing agency should begin a public outreach process to register members and teach people how to use the system. Good customer service is critical for getting public support. Once the system goes live, it should be constantly monitored and evaluated. There will be issues, and coordination between the implementing agency and operator can help ensure that any problems are solved quickly.<br />
<br />
==[https://www.itdp.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/ITDP_Bike_Share_Planning_Guide.pdf The Bike-Share Planning Guide]==<br />
<br />
==Further Reading==<br />
<br />
[http://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/NACTO-Bike-Share-Siting-Guide_FINAL.pdf National Association of City Transportation Officials. (2016). "Bike Share Station Siting Guide."]<br />
<br />
: This guide provides detailed instructions and illustrations outlining the best places to put bike share stations.<br />
<br />
[https://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/bts_technical_report/april_2016 Firestine, Theresa. (2016). "BTS Technical Report: Bike-Share Stations in the United States." Bureau of Transportation Statistics.]<br />
<br />
: This technical brief contains statistics on bikeshare connectivity to transit, useful given bikeshare's potential role as a first-mile, last-mile connector.</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Bikeshare&diff=4088Bikeshare2017-03-29T19:58:57Z<p>Rabiabonour: Created page with "File:Capital Bikeshare DC 2010 10 544.JPG|right|thumb|600px|Capital Bikeshare in Washington, D.C. Source: [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Capital_Bikeshare_DC_2010_..."</p>
<hr />
<div>[[File:Capital Bikeshare DC 2010 10 544.JPG|right|thumb|600px|Capital Bikeshare in Washington, D.C. Source: [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Capital_Bikeshare_DC_2010_10_544.JPG Mario Roberto Duran Ortiz]]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Cities are increasingly recognizing the potential of bicycle transportation to reduce congestion, improve environmental and public health, increase accessibility, and complement transit. Along with infrastructure improvements, bikeshare is one of the best ways to encourage cycling in a city. The number of bikeshare systems around the world has grown exponentially in the past decade. The Institute for Transportation & Development Policy’s [https://www.itdp.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/ITDP_Bike_Share_Planning_Guide.pdf Bike-Share Planning Guide] offers a comprehensive look the process of developing and implementing a bikeshare system.<br />
<br />
==First Steps==<br />
Once a city has decided to consider bikeshare, the first step is performing a feasibility study. The most basic, but important, part of the feasibility study is outlining objectives for the system. Specific objectives (e.g. providing first-mile last-mile service, alleviating transit crowding) are necessary to guide the study. <br />
<br />
The feasibility study itself is comprised of three main elements:<br />
* Demand analysis - Starting from current demand, the organization needs to predict future demand, establish the system’s coverage area, and decide what performance metrics to focus on.<br />
* Financial feasibility analysis - A detailed budget cannot be created until later in system development, but the feasibility study should include a high-level estimation of the capital and operational costs of the system.<br />
* Risk and barrier analysis - It is important to identify early any potential barriers to implementation, such as political opposition, traffic laws, and advertising contracts.<br />
<br />
===Metrics===<br />
Two main metrics are used to judge the performance of bikeshare systems: average number of daily uses per bike and average daily trips per resident (of the coverage area). These two metrics tend to have an inverse relationship. A system with a low number of bikes could have high per-bike usage because demand is high, but fail to meet that demand and therefore have a lower number of trips per resident. On the other hand, a system could have a high number of trips per resident but also a very high number of bikes, and therefore a low number of trips per bike. Both of these extremes are inefficient; a sustainable system should find a balance of having just enough bikes to satisfy demand with around 4 daily trips per bike. <br />
<br />
===System Coverage===<br />
A successful bikeshare system needs to be large enough to serve a range of destinations and have stations close enough to each other to make them easily accessible. A system should start out at least five square miles, but station density is even more important than system size. Bikeshare systems become exponentially more effective as stations get closer together, with 28 stations per square mile being a good goal. Keeping stations no more than a couple blocks apart ensures that there is always a station near a potential destination. ITDP recommends a system have 10-30 bikes for every 1,000 residents and 2.5 docking spaces for every bike so that there is always somewhere to return a bike.<br />
<br />
===Financial Analysis===<br />
The initial financial analysis should include estimates of capital costs, operational costs, and revenues. It is also important to consider funding mechanisms at this stage. Cost-per-bike is a common metric; while it might be useful in the planning stages, cost-per-bike is a flawed long-term metric because of the way the number of bikes in service fluctuates. Looking at operating costs per trip is a better metric, in line with the way traditional transit systems are evaluated.<br />
<br />
==Planning and Design==<br />
