Bus Transit Needs: Final Report Apr17 2007

8/8/2019 Bus Transit Needs: Final Report Apr17 2007

1/44

Final ReportBus Transit Needs Analysis Connecticut 2007

Prepared for

Prepared by

Urbitran Associates, Inc.

Transit for Connecticut

April 2007


2/44

Bus Transit Needs Analysis Connecticut 2007

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1Comparison with other Northeast States................................................................................ 1Project Description ................................................................................................................... 2

Chapter 1: Connecticuts Towns and Transit Districts........................................................ 3Study Area ................................................................................................................................. 3Chapter 2: Benefits of Bus Transit ......................................................................................... 6

Employees and Employers Benefit .......................................................................................... 6Better Job Access, Healthcare, and Personal Mobility ......................................................... 7

Employment and Education .................................................................................................... 7Health Care............................................................................................................................. 8Access to Community .............................................................................................................. 8

Better for Our Environment .................................................................................................... 9Supporting Responsible Growth ........................................................................................... 10Clean Vehicles, Less Pollution ............................................................................................. 10

Chapter 3: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 11Methodology for Determining Unmet Need ......................................................................... 11Categorizing Unmet Need ...................................................................................................... 12

Chapter 4: Service Program.................................................................................................. 14Chapter 5: Investment Program........................................................................................... 17Technical Appendix .................................................................................................................... 19

Existing Operators Fixed Route Services .......................................................................... 19Allocating Towns .................................................................................................................. 19Allocating Service Areas....................................................................................................... 20Need Curves.......................................................................................................................... 21Identification of Need............................................................................................................ 26Filling the Gap...................................................................................................................... 28

Paratransit Services ................................................................................................................ 34Express Services ...................................................................................................................... 34Service in Non-Member Towns and Towns without Local Fixed Route Service.............. 37Capital Requirements............................................................................................................. 39


3/44


ii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure I-1: Comparison in Investment between Connecticut and Peers......................................... 2Figure 1-1: Connecticut Transit Districts and Fixed Route Services ............................................. 3Figure 1-2: Bus Service Coverage for Connecticut Communities.................................................. 4

Figure 2-1: Top Employment Barriers............................................................................................ 7Figure 2-2: Senior Citizen Transportation Choices ........................................................................ 9Figure 4-1: Post-Program Bus Service Coverage and Current Route Structure........................... 15Figure A-1: Major Urban Need Curve.......................................................................................... 22Figure A-2: Medium/Large Urban Need Curve............................................................................ 23Figure A-3: Small Urban Need Curve .......................................................................................... 24Figure A-4: Rural Need Curve...................................................................................................... 25Figure A-5: Express Service: Productivity by Peak Runs ............................................................ 35

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3-1: Service Frequency and Span Standards....................................................................... 13Table 4-1: Unmet Service Needs by Type of Service and Estimated Additional Vehicles.......... 16Table 5-1: Detailed Investment Program...................................................................................... 18Table 5-2: Annual Staging of Investment Program...................................................................... 18Table A-1: Service Area Category Descriptions .......................................................................... 20Table A-2: Total Need Values by Category of System ................................................................ 25Table A-3: Need Calculation by District ...................................................................................... 27Table A-4: Hours Needed to Bring Transit Providers up to Span and Frequency Standards....... 29Table A-5: Total Additional Hours, Operating Costs, Vehicles and Capital Costs by Category of

Service................................................................................................................................... 30Table A-6: CACT Survey Results: Unmet Service Needs ........................................................... 31Table A-7: CACT Survey Results: Expanded Service Needs ...................................................... 32Table A-8: CACT Survey Results: Express/Commuter Service Needs ....................................... 33Table A-9: Current Express Services............................................................................................ 36Table A-10: Calculation of Need for Unallocated Towns............................................................ 38


4/44


Introduction 1

Introduction

This study is a plan for bus service investments that will support the economic developmentfuture of the State of Connecticut. Its mission is to identify the range of benefits which can

accrue from investing in bus transit and to determine how investing in these improvements totodays bus infrastructure will contribute to job access, emerging intra- and inter-state markets,smart growth, economic development, environmental quality, and congestion relief.

Over the past fifteen years, service levels have stayed fundamentally the same or have evendeclined slightly due to inadequate funding streams. However, even as this was happening,initiatives for improved job access by the state and federal governments and economicdevelopment initiatives from the Transportation Strategy Board recognized changing and unmettravel needs throughout the state and added some new services. This study focuses on continuingand expanding upon these initiatives to build a strategic vision and bus service plan that will takeus into the future.

Comparison with other Northeast States

One of the core comparisons that was examined to determine possible shortcomings in servicelevels was a comparison with other states on the eastern seaboard with similar operatingenvironments. The comparison revealed that Connecticut invests less in transit per capita whencompared to several other selected peer states. Figure I-1 shows that if the statistical relationshipshown in other states between service hours and ridership held up here, Connecticut would beable to dramatically increase bus transit ridership by investing more in public transportationthrough increasing service hours. The likely shortfalls in service indicate that Connecticut needsmore comprehensive coverage of the hours people travel and enhancements to the service area to

serve those destinations they desire to access.


5/44


Introduction 2

Figure I-1: Comparison in Investment between Connecticut and Peers

Investment in Transit Comparison

CT with DE, NJ, RI, and MD

CT

MDNJ

RI

DE

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60

Revenue Hours per Capita

PassengersperCapita

Increasing Investment

=I

ncreasedRidership

Sources: National Transit Database (NTD),

Connecticut Department of Transportation

Project Description

This project represents a unique opportunity to formally identify and present measurable transitservice goals in Connecticut to guide near term investments in existing and new services as wellas capital fleets and facilities.

The project presents the case for enhanced bus transit funding and demonstrates the role that arobust bus network plays in economic development and vitality, job access, congestionmitigation and air quality improvements.

Transit is an economic tool providing mobility that aids employment, helps reduce congestionand pollution, and allows communities to provide necessary connections. A strategic bus service plan, which includes a financial element that identifies the maximum operating and capitalinvestment required for its implementation, will create a transit network that will provide servicethat matches local, regional and state growth, and that increases the desirability and use of transitservice as a mobility option.

Finally, the study addresses the stagnant service levels and sets the transit properties inConnecticut on a path towards progressive service provision for their respective communities.


