|
Items in cart [1] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| ||||||||||||
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 7
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
PROBLEM STATEMENT
Passage of Me Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) funciamentaDy
changed the relationship between parahans* and fixed route services Paratrans* is no
longer consiclered a substitute for accessible fixed route service - now both are required.
Paratrans* is a complementary service to be provided whenever fixed route service is
unable to or not appropriate to meet a customer's needs.
The ADA has also changed the way In which individuals are determined eligible
for public paratransit service. Elig~bilibr is no longer to be based solely on a person's
particular disability or on the type of mobility air! that a person uses (e.g., "those who
use wheelchairs are eligible for paratransit"~. Insteaci, ADA paratransit elig~bilibr is
determined based on a person's ability to use the fixed route system, given that system's
current characteristics, and on related environmental factors. Person's determined ADA
paratransit eligible are not necessarily granted access to Me paratransit service for aD
travel needs. Instead, the fixed route system is to be utilized whenever possible and
appropriate.
There are a number of important Implications of this new relationship between
fixed route and paratransit service. First, provision of the most efficient and effective
transportation now requires that fixed route and paratransit be designed, developed,
and operated as one system rather than as two separate systems. The expressed
demanc! for paratransit service should be taken Into consideration in Me design and
TCRP B-1A I- 1 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 8
redesign of a total public transit program. Options and enhancements mat better
integrate fixed route and paratransit need to be considered.
Second, the transit industry's ability to successfully implement the ADA may
depend on its ability to maximize the use of fixed route services and develop integrated
paratransit and fixed route systems. The Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) recent
review of ADA paratransit plans found that the requirement posing the greatest
problem to the industry is, not surprisingly, the elimination of capacity constraints.
Shortcomings in addressing this service criteria were noted in 44% of the plans
reviewed. Many transit providers project significant increases In travel demand by
customers with disabilities. Expanding paratransit systems to meet this need will
require significant increases in funding. Better ulili~ation of available fixed route
capacity could, however, greatly reduce the financial impact of this aspect of the law.
Third, the most efficient and appropriate integration of fixed route and
para~ar~sit must be considered lay Transit systems WhiGh are likely to cur si,~j,nificz~nt
financial burdens meeting We paratransit requirements of the ADA. Before an undue
financial burden can be claimed, providers must demonstrate that paratransit service is
being provided only when it is needed and required. Costs associated with the
provision of paratransit for trips that could have been accommodated on the fixed route
system cannot be counted In any calculation of undue financial burden. It is vital In
these instances that Al appropriate service options be explored for meeting the needs of
ADA paratransit eligible Individuals In We most integrated, cost-effective way.
EG&G Dynahend, ~c., et. al., 1mplemer'tation of the Complementary Paratransit Provisions of the
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), First Year Experience, prepared for We
Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts, February 1993.
TCRP B-IA J`-2 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 9
As a result, Interest In service options that better integrate fixed route and
para~ansit systems and programs that can enhance fixed route systems has risen since
the passage of the ADA. A significant number of ADA paratransit plans include travel
training programs, on~all lift-bus programs, expanded marketing efforts, and other
improvements. The development of service options and enhancements has also been
promoted and facilitated by programs such as Project ACTION, demonstration
programs and policies established by Transport Canada, and by workshops and
seminars sponsored by FTA, industry associations, and State transit agencies.
Technical information and research on Me many types of service options and
enhancements is limited. For certain types of enhancements, such as travel pairing,
marketing, and employee training, local experiences are described in recent Project
ACTION reports. For over Apes of service options, such as route deviation services,
feeder services, and service routes, few detailed studies exist which describe costs,
benefits, and implementation issues. Available information is limited in many cases to
promotional materials and articles in industry joumals describing the efforts of specific
providers. Without the benefit of research and detailed information, many providers
are implementing programs without adequate knowledge of the likely costs, benefits, or
impacts on existing services and riders.
PURPOSE AND OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
This report documents the second phase of a two-part study of transit operations
for individuals with disabilities. The first phase of the study researched the various
options/enhancements that are used by transit agencies In North America. A report
TCRP B-IA I-3 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 10
describing 21 different innovative types of operation was prepared.2 Following this
comprehensive identification of types of operations, five were selected for detailed case
study review. This report contains these case study findings and includes a
comparative analysis of the effectiveness of each option studied.
The goal of the overall study is to develop information and data for local transit
providers that will facilitate the implementation of appropriate service options and
enhancements for serving individuals with disabilities. Specific objectives consistent
with this goal include the development of a methodology for transit managers and
planners to design and evaluate integrated transit systems that:
(~) provide accessible integrated service complying with the ADA;
(2) facilitate the appropriate use of paratransit service; and
(3) support service or system enhancements to encourage travel on accessible
fixed routes by individuals with disabilities.
To assist planners and transit managers with the selection of appropriate
options/enhancements, an analysis of the applicability of each option studied to
different types of transit systems and geographic settings is provided. Key
implementation issues are also presented.