Once the feasibility study is complete, system planning can begin in earnest. This involves specific station siting and choosing hardware and software.<br />
<br />
===Siting===<br />
[[File:BayArea Bikeshare 04 2015 SFO 2388.JPG|right|thumb|400px|Bikeshare stations should be placed near major destinations like San Francisco's Ferry Building. Source: [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:BayArea_Bikeshare_04_2015_SFO_2388.JPG Mario Roberto Duran Ortiz]]]<br />
Proper station siting is crucial to the success of a bikeshare system. Docks should be close together and concentrated in dense, mixed-use areas where there will be consistent demand. Placing stations near transit help bikeshare interface with the larger transportation ecosystem. Stations should be placed in sunny, well-trafficked areas and not block pedestrian movement. Picking station locations will typically require community outreach so as to build support for the project. <br />
<br />
===Station Type===<br />
In the US, virtually all bike share stations are automated and use docking spaces as opposed to bike parking areas. While some stations are permanently installed into the ground, modular systems are increasingly common. Modular stations are built on a base that can be bolted to the ground, making them relatively easy to move. Rather than being connected to a power source, they run on solar energy.<br />
<br />
===Bikes===<br />
You of course can’t have bikeshare without bikes. Modern bikeshare systems use robust, one-size-fits all bikes with lights, storage, and features like fenders and chain guards to keep riders clean. Most bike-share bikes are made with distinctive, non-standard parts to deter theft.<br />
<br />
Traditionally, most US bikeshare systems have used a “smart dock” system where bikes are stored at docks containing the system’s electronics. However, “smart bike” systems in which all the technology is stored within the bikes themselves have become popular. This system, used in cities like Portland, Oregon, is cheaper and lets users lock bikes anywhere. On the other hand, smart bikes are more maintenance-intensive and the systems generally require a smartphone to be used to their full potential. <br />
<br />
==Business Model==<br />
Bikeshare should be thought of like other transit; it is aimed at providing a public service rather than generating profit. Most successful bikeshare systems are public-private partnerships, with the government entity leading the project and a private firm running operations. <br />
<br />
===Organizational structure===<br />
There are two main entities involved with a typical bikeshare system: the implementing agency and operator. In some cases these are the same, but more often there is a division of labor. The implementing agency is typically a government group such as a department of transportation or parks department and oversees the entire system. Departments of transportation have an advantage running bikeshare systems because they have authority over the roadbeds and sidewalks where stations will be placed. Day-to-day operations of a bikeshare system are the responsibility of the operator, which could be either a government agency or private company. Government agencies have the advantage of being closer to the implementing agency and are committed to working for the public good; private companies can be more efficient, but their profit motives might run counter to the government’s goals for the system. <br />
<br />
===Contracting===<br />
Running a bikeshare system requires coordination between multiple groups. In some cases the implementing agency will only have to contract with a single supplier, but often times separate specialized vendors are used for each component. In either case, contracts are important. There are three main contracting structures to consider:<br />
* Publicly owned and operated - In this system, the government implements and operates the whole system and takes on all the risk involved. Keeping everything in-house is simple, but parts of a bikeshare system might be operated more efficiently by the private sector. <br />
* Publicly owned and privately operated - Bringing in a private operator diffuses some risk and responsibility while allowing the government to maintain control over the system’s assets and direction.<br />
* Privately owned and operated - Private systems built to government specifications require no public funding, but there is a risk that the profit-minded operator will not act in a way that makes the system as publicly beneficial as possible.<br />
<br />
==Financial Model==<br />
Bikeshare is a huge investment, and for a system to be successful it must be started with a clear picture of the costs and revenues that will be associated with it.<br />
<br />
===Capital Costs===<br />
Setting up a bikeshare system means purchasing bikes, stations, IT systems, maintenance equipment, and redistribution vehicles. In the US bikes alone typically cost more than $4,000 each. There is also a large amount of labor necessary before a system can open.<br />
<br />
===Operating Costs===<br />
Operating costs vary widely depending on the size and sophistication of a system and involve generally staffing, redistribution, maintenance, customer service, marketing, and insurance. Operating costs are best represented on a per-bike basis to reflect that fact that a larger system serves the public better (assuming that the trips per bike number is high enough).<br />
<br />
===Revenue Streams===<br />