6/44


Connecticuts Towns and Transit Districts 3

Chapter 1: Connecticuts Towns and Transit Districts

This chapter includes information on Connecticuts towns and transit districts and discusses howConnecticuts regions vary by level of development and connectivity. This study uses transit

service areas as units of study due to the variety of operating environments that exist throughoutthe State. Some of these transit service areas as transit districts, some are individual towns, andsome are regions with service provided by CT Transit.

Study Area

This study considers all regions of Connecticut. Connecticuts 169 towns are grouped by transitservice area for ease of comparison and because the communities in each service area dependupon each other (and in general, a single large metropolitan center) and function regionally.Towns that do not belong to any transit district and towns that do not receive fixed route transitservice are considered separately. Towns are listed by their transit service areas in the Technical

Appendix and are shown on the map in Figure 1-1.

Figure 1-1: Connecticut Transit Districts and Fixed Route Services


7/44



Figure 1-2 shows current fixed route, express and inter-regional routes, and illustrates the largenumber of towns that do not have any of the traditional types of transit service.

Figure 1-2: Bus Service Coverage for Connecticut Communities

Transit service areas are further classified based by level of development and population,business and transportation density from a Connecticut standpoint. Each service area is classifiedas major urban, medium/large urban, small urban or rural, as follows:

Major Urbano Hartford (CT Transit)o New Haven (CT Transit)o Bridgeport (GBTA)

Medium/Large Urbano Stamford (CT Transit)o Waterbury (CT Transit)o Danbury (HART)o New Britain (CT Transit)o Norwalk (NTD)o Norwich/New London (SEAT)


8/44



o Milford (MTD)*

Small Urbano Middletown (MAT)o Wallingford (CT Transit)o Meriden (CT Transit)

o Bristol (CT Transit)o Valley (VTD)

*o Westport (NTD)

*

Ruralo Northeastern CT TDo Northwestern CT TDo Estuary TDo Windham TD

The Technical Appendix provides more detailed information on transit service areas and townallocation.

* Milford, Valley, and Westport are special cases and are discussed in detail in the Technical Appendix.


9/44


Benefits of Bus Transit 6

Improved bus service linked toinvestments in rail will enhance theeconomic outlook for Connecticut byreducing congestion on our highwaysand encouraging employers to growjobs in Connecticut.

- Joseph McGee, Vice President, PublicPolicies and Programs

The Business Council of Fairfield County

Chapter 2: Benefits of Bus Transit

Enhanced public bus transportation throughout Connecticut can lead to a number of economic,social, and environmental benefits that are complementary and interrelated. Public transportation

provides an alternative to single-occupant automobile travel which is increasingly causingcongestion on the roadway network.

Bus transit can offer viable options for improved access to jobs and benefits to the environmentand economy. Importantly, enhancements to bus transit are most often possible with significantlyshorter implementation timeframes than capital-intensive transportation investments and canprovide greater flexibility to adapt to changing demand.

Employees and Employers Benefit

Public transportation provides economic benefits both to individual users and to the economy as

a whole. Employees benefit through better access to employment and educational opportunities,while employers benefit from a larger labor pool having access to their sites. Increasedinvestment in Connecticuts bus transit network will make the State more competitive inattracting new businesses and retaining existing employers.

The American Public Transportation Association (APTA) recently released a research report thatstated that households that are likely to use public transportation on a given day save over $6,200every year when compared to households with no access to transit2. When households are able toreduce commuting and travel expenses, these savings are typically spent on goods and services,further bolstering the local economy through additional tax revenue. For each dollar earned, theaverage household spends 18 cents on transportation, 98% of which is for buying, maintaining,

and operating cars; the largest source of household debt after mortgages.

When the overall transportation network ismade more efficient, all users benefit, notonly transit users. Businesses also benefit asdeliveries can be made in more timelyfashion due to reduced congestion, loweringshipping costs that are typically passed on toconsumers.

Finally, several studies have shown that

investment in transit can yield up to threetimes that value in economic benefit. Theinvestment in transit service is directly tied to financial savings and increased economic activityof transit users (both choice and dependent riders), increased spending on goods and services and

2 Public Transportation and Petroleum Savings in the U.S.: reducing Dependence on Oil. January 2007. AmericanPublic Transportation Association.


10/44



In a recent survey, 77% of riders reportedthat new bus and shuttle services enabledthem to secure their jobs, and 41% reportedthat without their bus service, they would beunable to maintain employment.

- Joseph M. Carbone, President and CEOThe WorkPlace, Inc., Southwestern

Connecticuts Workforce Development Board

corresponding tax revenue generation by transit agencies, as well as job creation from bothcapital projects and ongoing transit operations.

APTA has determined that every $10 million invested in transit capital projects yields $30million in business sales, and the same $10 million investment in transit operations produces $32

million in economic activity in the community.

Better Job Access, Healthcare, and Personal Mobility

The mobility afforded by public transportation provides a number of direct benefits from a social perspective, including access to employment, education, medical, social and recreationalactivities.

Employment and Education

Studies by the Connecticut Department of

Labor indicate that 68% of Jobs FirstEmployment Services participants citetransportation as the most significant barrierto employment (see Figure 2-1). Access totransportation is also a barrier for certainsegments of the population such as theelderly, disabled, and low-incomehouseholds. Furthermore, increased use oftransit can play a beneficial role inpromoting public health and safety.

Figure 2-1: Top Employment Barriers


11/44



Perhaps most importantly, public transportation provides increased opportunity for employmentand community access. This mobility supports the spectrum of job access initiatives, whetherthrough express bus service to urban cores, reverse commute services, or increasingly importantsuburb-to-suburb connections and flexible rural services.

Health Care

Mobility and access for all residents, senior citizens and the disabled in particular, represent afundamental benefit of increased bus service throughout Connecticut. In the State ofConnecticut, the senior population is expected to grow substantially, 46% between 2000 and2025, with most of that growth occurring after 2010. For senior citizens, maintaining mobilitygoes hand in hand with the concept of aging in place, or aging at home and with community-based health care as opposed to moving into nursing homes or other facilities.

Increased public bus transportation, particularly in areas that currently do not have any transitservice, furthers the goal of helping residents age in place, and in turn leads to substantial

economic savings as more Medicaid clients are able to access community-based care makingaging in place more practical and avoiding the need for institutionalization in nursing homes.

To age in place, however, requires options for mobility for a segment of the population that iseither unable or not inclined to rely on the personal automobile for transportation. States such asOregon and Maine have been cited as model states, achieving an optimal ratio of 75% ofMedicaid long-term care clients receiving community-based care to 25% receiving care ininstitutions. Increased transit and new transit service areas in Connecticut would support thisgoal of reaching the optimal ratio and provide savings of up to $1.2 billion by 2025 by holdingthe number of individuals served constant and increasing the proportion of community-basedcare recipients to 75%.

