DOCSLIB.ORG

Seniors/Disabled Ride Free

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Seniors/Disabled Ride Free Analysis of the RTA Seniors and People with Disabilities Ride Free Programs A Report Prepared for the Regional Transportation Authority -FINAL REPORT- Joseph DiJohn, Paul Metaxatos, Ashish Sen, Mike Pagano Lise Dirks and Valbona Kokoshi Phone: 312-996-1458 Email: [email protected] November 2010 Urban Transportation Center (MC 357) College of Urban Planning and Public Affairs University of Illinois at Chicago 412 South Peoria Street, Suite 340, Chicago, Illinois 60607-7036 Phone: (312) 996-4820; Fax: (312) 413-0006; URL: www.utc.uic.edu Analysis of the RTA Seniors and People with Disabilities Ride Free Programs – FINAL REPORT 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Seniors Ride Free (SRF) program began on March 17, 2008, and the People with Disabilities Ride Free (PDRF) program, also known as the Circuit Breaker (CB) program, began on October 24, 2008. The Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) commissioned this study to examine the short- and long-term ridership and financial implications of the Senior Ride Free Program and the short-term financial implications for the PDRF program. Based on our analysis this study has found the SRF program to be financially unsustainable. Registrations SRF registrations increased from under 2,000 in March 2008 to more than 396,000 in December 2009. At the same time reduced fare registrations decreased during the SRF program from 252,260 in March 2008 to 175,632 in December 2009. The registrations of persons with disabilities (Circuit Breakers) have increased from 22,000 in November 2008, the first full month of the program in place, to more than 37,000 in December 2009. At the same time the registrations of people with disabilities on reduced fare have remained relatively stable between 45,000 in March 2008 and 47,000 in December 2009. Ridership From March 2008 to December 2009, 77.6 million free rides were provided to seniors and people with disabilities on the RTA system. This represents 6.6% of total ridership. Since the inception of the SRF and PDRF programs, many seniors and people with disabilities that were previously eligible for a reduced fare but were not registered have signed up for the additional benefit, and therefore there has been a rapid increase in ridership for these two programs compared to the previous reduced fare program. Through March 2009, according to our estimates, the programs have attracted on average 1.3 million new free rides per month compared to an average 1.7 million seniors rides per month that had previously paid a reduced fare. This represents a 75% increase in ridership for those two groups, which is not to be confused with a potential overall ridership increase among these populations which is more difficult to calculate since people not registered for the reduced fare program‟s travel habits were unable to be analyzed. Through December 2009, free senior rides represent, on average, 5.2% of CTA‟s total ridership and 6.5% of Pace‟s ridership. Through December 2009, Metra estimates about 3.8% of total ridership, on average, are free senior trips. By December 2009, 19.2 million free rides had been provided to people with disabilities. During that period, CTA experienced rapid growth from 566,000 rides in November 2008, the first full month of the program, to 1,519,000 rides in December 2009. Similarly, Pace went from 26,000 rides in November to 90,500 rides in December 2009. Metra increased from less than 500 rides Analysis of the RTA Seniors and People with Disabilities Ride Free Programs – FINAL REPORT 2 in November 2008 to 27,800 rides in December 2009. It is estimated that from November 2008 to December 2009, people with disabilities ride free represent on average about 2.6% of RTA‟s average (for the same period) total monthly ridership. In summary, during the study period, free rides to seniors and people with disabilities represented 6.9% of CTA, 3.8% of Metra‟s and 8.2% of Pace‟s total ridership. In addition, ADA paratransit ridership appears to be rather insensitive to the fluctuations in SRF and PDRF ridership. During the study period gasoline prices have fluctuated significantly and unemployment in the Chicago region has increased. Moreover, Metra ridership during the study period was also impacted by various road construction projects (Edens and Dan Ryan) and the CTA Brown Line construction. These and other factors also influence both general ridership and usage by seniors and people with disabilities. In addition, future ridership projections are based, in part, on past performance. The recent years of 2008 and 2009 were not typical years due to the poor economy, changes in fares, unseasonable weather and fluctuating gasoline prices. For these reasons, future predictions may vary. Survey of SRF Program Users A survey of seniors registered for the SRF program revealed the following information about the travel behavior and attitudes toward the program Transit Use 44% of the respondents did not have a reduced fare card prior to the program. 