DART Ridership. Board Workshop January 5, 2018

Transcription

1 DART Ridership Board Workshop January 5,

2 Overview This presentation looks at many facets of DART s bus and rail ridership trends. No single factor can adequately explains the current trends Key topics covered: General bus and ridership trends Factors behind the trends including both increases and decreases in ridership: demographics, the economy and employment, geography and physical development, service characteristics, ridership counting, and others 1

3 GENERAL RIDERSHIP TRENDS 2

4 General Ridership Trends Overall ridership has trended upward since 2001 Bus ridership has generally declined since 2008, but has experienced more significant declines in 2016 and 2017 LRT ridership is flat or up slightly in 2016 and 2017 after expansion-driven growth since 2001 TRE ridership has been trending down since 2008, but had a small increase when the Arlington MAX was implemented in 2013 and 2014, and is improving with more frequent service (especially on Saturdays) 3

5 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,226 DART Fixed-Route Ridership Trends Average Weekday Ridership - Bus, LRT, TRE 240, , , , , , , , , , ,000 4

6 ,230 38,696 56,767 55,301 61,994 60,592 65,752 64,592 59,810 59,293 71,606 90,221 96,272 96,380 97,846 96,346 97,242 DART LRT Ridership Trends Average Weekday Ridership - LRT 110, ,000 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 5

7 ,758 7,211 8,045 7,674 7,535 8,077 7,643 8,618 8,206 7,788 7,421 8,893 8,680 7,432 9,796 9,879 8,468 TRE Ridership Trends Average Weekday Ridership - TRE 10,500 9,500 8,500 7,500 6,500 5,500 4,500 3,500 6

8 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,873 DART Bus Ridership Trends Average Weekday Ridership - Bus 170, , , , , , , ,000 90,000 80,000 7

9 Route-Level Ridership Trends Staff has reviewed ridership trends at a route level to try to help determine some of the factors behind changes We looked at weekday ridership for each route operating FY14 through FY17 four years of data There were no fare increases or major rail openings during this period that could influence the results 142 bus routes operated during the entire four-year period We calculated the slope for each route the overall linear weekday ridership trend for that route over the four years Reflecting general bus ridership trends for the period, 21 routes had positive trends, and 121 routes had negative trends 8

10 Routes with the Best Ridership Trend Route Name Avg Weekday Riders FY14 Avg Weekday Riders FY17 Slope Notes 883 UT Dallas Shuttle 3,175 4, Downtown Irving- Westmoreland Rapidly expanding ridership, service growth 919 1, Midday frequency improvements 524 LoveLink Serves Love Field, with major growth 208 Northwest Plano Express Serves growing employment center 529 Inwood-Royal Lane Uncertain 463 Addison-Downtown Garland 385 Chaha-South Garland TC Jefferson-Malcolm X/Bexar 1,404 1, Steady ridership growth, service added 4,236 4, Hatcher 1,121 1, Uncertain Route expanded to connect to Rowlett Station Route reorganized in 2010, more frequent service 841 Telecom Corridor FLEX Serves growing employment center 9

11 Location of Growing Routes

12 Oct-13 Dec-13 Feb-14 Apr-14 Jun-14 Aug-14 Oct-14 Dec-14 Feb-15 Apr-15 Jun-15 Aug-15 Oct-15 Dec-15 Feb-16 Apr-16 Jun-16 Aug-16 Oct-16 Dec-16 Feb-17 Apr-17 Jun-17 Aug-17 Route 883 UTD Trends Average Weekday Ridership 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1, per. Mov. Avg. (883) 11

13 Oct-13 Dec-13 Feb-14 Apr-14 Jun-14 Aug-14 Oct-14 Dec-14 Feb-15 Apr-15 Jun-15 Aug-15 Oct-15 Dec-15 Feb-16 Apr-16 Jun-16 Aug-16 Oct-16 Dec-16 Feb-17 Apr-17 Jun-17 Aug-17 Route 549 Trends Average Weekday Ridership 1,200 1,100 1, per. Mov. Avg. (549) 12