3

The Governors Budget Summary for FY2003-FY2005 shows that home health care and assistedliving provide dramatic cost savings relative to nursing care. Average monthly costs for homehealth care are $1,180 and assisted living costs average $1,450, while nursing homes can costclients an average of $5,177 per month.

Access to Community

As access to the community is increased through greater mobility, barriers that lead to socialisolation among transportation-disadvantaged populations are removed. Mobility represents aquality of life issue for all Connecticut residents, and non-drivers lose the ability to participate inthe community and the economy (see Figure 2-2).

Compared with senior citizen drivers, non-driving senior citizens make:

15% fewer trips to the doctor 59% fewer shopping trips and restaurant visits 65% fewer trips for social and family activities

3 State of Connecticut, Governors Budget Summary FY2003-FY2005, February 2003, p. 73.


12/44



Figure 2-2: Senior Citizen Transportation Choices

Nationwide, more than 20% of Americans age 65 and older do not drive, whether due todeclining health, concerns about safety, lack of access to a car, or personal preference.Furthermore, just as public transportation promotes responsible growth and transit-orienteddevelopment, a safe and inviting walking environment encourages transit use, particularly amongolder residents. More than half of older non-drivers use public transportation occasionally indenser, more livable communities, as opposed to 1 in 20 using transit in more spread out areas4.

Better for Our Environment

Public transportation has long been recognized as an efficient, environmentally sound means oftravel, particularly in relation to the single-occupant automobile. In addition to the efficiencyoffered by bus transit on a per-trip basis, multi-modal connections such as those between rail and bus enhance the use of transportation modes other than the automobile. Public transit canenhance the efficiency of the entire transportation network as more individual person trips arecombined in fewer vehicles. This increased efficiency and connectivity can help manage overalltraffic congestion and by extension lessen environmental impacts.

Reduced traffic congestion and fewer vehicle trips reduce pollution. Similarly, clean dieselengine technology will further reduce particulate and greenhouse emissions and increasedridership encourages alternatives to the single occupant automobile.

4 Aging Americans: Stranded Without Options. Surface Transportation Policy Project. 2004.


13/44



Doubling bus transit use in a cost-effectivemanner is one of the goals of our StateClimate Action Plan and will reduce globalwarming pollution by hundreds of thousandsof tons each year.

- Curt Johnson, Program Director and Senior AttorneyConnecticut Fund for the Environment

Supporting Responsible Growth

Transit supports Responsible Growth and Transit Oriented Development initiatives designed toreduce sprawl. Reducing infrastructure costs and lowering vehicle miles traveled (VMT) arepossible through targeted growth in developed areas rather than unmitigated sprawl. According

to the Research Institute for Housing America, the potential savings in development coststhrough smart growth measures nationally can approach $250 billion over 25 years. Tailoringthis nationwide estimate to Connecticuts population, savings in the State could reach $2.7 billion by 2025, with 20% ($540 million) of those savings stemming from road and land usesavings to state and local governments.5

Clean Vehicles, Less Pollution

Increased provision of transit service also supports the goals of the Connecticut Climate ChangeAction Plan, including the goal of doubling ridership levels statewide by 2020 and acorresponding reduction in VMT below the 2020 baseline. Connecticut transit systems are

already in the process of replacingconventional diesel buses with cleandiesel models, and this investment program furthers the goal of acomprehensively clean vehicle fleetstatewide. Each clean diesel bus provides a decrease in pollutionrelative to older buses and individualautomobiles.

The efficiency of high-occupancy public transit relative to single occupant automobile use leadsto broad savings in energy consumption, particularly the demand for gasoline. Current publictransportation usage nationwide reduces gasoline consumption in the United States by 1.4 billiongallons each year, according to a 2007 ICF International/APTA study. The savings represent theefficiencies gained by carrying multiple passengers in each vehicle, reducing traffic congestion by removing automobiles from the roads, and the varied sources of energy used for publictransportation. At both the national and the local level, this means fewer cars filling up at the gas pump and fewer truck deliveries to service stations, which leads to an overall reduction incongestion and corresponding increase in efficiency of the transportation network.

5 Linking Vision with Capital-Challenges and Opportunities in Financing Smart Growth. Research Institute forHousing America. Institute Report #01-01.


14/44


Methodology 11

Chapter 3: Methodology

Transportation, by any mode, provides mobility. Transportation is thus a means to an end and notthe end itself; it provides the link between individuals and the places and services to which they

want to go.

A transportation systems output is measured by the number of trips provided for individuals toreach these places and services. The success of the system is therefore measured in how well it provides mobility and access. The greater the number of choices provided and destinationsserved, the better the network will be in meeting the needs of its residents.

Bus transit is an important element of a comprehensive transportation system. It providesmobility for those who do not have a car or access to a car, to those with limited incomes whomay have car but find it expensive to use and maintain, and to those who choose to use the bus inlieu of their car to save money, to avoid contributing to congestion, or to reduce energy

consumption and environmental pollution.

Bus transit services in Connecticut, as presently configured and funded, do not meet all of theneeds identified in local planning processes. An examination of information supplied from theConnecticut Department of Transportation (CDOT) Statewide Bus Study (2000), local transitstudies, and surveys of Connecticut Association for Community Transportation (CACT)members identify a range of service needs more frequent peak hour services, evening hours,Sunday services, additional capacity on overcrowded routes, services to decentralized joblocations, etc., which cannot be met within existing budgets.

The purpose of this project is to quantify the extent of the unmet needs for bus transit service in

the State and to translate these needs into estimates of operating and capital expendituresrequired to address them efficiently.

Methodology for Determining Unmet Need

Determining the magnitude of unmet need for bus service in Connecticut requires three steps:

1. Identification of the existing use of bus transit in Connecticut, which is readily availablefrom operator and CDOT statistics.

2. Identification of total need for bus transit service, which requires the development of amodeling tool.

3. Determination of the gap between current use and total need, which is identified as theunmet need for bus transit service.

The total need for bus transit is based upon the relationship of ridership to the amount of busservice currently provided in each system in the state, with the systems stratified into groupsrepresenting similar sized systems and communities.