Funding for bikeshare usually comes from some combination of advertising, sponsorship, membership fees, and/or taxes. Given that bikeshare is a public service just like transit, it is reasonable to expect the government to subsidize it to some degree. Government funds are often used for initial capital expenses. Sponsorship is also a major funding source; Citigroup spent more than $40 million dollars for six-year naming rights to New York City’s system. Revenue from subscriptions, single rides, and overage fees do not fully fund any US system; Capital Bikeshare in Washington, D.C. comes closest with 97% farebox recovery, but most systems have a significantly lower percentage.<br />
<br />
==Implementation==<br />
Once the contracts are signed, the process of actually launching the system can begin. While working on procuring hardware and software the implementing agency should begin a public outreach process to register members and teach people how to use the system. Good customer service is critical for getting public support. Once the system goes live, it should be constantly monitored and evaluated. There will be issues, and coordination between the implementing agency and operator can help ensure that any problems are solved quickly.<br />
<br />
==[https://www.itdp.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/ITDP_Bike_Share_Planning_Guide.pdf The Bike-Share Planning Guide]==<br />
<br />
==Further Reading==<br />
<br />
[http://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/NACTO-Bike-Share-Siting-Guide_FINAL.pdf National Association of City Transportation Officials. (2016). "Bike Share Station Siting Guide."]<br />
<br />
: This guide provides detailed instructions and illustrations outlining the best places to put bike share stations.<br />
<br />
[https://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/bts_technical_report/april_2016 Firestine, Theresa. (2016). "BTS Technical Report: Bike-Share Stations in the United States." Bureau of Transportation Statistics.]<br />
<br />
: This technical brief contains statistics on bikeshare connectivity to transit, useful given bikeshare's potential role as a first-mile, last-mile connector.</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=Rail_platform_safety&diff=4082Rail platform safety2017-03-18T22:09:51Z<p>Rabiabonour: Created page with "Image:TaipeiMetro-PlatformStaff.JPG|right|thumb|500px|Platform doors and station agents, here seen on the Taipei Metro, are two strategies for improving rail platform safety..."</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:TaipeiMetro-PlatformStaff.JPG|right|thumb|500px|Platform doors and station agents, here seen on the Taipei Metro, are two strategies for improving rail platform safety. Source: [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:TaipeiMetro-PlatformStaff.JPG Mailer Diablo]]]<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Public rail transit is one of the safest forms of transportation, but incidents causing injury and even death can still occur. The risk is highest at the platform, where passengers are close to the guideway and have to step from platform to vehicle. These risks are highest with heavy rail operating on significantly elevated tracks. The Transit Cooperative Research Program has created a [http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/175657.aspx manual] identifying risk factors and recommending treatments to increase rail platform safety.<br />
<br />
==Factors Affecting Safety==<br />
===Platform, Track, and Vehicle Factors===<br />
Platform safety starts with good platform design. Large, open platforms with few obstructions are ideal. Higher platforms typical of heavy rail are the most dangerous, but low light-rail platforms come with the increased risk of people walking onto the guideway. Platform surface is also important; cracked, uneven, and slippery surfaces can lead to tripping and slipping. The ADA mandates that platforms have a 24-inch tactile buffer at their edges.<br />
<br />
There are a couple of track characteristics to keep in mind when assessing safety. Commuter rail often shares a track with freight trains. Because passenger trains are typically narrower than freight trains, there can be a wide horizontal gap that passengers have to maneuver. Curved tracks also create a large gap at parts of the platform. Superelevated (or banked) tracks create vertical gaps that create tripping risks.<br />
<br />
The trains themselves also present potential issues. Plug doors and folding doors both require a sizable gap and prevent level boarding. Newer sliding doors help manage these issues. Because the ADA mandates level boarding, some systems with older cars with include some newer ADA-compliant trains in each consist (or group of cars).<br />
<br />
===Passenger and Human Behavior Factors===<br />
The manual identifies several passenger characteristics that seem to put people at a higher risk of injury. Studies have shown riders younger than 16 and older than 50 to have disproportionately high incident rates. Women also appear to have more incidents; while no causal link has been established, some theories center on the fact that women are more likely to be traveling with young children, who can be distracting. Injuries appear to be highest at rush hour when platforms are most crowded.<br />
<br />
There are also behaviors that put passengers at increased risk. Intoxicated passengers have significantly higher incident rates, especially in the evenings. Traveling with large luggage can put passengers at danger - both those with the luggage and others around them. While no data exist on cellphone-related incidents on platforms, general studies on phones and distraction suggest that they are probably risky.<br />
<br />
==Safety Strategies==<br />