14 Underlying Factors for Gains Most of the routes with the greatest improvements had one of several factors influencing their results: Employment growth Activity growth (e.g. Love Field) Service improvements, particularly frequency improvements 13

15 Routes with the Worst Ridership Trend Route Name Avg Weekday Riders FY14 Avg Weekday Riders FY17 Slope Notes 409 Illinois-Westmoreland 2,013 1, Demographics 19 Ann Arbor-Lakewood 2,235 1, Likely gentrification, demographics 161 Glen Oaks 1,850 1, Demographics 362 Addison-Arapaho via Campbell Riders siphoned off by UTD Shuttle 467 Buckner-South Garland 2,678 2, Demographics 24 Mockingbird- Capitol/McMillan 1,573 1, Large-scale redevelopment, gentrification 466 SW Center Mall-Buckner 2,537 2, Demographics Downtown Garland- Royal Lane Wynnewood- Mockingbird Richland College-Lovers Lane 2,755 2, ,872 1, ,493 1, Riders siphoned off by 987, demographics Large-scale redevelopment, gentrification Large-scale redevelopment, gentrification 14

16 Location of Declining Routes

17 Oct-13 Dec-13 Feb-14 Apr-14 Jun-14 Aug-14 Oct-14 Dec-14 Feb-15 Apr-15 Jun-15 Aug-15 Oct-15 Dec-15 Feb-16 Apr-16 Jun-16 Aug-16 Oct-16 Dec-16 Feb-17 Apr-17 Jun-17 Aug-17 Route 583 Trends Average Weekday Ridership 3,100 2,900 2,700 2,500 2,300 2,100 1,900 1,700 1, per. Mov. Avg. (583) 16

18 Oct-13 Dec-13 Feb-14 Apr-14 Jun-14 Aug-14 Oct-14 Dec-14 Feb-15 Apr-15 Jun-15 Aug-15 Oct-15 Dec-15 Feb-16 Apr-16 Jun-16 Aug-16 Oct-16 Dec-16 Feb-17 Apr-17 Jun-17 Aug-17 Route 1 Trends Average Weekday Ridership 2,200 2,000 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 1, per. Mov. Avg. (1) 17

19 Underlying Factors for Losses Routes with the biggest declines had several factors that influenced their results: Redevelopment and gentrification Potential competition from other services like Transportation Network Companies (TNC) in Uptown area and near downtown Underlying demographic changes 18

20 National Trends Recent DART ridership trends generally mirror national ridership trends Bus ridership is down throughout the country Rail ridership is down for some systems, up for others Recent trends for a number of cities with light rail and/or commuter rail operations follow 19

21 National Bus Trends Most peer bus systems are also experiencing declines Chart compares recent bus ridership for medium and large American systems with light/commuter rail operations City/System Change Phoenix 6.6% Houston -1.5% Salt Lake -2.1% Pittsburgh -2.1% Minneapolis -2.8% Portland -2.9% San Diego -4.5% DART -4.7% St Louis -7.0% Denver -8.6% Charlotte -9.9% Source: Federal Transit Administration National Transit Database Monthly Module Adjusted Data Release 20

22 National Light Rail Trends Peer rail ridership has been less consistent, with more systems seeing growth Chart compares recent light rail ridership for medium and large American systems with light rail operations City/System Change Minneapolis 3.7% Phoenix 2.0% DART 0.9% Denver 0.2% Houston -1.1% Pittsburgh -1.5% Charlotte -1.5% Portland -2.6% Salt Lake -2.8% San Diego -3.6% St Louis -6.5% Source: Federal Transit Administration National Transit Database Monthly Module Adjusted Data Release 21

23 Texas Trends The larger transit systems in Texas have been sharing ridership data for over a decade Trends for the largest four systems (DART, Houston Metro, San Antonio VIA, Austin Capital Metro) have been somewhat similar 22