15/44


Methodology 12

An examination of the services in Connecticut compared to research conducted for other statesconfirms that the number of trips taken per capita in areas of similar size is related to the amountof service provided, as measured by hours of service per capita. In other words, if an area has alow level of service for the size of its community, it will likely result in low levels of ridership,simply because the system is not large enough for the area, doesnt get close enough to residents

homes, or doesnt serve enough places or hours in the day. As the service gets better e.g., asmore hours are provided per capita it serves more people and places, and therefore carries moreriders. At some point, however, enough hours will be provided such that any additional hours ofservice will not result in significant increase in riders. It is at this point that the system hasreached its logical full development and saturated the market, theoretically reaching all unmetneeds.

By plotting the relationship between supply (service hours per capita) and demand (trips percapita) for each group of systems (major urban, medium/large urban, small urban, rural), themethodology defines the total need for bus services in each area of the state. By subtracting thetrips currently being taken from the total unmet need, an estimate of unmet need for each area

can be calculated. The methodology is described in more detail in the Technical Appendix.

Other needs were also estimated including unmet needs for Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA) paratransit services, express services, and services to currently unserved towns. Methodsfor calculating these unmet needs are also discussed in detail in the Technical Appendix.

Categorizing Unmet Need

A total figure for unmet need by transit district was determined using the methodology describedin the previous section. After determining the total amount of need, the types of needs were thenevaluated by transit district. In general, types of need identified included longer operating hoursand more frequent service, service expansion to new locations, more inter-regional and expressservices, and more rural dial-a-ride service to underserved towns.

Transit need was categorized using two methods. The first involved using the updated servicefrequency and span standards identified in the 2000 Connecticut Statewide Bus System Study tobring all transit agencies up to the standard level of service. Table 3-1 presents frequency andspan standards updated from the original 2000 Connecticut Statewide Bus System Study. Insome cases, bus routes are referred to as core or other. Core bus routes are generally the most popular bus routes serving the destinations with highest demand and operating along majorcorridors. The other routes service secondary roads and carry fewer passengers.


16/44


Methodology 13

Table 3-1: Service Frequency and Span Standards

Measure Rural Small Urban Large UrbanMajor

Urban

Express

Corridors

Frequency

Peak Headwaydemand

driven

30 core, 60 other20 core, 30

other

15 core, 30

other

maximum

30Off-Peak Headway

demanddriven

30 core, 60 other 30 30 60-120

Saturday Headway N/A 30 core, 60 other 30 30 N/A

Sunday Headway N/A N/A 30 30 N/A

Span

Weekday Span6 AM - 6

PM

6 AM - 6 PM core,6 PM - 10 PM

reduced eveningservice

5 AM - 11 PM5 AM - 11

PM6 AM - 7

PM

Saturday Span N/A 6 AM - 6 PM 6 AM - 11 PM6 AM - 11

PMN/A

Sunday Span N/A N/A 8 AM - 6 PM 8 AM - 6 PM N/A

Each transit provider was evaluated separately and the number of hours of service needed tobring the operator up to the appropriate standard of service was estimated using the operatorscurrent (2007) schedule of services. The methodology and results are discussed in detail in theTechnical Appendix.

For the second portion of the need categorization, transit providers in Connecticut also participated in a survey prior to this study to address how increased investments could bedirected in their districts. The survey was conducted by the Connecticut Association forCommunity Transportation (CACT). The survey identified areas for fixed route expansion, newexpress and inter-regional services, capital requirements, and new demand responsive services in

addition to frequency and service span increases. In order to avoid double-counting need,frequency and span increases were only quantified based on schedules as described above andwere removed from the CACT survey responses. Capital needs from the CACT survey alsoinclude new facilities, technology upgrades and rolling stock. The Technical Appendix includesthe results from the CACT survey.

After the needs were calculated and categorized, operating and capital costs were calculated based on need level and types of needs. Operating costs were determined using each transit providers operating cost per hour, calculated from 2005 annual figures provided to theConnecticut Department of Transportation. Capital costs were determined based on whether ornot service was being expanded during peak or off-peak hours and whether or not there were

facility requirements for the increased level of service. The calculation of these costs is discussedin greater detail in the Technical Appendix.


17/44


Service Program 14

Chapter 4: Service Program

This program proposes 1.8 million more annual hours of service statewide, phased in over fiveyears and has the potential to increase bus ridership by 81%. Connecticut can best achieve

improved access and mobility through the following enhancements:

More frequent service so that bus transit is more convenient for commuters, reducesovercrowding during peak periods, and reduces waiting time for all riders, includingseniors and persons with disabilities

Later evening hours, which open up a new pool of jobs for employees and a new laborforce for employers

Weekend services that allow patrons to make social, recreation, and shopping trips, whileallowing employees to find jobs that require weekend work hours

Service in towns where little or no service is currently provided, expanding mobilityoptions for seniors and people with disabilities, and providing links to inter-regional and

express services for all residents, including commuters New/expanded services to provide access to decentralized job locations, retail

establishments, and other destinations

More frequent express services operating longer spans of service to give commuters moreflexibility

New express bus routes to serve additional markets and provide job access for anexpanded labor pool

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) along major corridors to improve the speed of bus services andprovide more attractive mobility options for commuters

New Commuter Connection options to provide bus/rail connections that enhance theinvestment in rail service and provide options for commuters between their residence and

the rail station and between the rail station and their place of employment Increased inter-regional services, both in geographic extent and in frequency of service,

to provide mobility options for Connecticut residents and greater access to jobs

These services will be phased in over five years and have the potential to nearly double busridership by the end of the implementation period. These services are presented in detail in thefollowing section. The associated costs of implementation are discussed in the following chapter.

After the five years of the implementation period are complete, all Connecticut towns will havebus service of some type and the coverage will look like the map in Figure 4-1. Current fixedroute, interregional, express, commuter, and deviated fixed routes are included on the map but

will be evaluated and new services will be implemented on a local basis, so the route structuremay change throughout the implementation period.


18/44


Service Program 15

Figure 4-1: Post-Program Bus Service Coverage and Current Route Structure

The types of services that are needed in Connecticut are described in Table 4-1 along with theestimated number of vehicles needed to provide the service. The hours needed to bring allagencies up to service frequency and span standards are listed in the first seven lines of the table.Hours to be used for expansion of service, Commuter Connections, BRT applications, and otherservices (including non-ADA paratransit services) are grouped into one box at the bottom of thetable. The exact distribution of the hours was not determined as part of this project as thedecisions on how to divide the hours by agency, regionally, and among all the other services willbe made based on plans and comparative needs analyses completed at the local level after thisstudy.