In keeping win Me above goal and objectives, an important part of this phase
Tree report was We development of methodologies for evaluating Me effectiveness of
each option/enhancement studied. These methodologies are designed to provide a
framework for measuring the performance of each option and enhancement. ~ order to
measure these alternatives according to Me objectives noted above, the methodologies
consider traditional measures of efficiency and effectiveness (cost/trip, productivity,
Transit Cooperative Research Program, Transit Operationsfor Individuals with
Disabilities, Report No. 9,
National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1995.
TCRP B-IA I-4 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 11
total trips served by mode, etc.) as well as other criteria that relate to customer
satisfaction and acceptance. Particular attention is given in the evaluation to the degree
to which each alternative meets the broader goals of the ADA - such as independence,
integration, and the provision of service in a non-discriminatory manner.
The methodologies were then used to conduct the case studies. The case studies,
therefore, are meant not only to provide actual experiences in using innovative service
options, but also to serve as examples of the ways that these options can be evaluated.
SELECTION OF OPI IONS FOR STUDY
As noted above, 21 different innovative service options and enhancements were
identified in Transit Operationsfor Individuals with Disabilities, the report on the first
phase of the study. Figure I-1 provides a listing of all options detailed in that report.
The options and enhancements were designated as being either alternative operational
models, alternative technologies, or support service. Alternative operational models are
various approaches to the basic design of fixed route and demand responsive systems.
As shown, they include things such as service routes, feeder service, route deviation,
and flag stop programs. Alternative technologies are different vehicle and equipment
designs that specifically address the needs of customers with disabilities. Low-floor
buses, accessible taxis, and various automated information and communication
technologies are included in this category. Support services are activities which can be
implemented to enhance the success of any type of service that is offered. Included in
this category are activities such as travel training, fare incentives, and marketing.
TCRP B-IA I-5 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 12
Figure I-~. Service Options and Enhancements Identifier! by Related Research
Alternative Operational Models
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Support Services
service routes/community bus
on-call accessible fixer! route bus
route deviation
point deviation
feeder service
general public dial-a-ride
subscription bus
flag stop and request-a-stop service
Alternative Technologies
low-floor buses
accessible taxis
automated information and communication technologies
travel training
facilitated transportation
fare incentive programs
fare simplification mechanisms
marketing
trip planning
service planning
accessible bus stop programs
vehicle identifier programs
TCRP B-IA I-6 Drays Final Report
OCR for page 13
The first task In this part of the study was to select five options for detailed
evaluation. Each of We options/enhancements identified by Me research was
consiclerec] for further research. Possible benefits to the industry of more detailed
review were consiciered along with Me relationship of the option to Me overall goals of
the project.
Many of the option/enhancements iclentified represent activities which are
required under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. This Includes driver
training, bus T.D. and clesUnation card systems, access to bus stops, ant! accessible
information and communications. Because these enhancements win be implemented in
response to the law, it was felt that a cletailect study of their cost-effectiveness would not
greatly influence their future use. Other enhancements, however, are not required. This
wouic3 include service routes, Ravel training, route and point deviation, and feeder
services. These enhancements win only be implemented if hey are proven to be
effective ways of appropriately meeting the transportation needs of individuals with
disabilities.
A seconct major factor which was consiclered In selecting options for detailed
study was the degree to which they could appropriately promote integrated fixed route
service for people with disabilities. Certain options such as feeder service, route and
point clewation, fare incentives, travel training, and service routes relate clirectly to this
key project objective. These options either utilize fixed route service, or modified fixed
route service, for aD or part of the trip, or promote self-selection of faced route service
using economic incentives or direct assistance.
TCRP B-IA I-7 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 14
binary, consideration was given to Nose options which were being considered
by the greatest number of survey respondents and to options which appear to be
particularly cost-effective based on Me literature review and survey of transit providers
that was part of the Transit Operations for Individuals with Disabilities report. Basec!
on a sample of 309 transit systems In North America, this prior research determined if
transit agencies were presently using various service option, were in the process of
Implementing them, or were "considering" using the options.3 Figure I-2 summarizes
the survey responses. The number at the end of each bar indicates the number of transit
systems that are considering Nat particular option/enhancement.
Several Interesting conclusions can be drawn. First, "Employee Training" rated
last probably because the ADA regulations require that training be provided and most
systems are aware of and have been focusing on this issue. Interestingly, "Bus ID Kits"
and "Destination Cards", which are systems that can allow providers to meet the ADA
regulation conceming identification of vehicles and passengers at stops served by more
than one route, were being considered by many providers. This could be due to the fact
that many systems have not yet focused on this regulatory requirement but are
becoming aware that they need to do so. The interest In bus ID and destination card
systems may also be due to We fact Nat they meet this requirement without equipment
or operational changes such as external vehicle annunciators or operator
announcements outside of Me bus. Responsibilitr for identification of routes is shared
with Me passenger.
3 A total of 548 transit systems in tile United States and 76 in Canada were surveyed. Responses were
received from 309 systems.