24 Oct-07 Jan-08 Apr-08 Jul-08 Oct-08 Jan-09 Apr-09 Jul-09 Oct-09 Jan-10 Apr-10 Jul-10 Oct-10 Jan-11 Apr-11 Jul-11 Oct-11 Jan-12 Apr-12 Jul-12 Oct-12 Jan-13 Apr-13 Jul-13 Oct-13 Jan-14 Apr-14 Jul-14 Oct-14 Jan-15 Apr-15 Jul-15 Oct-15 Jan-16 Apr-16 Jul-16 Oct-16 Jan-17 Apr-17 Jul-17 Large Texas System Trends Average Weekday Bus and Rail Riders 400, , , , , , ,000 50,000 DART Houston Metro Capital Metro VIA 12 per. Mov. Avg. (DART) 12 per. Mov. Avg. (Houston Metro) 12 per. Mov. Avg. (Capital Metro) 12 per. Mov. Avg. (VIA) 23

25 FACTORS BEHIND THE TRENDS 24

26 Factors Driving Ridership Change As we have tracked ridership and activity, we see some clear trends and correlations, yet it is not clear that any single factor is driving ridership Instead, ridership seems to be impacted by a number of key factors Some of them are systemic; others affect individual routes or areas Some are factors that DART cannot directly control, while others are within DART control 25

27 Factors DART Does Not Directly Control Demographic and rider usage: demographics, how riders use the system Economy, employment: employment trends, spatial location of population and employment, spatial location of economic development Geography and physical development: geography, residential teardowns, transit-oriented development Other factors: fuel prices, crime 26

28 Factors DART Controls Service characteristics: frequency, service levels, service quality Ridership counting impacts: changes in counting methodology 27

29 DEMOGRAPHICS AND RIDER USAGE 28

30 Demographics: Who Rides the System Gender of DART Riders Female 47.2% Male 52.8% Source: 2014 Regional Rider Survey 29

31 Who Rides the System 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10, % under % 6, % 56, % 70,410 Age of DART Riders 19.5% 40, % 20, % 11, % 2,996 Under Over % 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% Source: 2014 Regional Rider Survey 30

32 Who Rides the System 120, ,000 Ethnicity of DART Riders 52.7% 60.0% 50.0% 80, % 60, % 30.0% 40, % 20.0% 20, % 2.5% 0.3% 0.8% 10.0% 0 Amer Indian Asian Black/AA Hispanic Nat Hawaiian White Other 0.0% Source: 2014 Regional Rider Survey 31

33 0.65% 0.31% 2.53% 0.32% 0.04% 0.81% 1.55% 7.28% 17.82% 18.44% 24.60% 34.38% 38.62% 52.66% Who Rides the System 60.00% Ethnicity of DART Riders and Ethnicity of Service Area Population 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Amer Indian Asian Black/AA Hispanic Nat Hawaiian White Other Riders Population Source: 2014 Regional Rider Survey and U. S. Bureau of the Census 2010 Federal Census 32

34 Who Rides the System Income of DART Riders 50,000 45,000 40,000 Low Income 51.7% 20.0% 41, % 44, % 20.0% 35,000 30,000 25, % 30, % 27, % 20,000 15, % 16, % 18, % 8.1% 16, % 10,000 11, % 5,000 0 Less than $12,000 $12,000 - $19,999 $20,000 - $23,999 $25,000 - $34,999 $35,000 - $49,999 $50,000 - $74,999 $75,000 or more No answer 0.0% Source: 2014 Regional Rider Survey 33

35 How and Why Riders Use DART A mix of rail, bus, and bus/rail riders The proportion of bus-only riders has dropped over time as the rail network has grown About 54% of DART riders complete trips without transferring; the others must use 2 or more vehicles to complete their trips More people ride for work commutes than any other trip purpose A large plurality of riders use service five days per week 34