For local fixed route service augmentation and expansion, Commuter Connections, BRT, andnon-ADA paratransit services, there is the equivalent of 1.17 million service hours of unmet needin the State. Meeting these needs would require an additional 252 vehicles be purchased and putinto service. Of these totals, the need for expansion and other improvements (not includingfrequency and span upgrades) total 472,600 hours and 175 vehicles.


19/44


Service Program 16

Table 4-1: Unmet Service Needs by Type of Service and Estimated Additional Vehicles

Types of Services

Additional

Annual

Hours of

Service

Additional

Annual

Passenger

Trips

#

Additional

Vehicles

Existing fixed route operations - total projected 1,170,000 24,090,000 252Weekday peak period service frequency 135,600 54

Weekday off-peak period service frequency 218,300 0

Saturday service frequency 58,300 23

Sunday service frequency 34,700 0

Weekday hours of service 187,700 0

Saturday hours of service 52,600 0

Sunday hours of service 12,400 0

Expansion/improvements

New routes

BRT operating hours and expenses

Commuter connections

Other

472,600

24,090,000

175

Other types of services are also needed in Connecticut. Many towns do not have bus service ofany kind. These towns need at a minimum dial-a-ride service for seniors and persons withdisabilities, but more ideally general public dial-a-ride service or even deviated fixed routeservice depending on demand. This analysis looked at each town in Connecticut that currentlydoes not have local fixed route bus service. Transit need was calculated for each town based onits type rural or small urban. Statewide, unmet annual transit need in the form of service toareas currently without service is 403,700 hours and is estimated to serve 1.9 million passengertrips. This service could be provided in a variety of ways, ranging from existing transit districtsexpanding to serve these towns, to towns operating the service on their own, creating new transitdistricts, or using private operators contracted by the State.

When the fixed route service around the state is augmented, corresponding ADA paratransitservice must also be expanded based on federal regulations. ADA service must be providedduring the same operating hours as the fixed routes and must provide service to all eligiblepersons within mile of a fixed route. Based on the proposed increases in fixed route service, itis estimated that ADA service would need to grow by 18% per year during the five yearimplementation period, adding a total of 72,500 hours of service and potentially serving 125,000passengers.

Express services also warrant expansion. Based on the unmet needs calculation, express servicesneed to be expanded by 110,800 hours annually. This could potentially increase ridership by 1.1million passenger trips.

The following chapter describes the investments required to implement the services included inthis program.


20/44


Investment Program 17

Chapter 5: Investment Program

The funding needed for implementation of the program falls into two categories: operating andcapital. Operating funds are used to subsidize that portion of the cost to operate the service

(including the cost of drivers, fuel, dispatching, administration, maintenance, etc.) that is notcovered by farebox revenues. Capital funds are used to purchase equipment such as vehicles,facilities, shelters, communications equipment, etc. In order to fund the Transit for Connecticut program, the State would need to invest an additional $12.7 million annually for 5 years, building to a total of $63.6 million per year above the current 2005 operational budget forsubsidizing the services. Over the 5-year period, the State would need to spend a total of $215.4million in capital expenses in order to purchase the necessary equipment to operate the newservices and to purchase new equipment necessary to provide the amenities and technologyneeded to support the safety, security, and customer needs of a twenty-first century bus system.

Table 5-1 details the amount of operating and capital investment needed for each new type of

service. Assuming a conservative 20% farebox return, fixed route operators would require aninvestment of $38.6 million in operating funds by the end of the five-year implementationperiod, ADA services would require $2.6 million, services to currently unserved towns wouldrequire $19.3 million, and express services would require $3.1 million. For capital purchases toimplement the proposed services, fixed route operators would need $96.7 million, ADA serviceswould need $1.9 million, new service to currently unserved communities would need $11.2million, and express services would need $14.8 million. Other capital investments would also berequired to implement the services and include $5 million for parking for the new expressservices, $10 million for non-vehicle related BRT capital (vehicles are included in the fixed routecapital investment), $5.9 million for additional vehicles, $38.1 for infrastructure includingexpanded maintenance facilities, more bus stop shelters and more bus stop signs, and $31.8

million for technology infrastructure including communications, fareboxes, etc.

Table 5-2 is a proposed staging of operating and capital costs for the five-year implementation period. The $63.6 million in operating costs and $215.4 million in capital costs are simplydivided into five equal increments over 2005 dollars building to the total request after five years.The operating investment would increase by $12.7 million every year for 5 years and the capitalinvestment would be a straight investment of $43.1 million per year.

These service proposals and costs build upon the existing level of service as of fiscal year 2007.They are independent of the elements of the Governors 2008 budget proposal, not adjusting forincreased expenses due to inflation and potential policy changes, and do not account for any

proposed fare increases or other changes in policy such as free fares for seniors.


21/44


Investment Program 18

Table 5-1: Detailed Investment Program

Table 5-2: Annual Staging of Investment Program


22/44


Technical Appendix 19

Technical Appendix

The technical appendix provides background documentation for the study methodology andprovides more detailed results including information by transit service area and town (for those

communities that currently do not have service).

Existing Operators Fixed Route Services

Connecticut has 20 fixed route service areas. The amount and type of service varies greatlybetween the service areas based on relative geographic location, population density and level ofdevelopment. The service areas are as follows: Greater Bridgeport Transit Authority (GBTA),CTTransit Bristol, Housatonic Area Transit (HART), Estuary, CTTransit Hartford, CTTransitMeriden, Middletown Area Transit (MAT), Milford Transit District (MTD), CTTransit NewBritain, CTTransit New Haven, Northeastern CT Transit District, Northwestern CT TransitDistrict, Norwalk Transit District (NTD), Southeast Area Transit District (SEAT), CTTransit

Stamford, Valley Transit District (VTD), CTTransit Wallingford, CTTransit Waterbury,Westport (operated by NTD), and Windham Region Transit District (WRTD). For this project,transit service areas are discussed both by transit district name and by the name of the main citythat serves as the center of the service area.