Improving platform safety can involve modifications to the station or platform, as well as operational changes. <br />
[[Image:Unionsquaregap_1.JPG|right|thumb|400px|New York City's Union Square station has moving gap fillers to deal with concave tracks. Source: [https://www.flickr.com/people/61223211@N00?rb=1 Antonio Rubio]]]<br />
===Station-based treatments===<br />
Dealing with gaps is particularly important on high platforms. Gap fillers on the platform edge can help manage horizontal gaps. Wooden gap fillers are the cheapest option but aren’t very durable, whereas aluminum versions are extremely durable. Polyethylene provides a compromise between price and longevity, and can be brightly colored to attract passenger attention. For horizontal gaps, partially raised platforms are a standard option.<br />
<br />
Curved platforms pose the biggest challenges because of their larger gaps, so they require extended gap fillers or, in some cases, mechanical platform edge extensions. Platforms shared between freight and passenger rail are also tricky; hydraulic gangways or track switchers that bring the train closer to the platform (called gauntlet track) can be used to account for the smaller size of passenger trains.<br />
<br />
Outside the US, it is common to use half- or full-height doors on platform edges to increase safety. While half-height doors and fences are better than nothing, full-height doors provide the most benefits. Not only do they fully block people from falling onto the track, but they also keep the track clean of debris, dampen train noise, and make it easier to ventilate and climate control the platform.<br />
<br />
In the event that someone does fall onto the tracks, there need to be detection systems in place. Station agents are the first line of defense, but many systems use automated CCTV to monitor tracks. Radiofrequency and laser technology also can detect guideway intrusion. The trick with any system is to get the sensitivity right; failing to detect a person is unacceptable, but frequent false alarms can cause extensive delays.<br />
<br />
===Vehicle-based treatments===<br />
One of the most common vehicle-based solution to platform safety issues is the static door threshold extension, which minimizes the gap. These can be built onto new trains or retrofitted onto legacy systems. Mechanized systems can also be used. Movable vehicle-based gap systems extend from the vehicle to the platform at platform-level. Ramps and bridging plates work similarly, but rest on top of the platform. All of these systems are designed to only activate when the train is stopped. Some trains also have between-car barriers to keep passengers from falling between vehicles or trespassing onto the coupling system.<br />
<br />
===Operational treatments===<br />
One way to deal with the safety hazards posed by curved platforms is zoning off cars and only opening the doors where the gap is smallest. Being careful about where along the platform to stop the train can maximize the number of accessible doors. This zoning system is only used on commuter and intercity rail and requires strong communication to prevent passenger confusion.<br />
<br />
Positioning staff members on platforms can increase safety. Personnel can be trained to identify risk factors and guide traffic at busy times. CCTV can be used as a supplemental tool for monitoring track platform conditions.<br />
<br />
===Outreach===<br />
Rider outreach is an important part of platform safety. The London Underground pioneered this field with the “Mind the Gap” campaign, which American agencies have adopted as “Watch the Gap.” Safety information can be printed on tickets, painted onto platforms, or delivered on standalone brochures. In addition to print, outreach can be conducted with audio and visual messaging. Recently, agencies across the world have begun using social media to educate riders on safety risks.<br />
<br />
==[http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/175657.aspx Manual to Improve Rail Transit Safety at Platform/Vehicle and Platform/Guideway Interfaces]==<br />
<br />
==Additional Reading==<br />
<br />
[https://www.fra.dot.gov/eLib/Details/L03196 Federal Railroad Administration. (2007). "Passenger Rail Station Gap Management Guide, FRA Approach to Managing Gap Safety."]<br />
<br />
:This FRA report summarizes national recommendations on increasing safety relating to platform gaps.<br />
<br />
[http://www.apta.com/previousmc/rail/previous/2010/Presentations/ADA-Requirments-Impacting-Rail-System-Construction-and-operations.pdf Klein, J. (2010). "ADA Requirements for Rail Operators." Federal Transit Administration.]<br />
<br />
: This brief slide deck summarizes ADA requirements for transit, including standard for gap size and level boarding.<br />
<br />
[http://transweb.sjsu.edu/PDFs/research/1129-2-preventing-suicide-on-US-rail-systems.pdf Botha, J. L., Neighbour, M. K., & Kaur, S. (2014). "An Approach for Actions to Prevent Suicides on Commuter and Metro Rail Systems in the United States." Mineta Transportation Institute.]<br />
<br />
: While covered in less depth in the manual, suicide prevention is an important aspect of rail safety.</div>Rabiabonourhttps://www.transitwiki.org/TransitWiki/index.php?title=File:Unionsquaregap_1.JPG&diff=4081File:Unionsquaregap 1.JPG2017-03-18T22:08:50Z<p>Rabiabonour: New York City's Union Square station has moving gap fillers to deal with concave tracks. Source: [https://www.flickr.com/people/61223211@N00?rb=1 Antonio Rubio]</p>
<hr />
<div>New York City's Union Square station has moving gap fillers to deal with concave tracks. Source: [https://www.flickr.com/people/61223211@N00?rb=1 Antonio Rubio]</div>Rabiabonour