36 Modes Used The Modes DART Riders Use for Their Trips Rail Only 28.9% Bus and Rail 32.2% Bus Only 38.9% Source: 2014 Regional Rider Survey 35

37 Changes in Mode Over Time 2007 Survey 2014 Survey Rail Only 23.0% Bus and Rail 29.0% Rail Only 28.9% Bus and Rail 32.2% Bus Only 48.0% Bus Only 38.9% Source: 2007 Transit Rider Survey and 2014 Regional Rider Survey 36

38 Transfers How Many Vehicles DART Riders Use to Complete a Trip One 54.5% Two 28.4% Three 14.1% Five/Six 0.1% Four 2.9% 45.5% of DART Riders Transfer to complete their trip. 17.1% of DART Riders transfer more than once to complete their trip. Source: 2014 Regional Rider Survey 37

39 Why Riders Use the System NHB Work 4.4% NHB Other 4.9% HB Air 0.3% HB Accom 1.1% HB Eat 3.4% HB College 8.6% HB K % HB Other 0.4% HB Pers 9.6% HB Work 48.3% HB Social 12.3% HB Shop 4.3% Trip Purpose All Riders NB means Home Based NHB means Non Home Based Source: 2014 Regional Rider Survey 38

40 How Often Riders Use the System How Often DART Riders Ride 100,000 90,000 80,000 70, % 91, % 45.0% 40.0% 35.0% 60,000 50,000 40,000 30, % 40, % 12.5% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 20,000 10, % 11,460 Every Day 5 days/week 2-4 times/week 6.1% 12, % 16,207 Once a week 2-3 times/month 26, % 10,172 Once a month < Once a month 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% Source: 2014 Regional Rider Survey 39

41 ECONOMY, EMPLOYMENT 40

42 Economy and DART Ridership It has not been consistent throughout DART s history, but there was an extended period of time where a strong economy as measured by low unemployment has corresponded to high bus ridership Yet in the 1990 s and in the past few years, this relationship seems to be broken bus ridership declines despite historically low unemployment figures 41

43 Unemployment and DART Bus Ridership 50,000, % 45,000,000 40,000,000 35,000,000 30,000,000 25,000, % 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 20,000, % Bus Ridership Unemployment Rate 42

44 Impact of Employment Changes With so many riders using DART to go to work, ridership is profoundly affected by changes in the location and size of the employed population This is especially true for employed population shifts in areas that have a high proportion of transit-dependent riders people who do not have alternatives available 43

45 General Employment Trends Overall employment trends have varied with economic cycles, but have generally been improving in recent years This is important because employment and ridership trends have been closely linked historically, especially for bus ridership There are substantially more jobs in Dallas County now than 10+ years ago, but Fewer of these jobs are in the core Dallas CBD where so much transit service operates The decentralization of jobs can have a significant negative impact on a centrally-oriented transit system 44

46 91.2% 91.2% 92.2% 91.8% 91.5% 91.9% 93.0% 93.7% 93.6% 94.3% 92.5% 92.3% 94.8% 94.6% 92.8% 94.8% 95.4% 93.7% 94.5% 94.5% 94.1% 95.9% 96.2% 95.3% 95.1% 95.6% 95.4% 95.2% 96.1% 96.1% 96.2% 96.5% Employment Rate Trends 98.0% Employment Rates DART Service Area 98.0% 97.0% 97.0% 96.0% 96.0% 95.0% 95.0% 94.0% 94.0% 93.0% 93.0% 92.0% 92.0% 91.0% 90.0% 89.0% 91.0% 90.0% 89.0% 88.0% Dallas DART Suburbs 88.0% Source: U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 45

47 Dallas County Employment Totals 855,000 Dallas County Employment 840, , , , , , , , , , Source: U. S. Bureau of the Census Linear Household-Employment Data 46