Allocating Towns

Connecticut is home to 169 towns. Towns were allocated to transit service areas as follows:

Bridgeport: Bridgeport, Stratford, Fairfield, Trumbull

Bristol

Danbury (HART): Danbury, Bethel, Brookfield, New Milford, Ridgefield Estuary TD: Old Saybrook, Essex, Deep River, Chester, Westbrook, Clinton, Madison

Hartford: Hartford, East Hartford, West Hartford, Manchester, Wethersfield, RockyHill, Newington, Glastonbury, Farmington, Bloomfield, Windsor, Windsor Locks, SouthWindsor

Meriden

Middletown (MAT): Middletown, Portland, East Hampton, Cromwell, Durham,Haddam

Milford (MTD)

New Britain: New Britain, Plainville, Southington, Berlin

New Haven: New Haven, West Haven, East Haven, Hamden, North Haven, Chesire,

Orange, Branford, North Branford, Woodbridge, Guilford, Madison Northeastern CT TD: Brooklyn, Putnam, Killingly, Thompson

Northwestern CT TD: Torrington, Litchfield, Winchester, Barkhamsted, Canaan,Colebrook, Cornwall, Goshen, Harwinton, Kent, Morris, New Hartford, Norfolk, NorthCanaan, Salisbury, Sharon

Norwalk (NTD): Norwalk, Wilton


23/44



Norwich/New London (SEAT): Norwich, New London, Groton, Waterford, East Lyme,Montville, Preston, Lisbon, Griswold, Ledyard, Stonington, North Stonington

Stamford: Stamford, Greenwich, Darien

Valley (VTD): Ansonia, Derby, Seymour, Shelton

Wallingford

Waterbury: Waterbury, Wolcott, Watertown, Naugatuck, Middlebury Westport (NTD)

Windham (WRTD): Windham, Willimantic, Mansfield, Storrs, Franklin

Towns were then further separated based on whether or not they had local fixed route serviceavailable. Towns with local fixed route service were included in the overall calculation of needas a transit district. Towns without local fixed route service were moved to the calculation ofneed for individual towns using the non-member town methodology.

Non-member towns (towns that are not members of transit districts and that do no have fixed-route service) included: East Haddam, East Granby, Easton, Hartland, Oxford, New Canaan,

Plainfield, Plymouth, Roxbury, Salem, Sherman, Southbury, Sprague, Stafford, Sterling, Union,Voluntown, Warren, Washington, Weston, and Woodbury

Allocating Service Areas

Using population density as a simple way of distinguishing between categories of service area(major urban, medium/large urban, small urban and rural), transit service areas and towns weresplit into categories for analysis. Table A-1 lists the overall population density ranges used todistinguish between the categories of systems.

Table A-1: Service Area Category Descriptions

Population Density Category of Service Area

2500 + up Major Urban

1800-2500 Medium/Large Urban

700-1800 Small Urban

under 700 Rural

Service areas were categorized as follows:

Major Urbano Hartford (CT Transit)o New Haven (CT Transit)

o Bridgeport (GBTA) Medium/Large Urban

o Stamford (CT Transit)o Waterbury (CT Transit)o Danbury (HART)o New Britain (CT Transit)o Norwalk (NTD)o Norwich/New London (SEAT)


24/44



o Milford (MTD)*

Small Urbano Middletown (MAT)o Wallingford (CT Transit)o Meriden (CT Transit)

o Bristol (CT Transit)o Valley (VTD)*o Westport (NTD)*

Ruralo Northeastern CT TDo Northwestern CT TDo Estuary TDo Windham TD

Milford, Valley and Westport are special cases and are discussed in more detail in the followingsection.

Need Curves

The total need for bus transit is based upon the relationship of ridership to the amount of busservice provided currently in each system in the State, with the systems stratified into groupsrepresenting similar sized communities.

An examination of the services in Connecticut compares to research conducted for other statesand confirms that the number of trips taken per capita in areas of similar size is related to theamount of service provided, as measured by hours of service per capita.

If an area has a low level of service for the size of its community, it will likely result in lowlevels of ridership, simply because the system is not large enough for the area, doesnt get closeenough to residents homes, or doesnt serve enough places or hours in the day. As the servicegets better e.g., as more hours are provided per capita the service becomes better, servesmore people and places, and therefore carries more riders and is more efficient. At some point,however, enough hours will be provided, so that any additional hours of service will not result insignificant increase in riders. It is at this point that the system has reached its logical fulldevelopment and saturated the market, theoretically reaching all unmet needs.

By plotting the relationship between supply (service hours per capita) and demand (trips percapita) for each group of systems (major urban, medium/large urban, small urban, rural), the

methodology defines the total need for bus services in each area of the state. By subtracting thetrips currently being taken from the total unmet need, an estimate of unmet need for each areacan be calculated.

Figures A-1 through A-4 are the total need curves for major urban, medium/large urban, smallurban and rural systems. As hours of service are added to the system, the number of passengersusing the service increases. This relationship exists linearly for a range of service hours, but thenumber of new riders gained per additional hour of service begins to taper off once the market


25/44



approaches saturation. When the curve flattens the market is saturated and every additional hourof service added yields no new passengers. This is 100% of total need.

It is not reasonable to think that every system in Connecticut would be able to meet 100% of thetransit needs of the community. Thus, other levels of service were examined to determine which

level of service would be the most cost-effective. After looking at several levels of service, thestudy panel decided that meeting 90% of total need would be the most cost effective with onlya 46% increase in operating cost, both hours of service and potential ridership could be increasedby 81%. On the charts in Figures A-1 to A-4, red lines represent 100% of transit need. The bluelines represent 90% of total need and the green lines represent 80%.

Figure A-1: Major Urban Need Curve

Major Urban Regions - Fixed Routes Only

Hartford, New Haven, Bridgeport

Hartford

New Haven

Bridgeport

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60


Pa

ssengersperCapita


26/44



Figure A-2: Medium/Large Urban Need Curve

Medium/Large Urban Regions - Fixed Routes Only

Stamford, Waterbury, Danbury, New Britain,

Norwalk, Norwich (SEAT), Milford*

0

Danbury

Norwich (SEAT)

New Britain Waterbury

Milford

Norwalk

Stamford

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

0.0000 0.2000 0.4000 0.6000 0.8000 1.0000 1.2000 1.4000 1.6000


Pas

sengersperCapita

*Milford does not fit into the profile of the medium/large systems based on its population density; rather it belongsin the small urban category. However, Milford is located inside a major densely packed metropolitan region

between New Haven and Bridgeport which makes its transit needs more like a medium/large urban area than a

small urban area.


27/44



Figure A-3: Small Urban Need Curve

Small Urban Regions - Fixed Routes Only

Bristol, Meriden, Middletown, Wallingford, Valley*

0

Valley

Middletown

Bristol

MeridenWallingford

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

10.00

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80


PassengersperCapita

*Valley Transit District is actually categorized as a rural service area. However, it is treated as a small urban area for this analysis because of its central location in the triangle that is created by Waterbury, New Haven and

Bridgeport and its larger more densely packed downtowns that make it function more like a small urban area than a

rural area. Its transit needs would be underestimated if it was categorized as rural.