34% of the respondents currently use transit one or more times per week. 28% responded they ride transit more frequently as a result of the program; an approximately equal percentage (31%) reported they use cars and taxis less. Why and How They Ride 13% reported taking rides that are work related while 16% were currently employed. 47% reported having ridden CTA bus in the previous week, 25% CTA rail, 31% Metra and 17% Pace. 50% of respondents reported taking more transit trips during rush hour, and 52% rode more during weekends since the program started. Socioeconomic Profile Over 90% reported living in households of 1 or 2 people. 79% respondents had a driver's license and 81% had an auto available. 16% are currently employed, 5% less than at the start of the program. 33% had incomes less than $22,000 annually. 28% had income more than $55,000 annually. Analysis of the RTA Seniors and People with Disabilities Ride Free Programs – FINAL REPORT 3 About 44% (59% of the rides) of the respondents would qualify for the CB program based on income eligibility. Attitudes about the Seniors Ride Free Program Continuation 71% of respondents think the program should be continued, 24% think it should be limited to low income seniors, and 4% think it should be discontinued. These results regarding attitudes about the SRF Program should be interpreted with caution as the majority of the survey respondents were mostly from Cook County. In addition, it is possible that riders who use their cards regularly were more likely to respond to the survey. Finally, the survey was only sent to seniors who have a SRF card and who, according to census data, are only about half of the seniors in the region. Recent Surveys in the Chicago Region Recent surveys in the Chicago region undertaken by Pace in 2007 and IDOT in 2009 have concluded that the majority of trips by seniors are non-work related trips and the cost of transit fares is not an important factor in choosing transit. Demographic Forecasts and Ridership Impact of the SRF Program The forecasted senior population data indicates that the senior population for the Chicago region will double between 2000 and 2030, growing from 870,000 or 10.8% of total population to over 1,780,000 or 17.6% of total population. This includes an 83% growth in senior population from 2010 to 2030. In terms of sheer numbers, Cook County will continue to dominate, with 60% or more of the region‟s senior population throughout the growth period. As the baby boomers age, the largest impact will be growth in the 65 to 74 age cohort over the next ten to fifteen years. The 65-74 age group forecast for 2010 is over 513,000, growing to 972,000 by 2030. Between 2020 and 2030 growth in this cohort will slow, and the 74 to 85 year old age cohort will increase accordingly. By the year 2030 the regional population for persons 75 and older is forecasted to be nearly 811,000. The growth rate in disabled population is influenced by growth in total population, since the disabled population is distributed throughout all age groups. However, seniors have a higher rate of disability than the rest of the population and as an age cohort, a higher growth rate. The percentage of disabled who are seniors is expected to increase from about 25% to around 35% over the forecast period. The fact that most of the growth in the disabled population will occur within the senior cohort has planning implications for transit and paratransit services. We might expect this pattern to follow the same trend as senior growth, with declining growth rates following 2030. Disabled population in Cook County and the Chicago region is projected to increase, respectively, from 1.03 and 1.53 million in 2000 to 1.24 million and 2.08 million in 2030, respectively. Analysis of the RTA Seniors and People with Disabilities Ride Free Programs – FINAL REPORT 4 If the Seniors Ride Free were to continue we expect total annual ridership to be approximately 64.5 million trips by 2030 with CTA, Metra, and Pace carrying, respectively, approximately 54.4 million, 6.2 million, and 3.9 million rides. Locations in the United States with Free Senior Fares Only one other state in the United States, Pennsylvania, provides free rides to seniors (commuter rail rides are $1) by using lottery funds to reimburse the operators. Philadelphia and Pittsburgh have experienced similar ridership trends as the RTA region resulting from the free ride program. Financial Implications of the SRF and PDRF Programs Short Term Financial Impacts The 2009 annual revenue loss for the SRF program is estimated to be between $26.1 million and $76.8 million with a median value of $38.5 million.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • RTSP Template
    Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Regional Transit System Plan (RTSP) Summary of Projects, Plans, and Strategies Analyzed As Part of the RTSP 2040 Base Case Constrained Long Range Plan (CLRP) Metro 2025 – District of Columbia – 100% 8-car trains • Anacostia Streetcar Phase 1 – Priority Corridor Network service improvements • K Street Busway from CLRP • DC Streetcar - H St/Benning Rd NE – Metro Center/Gallery Place Pedestrian • Tiger Grant Bus Priority Improvements Passageway – Maryland – Farragut North/Farragut West Pedestrian Passageway • Viers Mill Road Busway – Blue Line stub with 2nd Rosslyn Station • Corridor Cities Transitway: – Bus Fleet expansion for non-PCN routes • Purple Line: – Virginia Other Elements • Cherry Hill VRE Station – Round 8.2 Land Use • Columbia Pike Streetcar – Increase train frequencies to maximum • Crystal City Potomac Yard Bus Way supported by infrastructure • I-495 Express Lanes Transit Service – Removed 2020 capacity constraint • Van Dorn Busway – Modified bus routes to connect with CLRP • Potomac Yard Metro Station projects • Dulles Corridor Metrorail – Additional CLRP service improvements 2 Types of Projects, Plans, and/or Strategies Tested Core Capacity Access Surface Transit New Strategies Strategies Strategies Connections Strategies New rail lines In-fill stations & Enhanced bus Metrorail through the core pedestrian priority corridors extensions to connections activity centers Rail inter-lining Improved Enhanced Commuter rail pedestrian commuter rail extensions networks service Enhanced bus Park and Ride lots Enhanced BRT BRT/LRT/Streetcar priority corridors with shuttles to network extensions rail 3 Yellow and Green Line Separation Options Tested New Yellow Line Split Yellow Line to New Yellow Line on 2nd on 10th Street NW, maintain current Street SE/NE to connect to Red Line alignment and add new to Union Station, up line on 2nd Street SE/NE North Capitol Street.
    [Show full text]
  • Pittsburgh Pittsburgh
    pittsburgh pittsburgh Pittsburgh is the second-largest city in Pennsylvania, with an estimated population of 2,354,957 people in the seven-county metropolitan area. Downtown Pittsburgh retains substantial economic influence, ranking at 25th in the nation for jobs within the urban core and 6th in job density. While the city is historically known for its steel industry, today its economy is largely based on health care, education, technology, robotics, and financial services. The city is headquarters to major global financial institutions, including PNC Financial Services, Federated Investors and the regional headquarters of BNY Mellon. Most recently, in 2010, Forbes and Yahoo! both listed Pittsburgh as the most livable city in the United States. busnetwork bus kings about bus kings display type size Bus Kings offer superior eye-level coverage and penetration, reaching King 30”H x 144”W commuters, workers and areas where traditional outdoor media is there are over 38,000 limited or unavailable. bus kings in the titan network. bus queens about bus queens display type size Slightly shorter than the King-Size poster, this option offers a Queen 30”H x 108”W marriage of impact and value. With Queens, advertisers can exterior bus reach a mass audience of pedestrian and vehicular traffic in an advertising is the effective way. ultimate mass-reach medium. bus ultra super kings about bus ultra super kings display type size Bold, colorful and unique, Ultra Super Kings cut through the clutter Ultra Super King 30”H x 248”W and command attention. Wheel-well to wheel-well, this mock-up over 2.4 million showcases the great way in which Ultra Super Kings can deliver individuals see a titan high-impact messages.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Seismic Image Quality on Fault Interpretation Uncertainty Juan Alcalde Et Al
    FEBRUARY 2017 | VOL. 27, NO. 2 NO. 27, | VOL. 2017 FEBRUARY Double Science Issue! A PUBLICATION OF THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA® Impact of Seismic Image Quality on Fault Interpretation Uncertainty FEBRUARY 2017 | VOLUME 27, NUMBER 2 Double Science Issue! 4 Impact of Seismic Image Quality on Fault Interpretation Uncertainty Juan Alcalde et al. GSA TODAY (ISSN 1052-5173 USPS 0456-530) prints news Cover: Where lies the fault? See related article, p. 4–10. and information for more than 26,000 GSA member readers and subscribing libraries, with 11 monthly issues (March/ April is a combined issue). GSA TODAY is published by The Geological Society of America® Inc. (GSA) with offices at 3300 Penrose Place, Boulder, Colorado, USA, and a mail- ing address of P.O. Box 9140, Boulder, CO 80301-9140, USA. GSA provides this and other forums for the presentation 19 Late Miocene Uplift of the Tian Shan of diverse opinions and positions by scientists worldwide, regardless of race, citizenship, gender, sexual orientation, and Altai and Reorganization of Central religion, or political viewpoint. Opinions presented in this Asia Climate publication do not reflect official positions of the Society. Jeremy K. Caves et al. © 2017 The Geological Society of America Inc. All rights reserved. Copyright not claimed on content prepared Inside Cover: Chakpaktas: Paleosols and terrestrial sediments wholly by U.S. government employees within the scope of exposed on the north shore of Lake Zaysan. Lake Zaysan their employment. Individual scientists are hereby granted to the left. Photo credit: Daniel E. Ibarra. See related article, permission, without fees or request to GSA, to use a single figure, table, and/or brief paragraph of text in subsequent p.