48 Employment and Demographic Trends Present Challenges Looking at employment trends in more detail reveals challenges for DART in building ridership Transit ridership is generally younger, but employment rates for younger residents are actually declining workers are getting older Jobs in our area are trending to higher levels of pay and this can also impact ridership 47

49 Employment and Age Employment for younger workers has declined in Dallas County, which is especially important given the relative youth of DART ridership Age Group Under , , , to , , , and Over 98, , ,569 Source: U. S. Bureau of the Census American Community Survey 48

50 Employment and Earnings Employment for lower-wage workers, which is important given that low-income workers are more likely to use transit Wage Group $1250/ month or less $ More than $ , , , , , , , , ,271 Source: U. S. Bureau of the Census American Community Survey 49

51 Location of Jobs, Worker Residences Affects Ridership Critical parts of DART s rail and bus networks are aligned to serve Downtown Dallas, but employment in the CBD is actually falling over time Relatively few riders live and work within walking distance of rail stations, and rail is not enough bus networks are crucial Population losses in areas with high transit-dependent ridership also affect transit ridership levels 50

52 Employment in the CBD Employment in the core CBD in Dallas has been declining With the concentration of transit in this area, this could have significant implications for ridership trends 120, , , , ,000 Dallas CBD (Within the Freeway Loop) Employment 115, , ,991 95, Source: U. S. Bureau of the Census Linear Household-Employment Data 51

53 Linkage Between Where People Work and Live, and Transit Impact 1,637,504 jobs are located in service area as of % of these service area jobs are worked by non-residents to the service area 439,690 jobs are located within ½ mile of rail station 192,558 residents live within ½ mile of a rail station Only 54,852 residents actually live & work within ½ mile of a station Key Point---rail ridership is extremely dependent upon bus service or Park & Ride to generate ridership 52

54 Changes in Employee Residential Riders and Transit Impact Example: Oak Cliff along the Blue Line LRT corridor Area reviewed: between IH-45 and Marsalis, and IH-20 on South Employed population and bus ridership are both declining in this area, which has traditionally generated heavy transit ridership 53

55 Blue Line Corridor Employed Population Trends Employed population in this area is steadily declining The percentage of work commuters from this area working in Dallas County has declined, making it more likely that workers will not be able to use DART to complete their trips Year Employed population within Corridor Percent Working in Dallas County , % , % , % Source: U. S. Bureau of the Census Linear Household-Employment Data 54

56 GEOGRAPHY AND PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT 55

57 Geography and Physical Development Physical geography and development also have significant impacts on ridership Mountains, lakes, ocean constraints can dramatically increase ridership Here in Dallas, apartment tear-downs have had a major impact on ridership on individual routes and parts of the route network 56

58 Geography Some cities that have not seen ridership losses have significant geographical issues that limit commute options and encourage people to look for alternatives The San Francisco Bay Area is a good example; water funnels traffic over strategic bridge and ferry corridors Dallas (or most Texas cities) does not have any such geographical issues Bay Area 57

59 Residential Tear-Downs Replacement of urban housing stock has had significant impacts on ridership in parts of the system Large-scale tear-downs of apartments and singlefamily homes displace residents and riders Unfortunately, we do not have any way to track where displaced residents relocate The result permanent ridership losses on affected routes 58

60 Route 583 Example Route 583 serves a section of Skillman in Lake Highlands that has seen major apartment teardowns over the past decade Many of the tear-downs have not been replaced, or have been replaced with more expensive units serving a different demographic Ridership has plunged from 3,500/day to 2,000/day even as the route transitioned to feed riders into the new Lake Highlands LRT Station 59

61 Route 24 Example Route 24 operates between Mockingbird Station and Downtown Dallas, and some parts of the route have seen major redevelopment e.g. Capitol Ridership has dropped from 1,600/day to 1,200/day even though much of the lost housing has been replaced by higher-density apartments 60