Westport, which has service operated by Norwalk Transit District, is also a unique case in thestatewide analysis. Westport with its wealthy residents and mix of mostly suburban and ruralresidences and small commercial centers is unlike any other town in Connecticut that has its owntransit district. Thus, its needs were estimated separately using data from a previously completedproject for the State of Minnesota. Towns averaging 25,000 residents (with a range in populationfrom 8,000 to 39,000) were used to approximate the conditions in Westport with their average0.89 hours per capita and 6.4 passengers per capita. Total transit need in those systems was projected at 1 hour per capita and 11 passengers per capita. When curve representing these

systems is dropped to the Westport level, total transit need for the community was estimated at0.85 hours per capita and 5.5 passengers per capita.


28/44



Figure A-4: Rural Need Curve

Rural Regions - Fixed Routes Only

Old Saybrook (Estuary), Northeastern, Northwestern, Windham

0

Windham

Northwestern

NortheasternOld Saybrook

(Estuary)

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20


PassengersperCapita

After the need curves were fit to the data, they were read to provide optimal level of service

numbers in terms of trips per capita and hours per capita. Table A-2 lists the optimal level ofservice per capita for the four categories of transit providers and for the 100%, 90% and 80% oftotal need levels.

Table A-2: Total Need Values by Category of System

% Total Need

100% 90% 80%

Type of SystemTrips /

Capita

Hours /

Capita

Trips /

Capita

Hours /

Capita

Trips /

Capita

Hours /

Capita

Major Urban

Systems31 1.43 27.9 1.17 24.8 0.96

Large UrbanSystems 22 1.24 19.8 0.96 17.6 0.82

Small Urban

Systems5.5 0.66 4.95 0.5 4.4 0.43

Rural Systems 3 0.96 2.7 0.67 2.4 0.59

The optimal level of service numbers (90% of total need) were then used to calculate total needgiven population size in each transit service area. Existing service was subtracted from the


29/44



calculated total need of the region in order to give an indication of unmet need in an area.Identification of need is discussed further in the following section.

Identification of Need

Need values were calculated using the optimal level of service numbers shown in Table A-2 andderived from the need curves. Total need is the amount of service and number of passengers thata given region can support based on its population size and density. Other factors such as business and development, major employers, and percentage of seniors and disabled personsliving in an area also impact the amount and type of service used in a local area; but for a small-scale analysis such as this one, where the study area is the State of Connecticut, localcharacteristics have less of an impact on the overall demonstration of transit need. Thus, hours ofservice per capita and passengers per capita were used to calculate need statewide based onservice area type (major urban, medium/large urban, small urban, and rural).

Table A-3 lists fiscal year 2005 operating expenses by transit district and unmet need in hours

and passenger trips at the optimal level of service for Connecticut (90% of total transit need).Unmet service hours total 1.17 million and potential unmet passenger trips amount to 24.1million. Operating costs were estimated based on transit operators hourly rate of service provision their fiscal year 2005 operating expenses divided by the total hours of serviceprovided.

Some districts are providing service at only a slightly lower level than optimal and others havenumerous unmet needs. Westport and Northwestern Connecticut Transit District are close tomeeting the transit needs of their residents. However, service areas like Bristol, Wallingford,Estuary Transit District, HART, SEAT, Meriden and New Britain have unmet needs so great thatservice levels need to more than double in order to be providing an appropriate level of service.Transit needs in these areas are both local needs and interregional needs.


30/44

Bus Transit Ne


Table A-3: Need Calculation by District


31/44



Filling the Gap

The calculated need gap can be filled in a variety of ways and the manner in which the gap willbe filled will be determined later based on studies of individual transit agencies. However, theservices used to meet the needs of Connecticut stakeholders can be estimated and discussed in

general terms based on two approaches.

First, as mentioned in the main body of the report, Connecticut transit providers do not meet allof the service frequency and span standards set forth in the 2000 Connecticut Statewide BusSystem Study. Thus, the first step in filling the gap would be to bring all transit providers up tothe updated service standards for service frequency and span. Each agency was evaluatedseparately based on their level of service as of February 2007. This evaluation is described indetail in the following section.

Second, unmet needs were also identified in a general manner prior to the initiation of this project through a survey. The results of this survey are provided in the section following the

discussion of frequency and span of service standards.

Frequency and Hours of Service

Schedules were obtained from each transit agency in February 2007. Most schedules wereavailable on the transit providers websites. Each providers level of service was then comparedto the updated standards laid out in the 2000 statewide bus study. Level of service was comparedto the standards on a route-by-route basis. The number of service hours required to meet theservice standards were estimated for weekday peak and off-peak hours, Saturdays, and Sundays.Table A-4 lists the number of hours and vehicles necessary to bring all operators up to standardas well as the hours available for service expansion, the details of which will be developed basedon local plans completed after this study.


32/44

Bus Transit Ne


Table A-4: Hours Needed to Bring Transit Providers up to Span and Frequency Standa


33/44



In order to calculate operational expenses, each agencys additional hours were multiplied bytheir hourly operating rate. Additional vehicles were estimated based on when the additionalservice would be provided. Peak service, for example, requires additional vehicles whileextended service into the evening hours does not. Using an industry average of 3,000 revenuemiles per year per vehicle, the number of requisite additional vehicles was calculated. Also using

an industry average as of March 2007, full size buses were assumed to cost $400,000 and paratransit vehicles were assumed to cost $75,000. Table A-5 provides the totals for eachcategory of service.

Table A-5: Total Additional Hours, Operating Costs, Vehicles and Capital Costs by Category of Service

Types of Services

Additional

Annual

Hours of

Service

Additional

Annual

Operational

Expenses

#

Additional

Vehicles

Additional

Capital

Expenses

Existing fixed route operations - total

projected1,170,000 $48.3 252 $96.7

$ in millionsWeekday peak period service frequency 135,600 $5.6 54 $21.7

Weekday off-peak period service frequency 218,300 $9.0 0 $0.0

Saturday service frequency 58,300 $2.4 23 $9.3

Sunday service frequency 34,700 $1.4 0 $0.0

Weekday hours of service 187,700 $7.9 0 $0.0

Saturday hours of service 52,600 $2.3 0 $0.0

Sunday hours of service 12,400 $0.4 0 $0.0

Expansion/improvements

New routes

BRT operating hours and expenses

Commuter connections

Other

472,600 $19.3 175 $65.7

CACT Survey

Prior to the initiation of this study, transit providers in Connecticut were asked to quantify theirunmet needs by CACT (2006). Not all transit providers responded to the survey. Tables A-6through A-8 describe the responses to the survey. The first table lists unmet service needs, thesecond lists expanded service needs, and the third lists express/commuter service needs.