    [Show full text]
  • Pittsburgh Rapid Transit
    NORTH SHORE CONNECTOR North Under Construction Side East Wood St Penn Station Herron Negley Liberty Homewood Wilkinsburg Hamnett Roslyn Swissvale Allegheny Martin Luther King, Jr. Gateway Steel Plaza EAST BUSWAY Sheraden Center P1, P2 Craft McKee Thackeray Tennyson Robinson Halket Oakland Bigelow Bellefield Station First Ave Square Ingram Fifth Avenue, Outbound DUQUESNE William BUS LANE INCLINE No. 916 R1-R7 Newton Roanoke Crafton MONONGAHELA INCLINE No. 1047 Allen Beltzhoover Curtin Estella Haberman BROWN LINE Harwood Inglewood South Hills Jct VIA Palm Garden ALLENTOWN Dawn Boggs Traymore Pennant Bon Air Westfield Pioneer PITTSBURGH RAPID TRANSIT Fallowfield Denise Edgebrook Hampshire South Bell Whited Coast Bank Trolleys, Subway, Inclines Central RED LINE Belasco VIA Inglewood Station Stop BEECHVIEW Bousted Overbrook (enter at platform level) (enter at street level) Shiras SOUTH McNeilly Glenbury WEST Neeld BUSWAY Carnegie Y45-Y49 BUSWAY Stevenson G1, G2 Potomac Busways Dormont Jct Killarney Kelton Mount Lebanon Station Connecting service on street Poplar Memorial Hall Arlington Castle Shannon Willow/ Overbrook Jct BLUE LINE Martin Villa VIA St. Anne’s OVERBROOK Inbound, pay when you get on. Outbound, pay when you get off. Subway downtown is always free. Buses downtown are free until 7 Smith Rd p.m. After 7 p.m., always pay when you get on any bus, but trolleys Washington Jct Mine 3 still follow daytime rules. Subway runs till 1:30 a.m.; last car Casswell Hillcrest Highland Lindermer reaches South Hills Village at 2 a.m.- Santa Barbara Center Bethel Village Lytle Dorchester Mesta South Hills Village South Park Rd Monroe Latimer Sarah Logan Rd King's School Rd Beagle Sandy Creek West Library This map is a free service of fatherpitt.wordpress.com.
    [Show full text]
  • Downtown Chicago Transit
    Chicago History Museum Lincoln Park Zoo Downtown Chicago Transit Map CTA METRA CTA, PACE TRAINS TRAINS BUSES 1 2 3 Scott4 5 6 LaSalle 70 Division 70 Division 70 70 Chicago History Museum Clark/Division 151 Lincoln Park Zoo 800W 600W 200W 0 E/W Elm served by bus 22 or 151 Elm 146 146 nonstop between Michigan/Delaware Only full-time bus routes Viceroy 147 146 and Lake Shore/Belmont (3200N) Hotel are shown. CTA and Pace Cedar nonstop between Delaware/Michigan Hill 70 147 147 offer additional weekday and Marine/Foster (5200N) and rush period service. Maple Hobbie Visit RTAChicago.org 36 Bellevue Hooker Wendell 22 for more information. 8 Cr 70 Thompson osby A Haines Hotel A Oak Oak Oak North Branch Drake Hotel 146 Millennium Waldorf Walton 147 Knickerbocker Walton Astoria Hotel C Newberry 151 Residence Inn h Research Four ic a Kingsbury Seasons Westin Hilton Suites g Library The Talbott o Hotel W Locust Delaware 360º Chicago at The Whitehall Raffaello Hotel er Tremont John Hancock Taxi Center to/f Chicago The Seneca rom North A State ven Chestnut 22 Sofitel 10 ue Chicago Chestnut (s Water Tower u n m 22 r 36 Water Tower Place m Moody Ritz e r Bible Dewitt Loyola Carlton o Institute Pl Institute Pearson NORTH n University Hudson Sedgwick Orleans LaSalle Clark Dearbo Halsted l Larrabee Cambridge y ) Park Mies van der Rohe Museum of 800N Hyatt Contemporary Art 66 66 3 66 66 Chicago Chicago Chicago Chicago Lake Shore Drive 66 66 3 66 66 Chicago Peninsula Lurie Northwestern Superior Chicago Cambria Childrens University Hotel Hospital Downtown B
    [Show full text]
  • The New Real Estate Mantra Location Near Public Transportation