62 Transit Oriented Development and Rail Ridership In theory, transit oriented development near stations should increase ridership at the adjacent stations Two examples: Residential conversions near St. Paul Station have had a very noticeable positive impact on ridership (7-11 has not hurt, either!) Ridership at CityLine/Bush Station has begun to observe small increases in ridership based upon riders who live and work adjacent this station. Previously almost all of the ridership was from park & ride commuters destined for somewhere other than CityLine/Bush Station. 61

63 Nov-09 Feb-10 May-10 Aug-10 Nov-10 Feb-11 May-11 Aug-11 Nov-11 Feb-12 May-12 Aug-12 Nov-12 Feb-13 May-13 Aug-13 Nov-13 Feb-14 May-14 Aug-14 Nov-14 Feb-15 May-15 Aug-15 Nov-15 Feb-16 May-16 Aug-16 Nov-16 Feb-17 May-17 Aug-17 St. Paul Station Ridership Trends Average Weekday Riders 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 St. Paul 12 per. Mov. Avg. (St. Paul) 62

64 Oct-09 Jan-10 Apr-10 Jul-10 Oct-10 Jan-11 Apr-11 Jul-11 Oct-11 Jan-12 Apr-12 Jul-12 Oct-12 Jan-13 Apr-13 Jul-13 Oct-13 Jan-14 Apr-14 Jul-14 Oct-14 Jan-15 Apr-15 Jul-15 Oct-15 Jan-16 Apr-16 Jul-16 Oct-16 Jan-17 Apr-17 Jul-17 CityLine/Bush Station Trends Average Weekday Riders 2,000 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 1, Peak ridership during paid parking at Parker Road CityLine/Bush 12 per. Mov. Avg. (CityLine/Bush) 63

65 OTHER FACTORS 64

66 Gasoline Prices and Ridership In the years we have been tracking ridership and gasoline prices, there is definitely a general correlation between the two Gasoline prices, however, have been far more volatile than ridership The 2008 gasoline price spike corresponded with a noticeable spike in ridership Gas prices are probably a factor, though one of many 65

67 Gasoline Prices and DART Ridership 80,000,000 $ ,000,000 $ ,000,000 $ ,000,000 $ ,000,000 $ ,000,000 $ ,000, $1.000 Fixed-Route Riders Gasoline Price 66

68 Crime and Ridership Staff have reviewed the last four years of arrest and police call data for the system and arrest data for individual rail stations We see no correlations that would suggest a direct relationship between DART crime statistics and ridership trends Whether or not perception of crime is a factor in ridership cannot be directly determined with available data If perception is a recent factor, we do not see a direct impact in underlying ridership trends for bus or rail 67

69 SERVICE CHARACTERISTICS 68

70 Service Characteristics The characteristics of service also play a role in ridership trends More frequent service usually translates into more ridership but not always more efficient service Until recently, DART has generally been trending toward less frequent bus service due to the financial impacts of the last two recessions Reductions were generally on low performing routes or routes duplicating light rail Some recent frequency improvements have been paying almost immediate dividends in higher ridership 69

71 Impact of Frequency Improvements DART has made frequency improvements on selected routes over the past few years, and these routes have been near the top of longer-term ridership growth trends: Route 11 went to 15 minute daytime service (peak and midday) and ridership has trended upward, while other comparable routes have seen declines Route 463 midday service went from every 60 minutes to every minutes, and average weekday ridership grew from around 1,300 to as much as 1,700 Route 549 midday service went from every 60 minutes to every 30 minutes, and average weekday ridership grew from around 900 to over 1,100 in many months 70

72 Future Frequency Improvements Frequency improvements are a big part of DART s planning for future service changes 10 routes will have off-peak service frequency improvements in March 2018, with others to follow in 2019 Comprehensive Operations Analysis (COA) work envisioned a network of core frequent service routes 71

73 Ridership and Service Levels Service levels also have an impact on ridership Over the past 15 years, DART has significantly expanded rail service and has reduced bus service The reduction in bus services generally targeted the following: Bus routes duplicating new rail Bus routes ranking very low in route performance In 2011 DART reduced rail frequency during the peak hours from 10 minute to 15 minute frequency 72