Transit providers were also asked as part of this study to submit unmet needs/service plans. Onlya few operators responded. Their needs are as follows: locally expanded routes to serve new

major trip generators; service frequency and span improvements (included separately in thisanalysis); express, inter-regional, shuttle and Commuter Connection services; funding for ADAservices; new facilities; and other infrastructure improvements and technology upgrades such ascommunications, fareboxes, and Automatic Vehicle Locator (AVL) systems.


34/44

Bus Transit Ne


Table A-6: CACT Survey Results: Unmet Service Needs


35/44

Bus Transit Ne


Table A-7: CACT Survey Results: Expanded Service Needs


36/44



Table A-8: CACT Survey Results: Express/Commuter Service Needs


37/44



Paratransit Services

Paratransit services include both the ADA service required by federal law to match fixed routeservice coverage and hours of operation and the Dial-a-Ride services (Non-ADA paratransitservices) provided for the general public in rural areas, and seniors and disabled persons in all

areas. For this study, paratransit services need is estimated separately from fixed route serviceneed.

ADA service hours were projected to increase 4% per year over the 5-year period, which is equalto the 3% increase in service hours statewide over the past 5-year period and another 1% increasein service to cover the geographic and service span expansions recommended for fixed routes.The total need would then be 20% over the 5-year implementation, but is included as 18%because the 90% of total need threshold was determined to be the most cost-effective in thefixed route analysis.

Dial-a-Ride service need is accounted for in two ways. First, for towns that currently have no

service or have only limited service, transit need in those areas was calculated by category small urban or rural regions - just as was done for the fixed route methodology. Thus, for eachtown not presently receiving local fixed route service, transit need was calculated. This need willprobably be covered either by using deviated fixed route service in the more urban areas or Dial-a-Ride service in the less densely populated areas.

Second, for existing Dial-a-Ride services, the need was estimated as part of the fixed routecalculation. The need is included in the hours allotted for service expansion, BRT, and other usescategory.

Express Services

Express services are used by many Connecticut residents to access their places of employment inHartford, New Haven, and other major employment centers. Table A-9 describes currentlyoperating express services including hours of operation, frequency of service, productivity andpeak number of runs. Productivity presently ranges from around 6 passengers per hour on mid-day and smaller routes to around 30 passengers per hour on the popular Buckland Hills-Hartfordpeak route. The average is around 12 passengers per hour.

Using the same supply and demand theory as was used for fixed route service, Figure A-5 plotspeak number of runs on the X-axis and productivity in passengers per hour on the Y-axis. As theamount of service increases, the ridership also increases. As with fixed routes, there is asaturation point where additional service does not equate to additional riders. For expressservices, the saturation level is estimated to be 24 passengers per hour. However, the expressservices cannot be expected to serve 100% of need, as was discussed with the fixed routeservices, and the optimal level of service provision was determined to be 90% of total need.Thus, a figure of 21.6 passengers per hour was used in the calculation of the optimal level ofexpress service. Then the amount of additional service needed to bring existing express serviceup to the optimal level was calculated. The additional hours of express service needed to meet


38/44



Connecticuts needs was estimated at 110,800, which has the potential to provide an additional1.1 million passenger trips annually.

Figure A-5: Express Service: Productivity by Peak Runs

FY2005 Express Services

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Peak # Runs

Producti

vity(Passengers/Hour


39/44

Bus Transit Ne


Table A-9: Current Express Services


40/44



Service in Non-Member Towns and Towns without Local Fixed Route Service

Unmet transit service need in towns not currently belonging to a transit district was alsocalculated. Towns located within a transit district but without local fixed route service were alsoincluded in this estimation of need. Using the total need calculation from the rural curve in the

fixed route analysis, optimum passenger trips per capita of 2.7 and optimum operating hours percapita of 0.67 were applied to the rural and low density suburban towns currently with noservice. There were also three towns that currently are unserved yet do not fit the rural profile,but rather fit the small urban profile. Their need was calculated using the optimal trips per capitaof 4.95 and optimal hours per capita of 0.5.

Table A-10 provides detailed information on each of towns currently without local fixed routeservice.


41/44



Table A-10: Calculation of Need for Unallocated Towns


42/44



Capital Requirements

The capital requirements necessary to implement the services proposed to meet Connecticutstransit needs and to assist in turning Connecticuts fleet and facilities into a 21

stcentury clean bus

system were determined in two ways. First, for the hours estimated from the unmet needsanalysis for the fixed route, express, and unserved town service, the hours were divided by anaverage of 3,000 hours operated annually per vehicle (industry standard) in order to calculatetotal number of vehicles necessary to operate the service. Only certain types of service requireadditional vehicles including peak service on weekdays, service frequency expansion, and newservice areas. Other types of service improvements such as expansion of span and off-peakfrequency increases do not require additional vehicles. Thus, for the service improvements andnew service that required additional vehicles, capital investments were calculated using anaverage cost of $400,000 for a full-size transit bus and $75,000 for paratransit vehicles (industryaverage for 2007). For fixed route improvements and expansions, capital requirements total$96.7 million over 5 years. For ADA services needed to correspond to fixed route increase,capital requirements total $1.9 million over 5 years. New service to unserved towns requires anadditional $11.2 million and express service requires an additional $14.8 million in capitalpurchase over the 5 year implementation period. Related capital expenses include an estimated$5 million investment in parking for the new/expanded express services and $10 million for non-vehicle BRT infrastructure.

The second way that capital requirements were identified was through the CACT survey ofConnecticut bus service providers. Capital requests for service span and frequency increases andlocal service expansion were included as part of the previous estimation of capital requirementsfrom the unmet needs analysis and the filling of the gap between existing service and optimalservice level. Other capital requirements listed by operators in the CACT survey included


43/44



technology and communication infrastructure, maintenance facilities, rolling stock, and othersmaller infrastructure requests for shelters and signs. These capital requirements are listed indetail by transit provider and statewide in Tables A-6 to A-8. Totals by category are listed inTable 5-1 with the investment program.


44/44

Bus Transit Needs Analysis Connecti

Documents

Bus Transit Needs: Final Report Apr17 2007