Allison Yoh

Understanding Transit Ridership Growth: Case Studies of Successful Transit Systems in the 1990s

During the economic boom of the late 1990s, transit ridership increased nationwide, but not all transit systems added riders in equal proportions. To examine agencies that were especially successful at increasing patronage during the late 1990s, in-depth, open-ended interviews were conducted with managers from 12 agencies that substantially increased ridership between 1995 and 1999. The transit agency managers reported a wide variety of factors that they believe influenced patronage on their systems. While it was initially hypothesized that transit managers would tend to cite factors internal to the transit system, such as policy changes or managerial initiatives, in explaining ridership growth, they actually most often cited factors external to their transit systems, such as population or employment growth, as the primary determinants of increased ridership. When reported, the internally developed programs most frequently cited were changes in fare structure and new transit pass programs.

Hate to Wait: Effects of Wait Time on Public Transit Travelers’ Perceptions

A large and growing body of research suggests that transit users hate to wait. Given broad policy goals to increase public transit use in U.S. cities, this research sheds light on cost-effective ways to increase transit use by decreasing the perceived burdens of waiting at stops and stations. The goal of this study was to determine (a) the relative importance of stop and station amenities and attributes and (b) how the importance of these amenities and attributes varies with wait time. For this goal to be accomplished and for the duration of wait time when amenities become important to be determined a transit user survey that asked more than 2,000 travelers to rate both the importance of amenities at their stops or stations and their wait times was analyzed. Regardless of wait time, safety and on-time performance were paramount to riders; these also ranked highest relative to all other station and stop amenities examined. Lighting, cleanliness, information, shelter, and the presence of guards were less important to travelers when waits were short, but were more important with longer wait times. Thus, improving service frequency and reliability reduces the need for amenities at stations. This end suggests that when transit managers have a choice and when riders feel safe and secure managers should favor service improvements over station and stop amenities. Finally, some amenities become more important with long wait times, such as restrooms and food and drink facilities. Although provision of basic needs amenities is intuitive, restrooms and food and drink sales are most likely present at high-passenger-volume, high-service-frequency stops and stations, where they are valued least by travelers.

Light Rail Lite or Cost-Effective Improvements to Bus Service? Evaluating Costs of Implementing Bus Rapid Transit

Bus rapid transit (BRT) is growing rapidly in popularity because it is viewed widely as an efficient and effective means to improve both transit service and patronage. This paper argues that two distinct views of BRT are emerging: (a) BRT as a new form of high-speed, rubber-tired, rail-like rapid transit and (b) BRT as a cost-effective way to upgrade both the quality and image of traditional fixed-route bus service. These two views carry different price tags because the cost of planning, constructing, and operating BRT depends on the complexity of new service features and on rises for BRT that offer service characteristics approaching those of light rail. This study fills a gap in the literature on the costs of BRT by examining in detail component costs-actual costs for recently implemented services and projected costs for planned new services-for a sample of BRT systems in North American cities. The study examined BRT costs of 14 planned and recently opened BRT systems to determine how the wide range of ...

Increasing Transit Ridership: A Survey of Successful Transit Systems in the 1990s

This study examines trends in public transit ridership in the United States during the 1990s. Specifically, it focuses on agencies that increased ridership during the latter half of the decade. While transit ridership increased steadily by 13 percent nationwide between 1995 and 1999, not all systems experienced ridership growth equally. Some agencies increased ridership dramatically, some did so only minimally, and still others lost riders. What sets these agencies apart from one another? What explains the uneven growth in ridership? To examine these questions, we conducted a nationwide survey of transit agencies that added riders during the late 1990s. Specifically, transit general managers or their designees were asked about the factors they deemed important for ridership growth in their systems. We gathered information about specific transit planning efforts and programs that are not available from aggregate data sources, like the National Transit Database (NTD).

Are Smart Cards the Smart Way to Go? Examining Their Adoption by U.S. Transit Agencies

Smart card technologies offer public transit agencies unprecedented opportunity to price services flexibly by time, distance, and mode and in conjunction with neighboring transit operators. They also can simplify boarding, streamline accounting, and provide better passenger data. Some transit systems have moved quickly to adopt smart card fare media, others are moving more cautiously, and still others eschew smart cards—at least for now. Why such differences? U.S. transit agencies were surveyed to gauge current levels of interest in smart card technologies as next-generation fare media; examine knowledge and perceptions of costs, benefits, and risks of smart card adoption; and determine the status of system implementation, the degree of planning toward implementation, and the levels of participation in interagency collaboration to realize interoperability. Factors common to agencies that have and have not adopted smart card technology also were examined. Results indicate that the consideration and adoption of smart card technologies and interoperable systems vary by funding availability and partnerships with other operators in joint projects for intelligent transportation systems. Perceptions of benefits, costs, and risks of such technologies also vary by status of smart card system planning and implementation. Managers often are uncertain about the costs in general and the benefits in particular of such a move, especially regarding interoperable systems. History predicts the future: technologically sophisticated operators tend to embrace smart cards, whereas those working collaboratively with other transit agencies are most likely to adopt interoperable systems.

Does Transit Mean Business? Reconciling Economic, Organizational, and Political Perspectives on Variable Transit Fares

For decades, transportation scholars have argued for transit fares that vary by mode, distance, and/or time-of-day to reflect the marginal costs of providing transit service. This pricing strategy, they contend, would increase the efficiency and equity of transit service. Recent advances in smartcard fare collection technologies have reduced the operational obstacles to charging variable fares, yet relatively few transit agencies are doing so. Through interviews and a nationwide survey of transit professionals, this research examines why transit managers and their governing boards have been reluctant to adopt variable fare policies. We find that agencies and practitioners have little incentive to understand how the costs of transit service provision vary and that managers and policymakers tend to be loss averse—they worry more about the riders they might lose under variable pricing than those they might gain. Collectively, we find that transit agency objectives impede fare policy innovation.