74 Bus+LRT Combined Ridership vs. Service Levels 70,000,000 40,000,000 38,000,000 65,000,000 36,000,000 34,000,000 60,000,000 32,000,000 30,000,000 55,000,000 28,000,000 26,000,000 50,000,000 24,000,000 45,000, ,000,000 20,000,000 Riders Revenue Miles 73

75 LRT Ridership vs. Service Levels 35,000,000 6,000,000 30,000,000 5,500,000 5,000,000 25,000,000 4,500,000 20,000,000 4,000,000 15,000,000 3,500,000 3,000,000 10,000,000 2,500,000 5,000, ,000,000 Riders Revenue Miles 74

76 Bus Ridership vs. Service Levels 46,000,000 33,000,000 44,000,000 31,000,000 42,000,000 40,000,000 29,000,000 38,000,000 27,000,000 36,000,000 25,000,000 34,000,000 32,000,000 23,000,000 30,000, ,000,000 Riders Revenue Miles 75

77 RIDERSHIP COUNTING IMPACTS 76

78 Ridership Counting Methodology DART has traditionally counted ridership through the farebox system As the current technology has aged and more and more units malfunction, we do not believe we are counting all passengers using DART buses, and that the situation is getting worse Actual ridership counts are likely higher than our farebox numbers potentially by as much as 20%, and more on routes like D-Link that do not involve cash fares We are in the process of validating automatic passenger counter (APC) units on buses for ridership collection matching the process used for DART light rail APC counts will likely result in an immediate bump in ridership levels, as we saw for rail 77

79 ,423 1,159 1, , , ,804 1,550 1,394 1,397 1,121 1,790 1,522 2,183 1,953 1,892 1,900 2,236 2,267 2,766 2,934 2,670 3,178 3,500 APC Counts vs. Farebox Counts Selected Bus Routes Average Weekday Ridership 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1, Routes APC Farebox These APC Counts Average Approximately 20% Higher 78

80 350 APC Counts vs. Farebox Counts D-Link Service Route 722 D-Link Average Daily Ridership Jan 17-Jan 18-Jan 19-Jan 20-Jan 21-Jan 0 APC Farebox D-Link is fare free requiring manual input of counts to Farebox These APC counts average almost 73% higher. 79

81 WHAT CAN BE DONE TO IMPROVE RIDERSHIP 80

82 What Can Be Done To Improve Ridership? In the past decade many of DART s peers have sought improved ridership through bus system redesign and the addition of high frequency bus routes Improved ridership is the objective of DART s Comprehensive Operation Analysis in addition to efforts to improve safety, passenger amenities, fare payment, and new last mile services Unfortunately in FY16 and FY17, most of DART s transit peers including those who have redesigned their bus system are experiencing declining bus ridership and some are experiencing declining rail ridership Seattle is a good example of a system that has bucked the recent trend of ridership decline 81

83 Seattle The Seattle area has seen notable transit ridership growth over the past year From our review of FTA reports, most of the gains have been as a result of rail ridership growth as the light rail system continues to expand Supportive of this multi-modal system, City of Seattle has levied an additional car registration tax to help fund expanded bus service, and are investing an extra $36 million per year in King County Metro bus service to support high frequency routes Metro has added more than 300,000 additional bus service hours in the past year This translates into more frequent bus service on 66 bus routes The City of Seattle is also expanding the network of bus-only lanes and traffic signal priority improvements to improve bus performance 82

84 83 83

85 Core Frequent Route Network Weekday Peak Service (15 minute or less) 84

86 Core Frequent Route Network Weekday Midday Service (20 minute or less) 85

87 Core Frequent Route Network Saturday Midday Service (30 minute or less) 86

88 Core Frequent Route Network Sunday Midday Service (30 minute or less) 87