    The New Real Estate Mantra Location Near Public Transportation THE NEW REAL ESTATE MANTRA LOCATION NEAR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION | MARCH, 2013 1 The New Real Estate Mantra Location Near Public Transportation COMMISSIONED BY AMERICAN PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION IN PARTNERSHIP WITH NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS PREPARED BY THE CENTER FOR NEIGHBORHOOD TECHNOLOGY MARCH 2013 COVER: MOCKINGBIRD STATION, DALLAS, TX Photo by DART CONTENTS 1 Executive Summary 3 Previous Research 6 Findings 8 Phoenix 12 Chicago 17 Boston 23 Minneapolis-St. Paul 27 San Francisco 32 Conclusion 33 Methodology THE NEW REAL ESTATE MANTRA LOCATION NEAR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION | MARCH, 2013 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Authors: Center for Neighborhood Technology Lead Author: Sofia Becker Scott Bernstein, Linda Young Analysis: Center for Neighborhood Technology Sofia Becker, Al Benedict, and Cindy Copp Report Contributors and Reviewers: Center for Neighborhood Technology: Peter Haas, Stephanie Morse American Public Transportation Association: Darnell Grisby National Association of Realtors: Darren W. Smith Report Layout: Center for Neighborhood Technology Kathrine Nichols THE NEW REAL ESTATE MANTRA LOCATION NEAR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION | MARCH, 2013 Executive Summary Fueled by demographic change and concerns over quality of life, there has been a growing interest in communities with active transportation modes. The recession added another dimension to these discussions by emphasizing the economic impli- cations of transportation choices. Housing and transportation, the two economic sectors mostly closely tied to the built environment, were both severely impacted by the economic downturn. There has been a growing effort among planners, real estate professionals, and economists to identify not only the economic benefits of alternative transportation modes in and of themselves, but also the impact that they have on housing prices and value retention.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Service Report 2017 Contents
    PORT AUTHORITY OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY ANNUAL SERVICE REPORT 2017 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Persons with Disabilities 19 Letter from CEO Katharine Kelleman 3 Persons without Access to a Personal Vehicle 19 Overview of the Annual Service Report 3 Persons with Limited English Proficiency 19 Overall Equity Index Performance 20 SYSTEM LEVEL DATA Low and High Equity Routes: Performance 21 SYSTEM OVERVIEW ROUTE SPECIFIC DATA Overview of Port Authority’s Transit Services 4 Fleet 5 ADHERENCE TO SERVICE GUIDELINES Transit Stops and Stations 5 Summary of Service Guidelines 22 Shelters 5 In-Service Time 22 Park and Ride Lots 5 Passengers per Revenue Vehicle Hour 23 Stop Spacing 23 SERVICE AND RIDERSHIP Bus On-Time Performance 24 Service Levels 6 ACCESS Paratransit On-time Performance 24 Ridership 6 Frequency of Service 24 Trends in Ridership 7 Passenger Loads: Crowding 24 Peer Agency Selection 7 ROUTE PERFORMANCE SYSTEM EFFICIENCY Summary of Route Performance 25 Passengers per Revenue Vehicle Hour 8 Passengers per Revenue Vehicle Hour by Mode 9 UPDATES ON RECENT SERVICE CHANGES Cost per Passenger Served 10 Minor Service Updates 27 Cost per Passenger Served by Mode 11 Major Service Updates 27 Time Spent in Revenue Service 12 Time Spent in Revenue Service by Mode 13 SERVICE REQUESTS FOR FY2019 Service Request Process 28 SYSTEM EFFECTIVENESS Ranking Requests for Major Service Change 28 Walkable Service Area 14 Limitations to Adding Service in Fiscal Year 2018 28 Frequent Service Area 14 Service Requests 29 System Map of Equity 15 System On-Time Performance 16 PLANNED CHANGES FOR FY2019 Passenger Loads: Crowding 17 Planned Changes to Meet Service Guidelines on Existing Routes 32 SYSTEM EQUITY Major Service Changes 32 Low-Income Persons 18 Minor Service Changes 32 Minority Race/Ethnicity 18 Summary 32 Persons Under Age 20 18 Persons Over Age 65 18 INTRODUCTION Letter from CEO Katharine Kelleman To our Customers, Calendar year 2017 was defined by change for Port Authority of Allegheny County.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case for Rail Transit Expansion in the Chicago Central Area
