PRTC Bus Service Strategic Plan - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

prtc bus service strategic plan n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
PRTC Bus Service Strategic Plan PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
PRTC Bus Service Strategic Plan

play fullscreen
1 / 33
PRTC Bus Service Strategic Plan
157 Views
Download Presentation
Download Presentation

PRTC Bus Service Strategic Plan

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. PRTC Bus Service Strategic Plan Public Hearing Presentation September 2004

  2. Presentation Outline • Strategic plan background • Factors shaping transit service needs • Analysis and evaluation approach • Candidate new / expanded services examined • Recommended services • Related bus purchase and maintenance / storage facility investment requirements • Other forms of service delivery • Next steps

  3. Strategic Plan Background • Publicly supported bus services in area shaped by multi-year strategic plan • Last such plan developed by PRTC several years ago, and now nearing end of its useful life • PRTC’s governing board wants new (updated) plan produced in FY 2005, timed to dovetail with FY 2006 budget process

  4. Factors Shaping Transit Needs • Population / employment growth in area • Deteriorating traffic conditions • Growing public dissatisfaction with transportation conditions in the area • PRTC survey – citizens’ perceptions of unmet transit needs • Assessment of existing transit services – strengths and weaknesses

  5. 400,000 350,000 300,000 250,000 Population 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Year Factors Shaping Transit Needs Population growth in Prince William County, Manassas and Manassas Park – 1990 to 2003

  6. 500,000 450,000 400,000 350,000 300,000 Population 250,000 Employment 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Year Factors Shaping Transit Needs • Projected population and employment in Prince William County – 2005 to 2030

  7. Factors Shaping Transit Needs Deteriorating traffic conditions – 1990 - 2003 MeasureChange Since 1990 • Demand • VMT (NOVA counties only) 49% increase • Supply • Lane miles added (NOVA counties only) 9% increase • Demand vs. Supply (Congestion) • VMT per lane mile (NOVA counties only) 37% increase

  8. Factors Shaping Transit Needs • Growing citizen dissatisfaction with transportation in the area Around CountySatisfied? 2000 62.8% 2001 55.1% 2002 57.6% 2003 52.5% 2004 45.7% Around NOVASatisfied? 2001 37.3% 2003 37.1%

  9. Factors Shaping Transit Needs(PRTC Survey – OmniRide) • More frequent service on existing routes • Off-peak service on existing routes • Weekend Metro Direct service (connecting to Metrorail) • New service • To Dulles area • To Tysons Corner • To Rosslyn • To Fort Belvoir • From Haymarket / Gainesville

  10. Factors Shaping Transit Needs(PRTC Survey – OmniLink) • Weekend service • New service • Innovation • Montclair • Haymarket / Gainesville • More frequent service on existing routes

  11. Factors Shaping Transit Needs • Assessment of existing service • Evaluated relative to multiple measures of service quality (defined by the Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual -- transit industry guide for such evaluations) • OmniRide and OmniLink separately evaluated to account for inherent differences • Measures • Hours of service • Coverage • Frequency • Passenger seating capacity (loading) • On-time performance • Trips not served • Travel time (relative to auto)

  12. Factors Shaping Transit Needs – Existing Service Weaknesses • OmniRide • Lack of off-peak service • Absence of service in some areas • Haymarket (on “residential” end) • Rosslyn, Tysons Corner, Route 28 / Dulles, and Fort Belvoir (on “destination” end) • Absence of weekend service • OmniLink • Deficient service frequency on existing routes • Absence of service in some areas • Montclair, Haymarket / Gainesville (on the “residential” end) • Innovation and Fort Belvoir (on “destination” end) • Absence of weekend service

  13. Factors Shaping Transit Needs • Assessment of existing services – area peer comparisons from “service per capita” perspective

  14. Factors Shaping Transit Needs • Assessment of existing services – area peer comparisons from “investment per capita” perspective

  15. Candidate Services Examined • New OmniRide routes • Expanded service on existing OmniRide routes • New OmniLink routes • Expanded service on existing OmniLink routes

  16. Candidate Services Examined – New OmniRide Routes • Rosslyn • Haymarket • Tysons Corner (from east and west) • Fort Belvoir • Route 28 / Dulles • Brentsville

  17. Candidate Services Examined – Expanded Service on Existing OmniRide Routes • More peak period Route One corridor service • Mid-day service • Later evening service • Later morning service • Saturday Metro Direct (from east and west) • Increased frequency and Saturday service on Cross-county route

  18. Candidate Services Examined – New OmniLink Routes • Route One supplemental service • Montclair-related • Haymarket / Gainesville-related • Innovation • Route One Fort Belvoir extension

  19. Candidate Services Examined – Expanded Service on Existing OmniLink Routes • Route One corridor • Increased frequency on easterly OmniLink routes • Increased frequency on westerly OmniLink routes • Saturday service on westerly OmniLink routes • Sunday service on both easterly and westerly OmniLink routes

  20. Candidate Services Examined – Evaluation Factors • Customer requests / interest expressed via survey • Daily ridership expectations • Gross subsidy requirement • Gross subsidy per trip • Additional bus requirements • Supportiveness of local jurisdictional goals / objectives

  21. Recommended Services -- Introduction • Two groupings • Those recommended for implementation within next five years (by 2010) • Those seen as desirable later than 2010 • “Later than 2010” group not recommended sooner because • Road improvements have to be completed first to make the services productive and/or • Markets need more time to develop

  22. Recommended Services - OmniRide

  23. Recommended Services - OmniLink

  24. Recommended OmniRide Services Within Next Five Years – Key Financials and Other Measures

  25. Recommended OmniLink Services Within Next Five Years – Key Financials and Other Measures

  26. Desirable Services Beyond 2010

  27. Bus Purchase Needs Within Next Five Years

  28. Funding Requirements For Bus Purchases

  29. Maintenance / Storage Needs • Short-term expansion • Enlarge secure storage lot at PRTC Transit Center, encroaching on employee parking lot • Move employee parking lot to existing commuter lot • Construct replacement commuter lot on undeveloped acreage across from Transit Center • Longer-term expansion • Westerly maintenance facility

  30. Maintenance / Storage Needs – Short Term

  31. Maintenance / Storage Needs – Longer Term • Short-term plan yields total storage capacity of 128 buses • Fleet grows to 134 buses by 2010 assuming all recommended services are implemented as proposed • Indicates need for second maintenance facility • Preferred location on western side of PRTC service area to reduce “dead-head” costs

  32. Alternative Forms of Service Delivery Potentially Warranting Public Support • Forms • Volunteer transportation program • Voucher program • Either could be substitute form of service or supplement to improve mobility even further • Volunteer program already exists • Run by Prince William Area Interfaith Caregivers (aka “Caregivers”) • No public funding at present, limiting its effectiveness • No voucher program in PRTC service area at present, but many examples in jurisdictions to the north

  33. Next Steps • PRTC compiles reactions to draft plan from citizens and PRTC governing board • PRTC finalizes plan for governing board’s consideration / adoption as early as October 2004 • Plan used to shape proposed budget submissions to PRTC member jurisdictions • Member jurisdictions decide which of the recommended services they wish to sponsor (if any) • Implementation thereafter in accordance with sponsors’ decisions • Process begins with the FY 2006 budget