TOP B-IA I-8 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 15
lions "Being Considered" by Transit Providers
Bus ID Kits
Low-Floor FR Buses
Destination Cards
Service Routes
Route Deviation
Feeder Service
Access. Bus Stops
Travel Training
Audio/Visual Sysytems
Point Deviation
Marketing
Accessible Taxis
Simpl. Fare Collect.
On-Call Bus Service
Fare Incentives
Gen. Public DAR
Facilitated Transp.
Corridor Paratransit
Employee Training
MA 72
69
69
66
! ~ 62
55
54
54
~ 52
1 ~ 47
, ~ 46
43
40
34
34
31
29
13
83
TCRP B-IA I-9 Draft Final Report
l
1,
l
l
OCR for page 16
Eliminating items required or implied by the ADA (i.e., bus ID kits, destination
cards, accessible bus stops, accessible information and communications, ant} employee
Baaing), the four options/enhancements Mat are being considered by the greatest
number of respondents are: low-floor buses (72 systems); service routes (69 systems);
route deviation (66 systems); and feeder service (62 systems).
While fare Incentives were not being considered by as many transit systems, the
literature review and survey follow-up work indicated that fare incentive programs can
be very cost effective. Several systems which have implemented fare incentive
programs reported significant Increases In fixed route ridership.
Based on the above considerations, the five options selected for detailed on-site
evaluation were:
service routes
feecler service
route deviation
low-floor buses
· fare incentives
SELECTION OF CASE STUDY SITES
A number of transit systems which had Implemented the five options selected
for further study were iclentified through Me survey of transit systems In Nort h
America. Using the results of Me survey, a selected group of systems were contacted.
More detailed information about Me success of the program as well as any uriique
characteristics of the sewing or Me program were discussed. Basect on these phone
TCRPB-IA I-10 DrafiFinalReport
OCR for page 17
surveys, five sites were selected for He first phase of on-site case stucly work. This
Initial on-site research was conducted in 1994. A second set of case study sites was then
selected and reviewed in 1996.
In selecting case study sites, consideration was given to the potential for
transferability of the findings to other systems. Preference was given to transit agencies
which were more representative. Unique settings ant! circumstances were avoided if
possible. Consideration was also given to sites which indicated that the clata needed to
test the evaluation methodologies developed was available.
The case stucly sites, by type of service option/enhancement studied, are listed
below. The year each site was studied is also Indicated.
ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT
This report contains a summary of the major findings of ah 16 case stuclies. Also
presented Is an analysis of the relative cost-effectiveness of each option stuclied, a
comparison of qualitative measles of acceptance and success, key implementation
issues, and conclusions regarding applicability and transferability.
Chapters ~ through V! contain findings for the five service
options/enhancements studied. Findings from the service route case studies are
provided in Chapter H. Feeder service research is summ~ed in Chapter III. Results of
studies of route and point deviation programs are contained in Chapter IV. The low-
floor bus case studies are presented in Chapter V. And fare incentive programs and
findings are detailed In Chapter VI. Each chapter contains background information
about the transit systems studied and Weir use of the service option/enhancement of
interest. Both the methodology used to evaluate the service and the approach to data
ACRE B-IA I- 1 1 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 18
Figure I-3. Case Study Sites
.
Service Optior˘Enhancement Case Study Sites
. _
Service Routes Madison County, Illinois (1994)
Ajax, Ontario (1996)
Richmond Hill, Ontario (1996)
Madison, Wisconsin (1996)
Margate, Florida (1996)
Feeder Services Vancouver, British Columbia (1994)
| Tacoma, Washington (1996)
Route/Po~nt Deviation York Counter, Pennsylvania (1994)
Eugene, Oregon (1996)
Newport, Oregon (1996)
.
Low-Floor Buses Ann Arbor, Michigan (1994)
Champaign-Urbana, Michigan (1996)
I Victoria, British Columbia (1996)
Fare Incentive Programs Bridgeport, Connecticut (1994)
Austin, Texas (1996)
Tulsa, Oklahoma (1996)
Miami, Florida (1996)
Arm Arbor, Michigan (1996)
TCRPB-IA I-12 DrafiFinalReport
OCR for page 19
collection are given. Findings are then presented. Following the presentation of
findings, implementation issues, overall conclusions and transferability/applicability
issues are discussed.
Finally, Chapter VII presents the analysis of the relative success of each option
studied In achieving integration of services and the most appropriate use of paratransit
and faced route service. Quantitative as wed as qualitative measures of success are
used.
In addition to case study research, a second important part of this project
Involved the clevelopment of cletailed me~odolones for evaluating transit operations
~ ~ ~ rig
for Individuals with disabilities. These methodologies are contained In Appendix A.
Included in each evaluation framework are the Apes of data needed, possible sources of
information, and equations for calculating cost-effectiveness. Qualitative issues to be
consiclered In each evaluation are also detailed and sources of information for this
evaluation section are suggested. These methodologies guided the case study work.
They are also meant to serve as guidance for planners and bans* managers interested In
evaluating their own systems.
TCRP B-IA I-13 Draft Final Report
OCR for page 20
Representative terms from entire chapter:
draft final