    NURail Project ID: NURail2013-UIC-R14 The Case for Rail Transit Expansion in the Chicago Central Area By Ed Zotti Project Manager and Principal Author Chicago Central Area Committee 161 N. Clark St., Suite 4300, Chicago, IL 60601 [email protected] 08-17-2016 Grant Number: DTRT12-G-UTC18 1 DISCLAIMER Funding for this research was provided by the NURail Center, University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign under Grant No. DTRT12-G-UTC18 of the U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research & Technology (OST-R), University Transportation Centers Program. The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the information presented herein. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s University Transportation Centers Program, in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof. 2 TECHNICAL SUMMARY Title The Case for Rail Transit Expansion in the Chicago Central Area Introduction The Chicago central area has become the principal economic engine of its region. Central area employment is at record levels and accounts for nearly half of city jobs. Between 2000 and 2010, downtown Chicago is gained 48,000 residents, more than any other U.S. city, and is on track to add a similar number between 2010 and 2020. Since 2000, all net housing growth in Chicago has been absorbed downtown. The majority of central area workers use transit to get to their jobs, with a long-term shift from buses to trains.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Service Report 2015 Transit System Fiscal Year Data Contents System Overview
    PORT AUTHORITY OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY ANNUAL SERVICE REPORT 2015 TRANSIT SYSTEM FISCAL YEAR DATA CONTENTS SYSTEM OVERVIEW TRANSIT SYSTEM Overview of Port Authority’s Transit Services SYSTEM OVERVIEW 3 The Port Authority of Allegheny County provides public transportation services within Allegheny County, including the City of Pittsburgh, in southwest Pennsylvania. These services include 98 bus routes (three of which are rapid fixed guideways, or busways), three light rail HISTORICAL SERVICE 5 lines, and 2 inclined planes, one of which is operated by an outside entity. Port Authority also sponsors the ACCESS paratransit program SYSTEM EFFICIENCY 6 which provides door-to-door, advance reservation, shared ride service which is contracted out through a third party. These services are all supported by more than 7,000 transit stops and stations, 700 shelters, 54 Park and Ride lots, 105 locations where customers can SYSTEM EFFECTIVENESS 8 purchase fare products, and various operational centers (one light rail center, four bus garages, one bus heavy maintenance facility, and SYSTEM EQUITY 12 one general maintenance facility). ROUTE SPECIFICS ADHERANCE TO SERVICE GUIDELINES 16 UPDATES ON RECENT SERVICE CHANGES 21 SERVICE REQUESTS FOR FY2017 22 PLANNED CHANGES FOR FY2017 26 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The 2015 calendar year was a successful and transitional year for transit at the Port Authority of Allegheny County. With continued stable state funding secured in late 2013 through Act 89, the Authority was able to adjust its existing service to improve on-time performance, reduce overcrowding, roll out bus system-wide real time information (TrueTimesm), and develop new and transparent processes to ensure continual efforts to improve service and financial sustainability.
    [Show full text]
  • Historic Context Report for Transit Rail System Development
    Historic Context Report for Transit Rail System Development Nationwide, with localized contexts for the Boston, Chicago, New Orleans, New York, Philadelphia, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C. metropolitan areas June 2017 Prepared for: The Federal Transit Administration Headquarters Washington, D.C. Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. i Table of Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1 Objectives ............................................................................................................................................ 1 Methodology ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Organization of the Report ................................................................................................................. 2 2. National Context .......................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]