Five-Year
Transit Development Plan
To request
a copy of the full report, please call
(727) 540-1800 ext. 1802.
General Information
INTRODUCTION
The
State of Florida Public Transit Block Program was enacted
by the Florida Legislature to provide a stable source of
funding for public transit. The Block Grant Program requires
public transit service providers to develop and adopt a Five-Year
Transit Development Plan (TDP). The TDP must be submitted
to the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) District
Office on or before July 1st of each year. Major updates
are due every three years, while minor updates are required
in the interim years. The TDP is the guiding document for
the Pinellas County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), as well as the
FDOT Five-Year Work Program concerning public transportation
in Pinellas County. Assuring that the TDP is completed and submitted by July 1st
is the responsibility of the Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority
(PSTA), in coordination with the MPO. The TDP must be consistent
with the approved local government comprehensive plans and
the MPO Long Range Transportation Plan.
The TDP includes reports on transit policies; demographics
relating to the need for transit services, proposed transit-related
service improvements, costs (operating and capital), funding
sources, and an implementation plan. Also included is a summary
of ridership trends by fare category over the past several
years.
This plan meets the requirements for a major TDP update in
accordance with Rule Chapter 14- 73, Florida Administrative
Code (FAC).
Identification of the Submitting Entity
Agency: Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority
Mailing Address: 3201 Scherer Drive St. Petersburg, FL 33716
Telephone Number: (727) 540-1800
Authorizing Agency
Representative: Roger Sweeney, Executive Director
Needs
Assessment
INTRODUCTION Similar to the last major TDP update, a workshop
with PSTA’s
Transit Advisory Committee (TAC) was used to better delineate
the focus of the needs assessment process. Members of the committee
were asked to participate in a discussion group process to
help identify service improvement priorities for PSTA over
the next five years. This section reviews the methodology used
to conduct the workshop. In addition, the overall results of
the TAC’s input are summarized along with the primary
needs that ultimately will be used in developing PSTA’s
Five-Year TDP Update.
SERVICE ENHANCEMENT PRIORITIES WORKSHOP
On February 10, 2004, at a regularly-scheduled TAC meeting,
a workshop was held with members of the TAC to discuss PSTA
transit enhancement priorities for the next five years. The
TAC is a mixed group of transit users and other interested
citizens appointed by the PSTA Board to provide input into
the transit planning process and the day-to-day operation of
the transit system. Transit users are an important resource
for transit agencies since they often can provide valuable
insight into the service and/or infrastructure improvements
that can be made by the agencies to help increase ridership
and improve the overall transit experience. The workshop was
conducted to provide a forum for the TAC members to generate
ideas and prioritize the most important needed improvements
for the PSTA system. It is important to note that the Executive
Director from the Workforce Development Board also attended
and participated in the proceedings.
At the outset of the workshop, a brief presentation
was given to explain the purpose and the process of the workshop
to the
TAC members. The focus of the workshop was presented to the
TAC as a simply-phrased question: “What PSTA service
improvements should be priorities over the next five years?”.
Next, the priority lists for the last three major TDP updates
that were developed with the assistance of previous TACs were
reviewed to give current members a better understanding of
the types of improvements that have been desired in the past
and how priorities have shifted over time. Table 7-1 presents
these previous TAC workshop priority lists by period. The priorities
from the 2002-2006 TDP update then were discussed in terms
of PSTA’s progress to date in addressing the indicated
needs. For example, with regard to the indicated need for more
equipment, it was mentioned that PSTA has purchased 40 new
buses between 2001 and 2003, and also replaced all farebox
units.
The workshop process then was discussed with the TAC. The
basic process that was used to facilitate the workshop is the
Nominal Group Technique (NGT). The NGT process is designed
to organize meetings in a manner that maximizes productivity.
This process balances and increases participation. The NGT
process is best suited for small group meetings designed for
fact-finding, idea generation, or the search of problems or
solutions.
The NGT was developed to counter the problems
often experienced in group meetings that prevent the inclusion
of everyone’s
ideas. This technique reduces the social and psychological
dynamics of group behavior that are normally encountered. Examples
of these sorts of problems include: a few individuals dominating
the discussion, too many participants just listening, and few
people taking the time to actually think about the issue at
hand. People tend to be more creative when everyone is given
a structured opportunity to participate.
Outline of NGT Process
The following outline lists each step of the NGT process,
along with the benefits that each step contributes to the overall
process.
1. Silent Generation of Ideas in Writing
a. Allows time to think and provides a creative setting
b. Allows for improved focus and uninterrupted thought
c. Avoids competition and status differences
d. Avoids conformity pressures
e. Avoids polarizing on ideas
2. Recorded Round-Robin Listing of Ideas on Chart
a. Structures participation
b. Depersonalizes ideas
c. Tolerates conflicting ideas
d. Provides written permanence
3. Discussion of Each Idea on Chart
a. Each idea is as important as another
b. Clarifies ideas
4. Vote on Priorities
a. Provides focus on important issues
b. Avoids dominance by strong members
5. Review of Vote
a. Search for Vote Inconsistency
b. Allows Group Members to Confirm Vote
Methodology
Each of the steps in the NGT process is discussed in further
detail below.
Step 1: Silent Generation of Ideas in Writing
As indicated previously, the nominal question
for the workshop was “What PSTA service
improvements should be priorities over the next five years?” The
participants then were given 10 minutes to respond to this
question by writing brief phrases describing their five necessary
improvements in the space provided on the worksheet.
Step 2: Round-Robin Listing of Ideas on Chart
The next step of the process involved each member of the group
reading one of their ideas, in turn, to the rest of the group.
Each idea was recorded by the facilitator on a flip chart without
having the group discuss the idea. This procedure continued
around the table until the responses to the nominal question
were exhausted for all workshop participants. The pages of
the flip chart containing the provided ideas were displayed
on a wall for further reference.
Step 3: Discussion and Clarification of Each Idea
The ideas listed on the flip chart then were discussed in
order. The facilitator read each idea, indicated in general
terms the understood intent of the idea, and asked the group
if there were any questions about it. During this process,
efforts were made to ensure that each idea was clarified appropriately
and that it was understood clearly by all participants. In
addition, ideas similar in intent were grouped together to
produce a more concise final listing of ideas. In some cases,
additional probing was used to help identify more specific
details about some of the ideas that were listed. For example,
if someone indicated that later evening service was required,
they were asked to discuss where or on which routes such an
improvement would be most beneficial.
Step 4: Vote on Priorities
At this point in the process, the participants again were
reminded about the nominal question that they were trying to
address regarding priority PSTA service improvements needed
in the next five years. The participants then were instructed
to select their preference for the five most important improvements
from the entire list of ideas displayed on the flip chart pages
and record these improvements on separate 3x5 index cards that
the facilitator had provided. In addition to the participants
selecting five important improvements, the facilitator asked
each participant to rank in priority order the improvements
listed on their cards from one (highest priority) to five (lowest
priority). The participants were given approximately five minutes
to complete this step, and they did so independently and without
discussion. The following is a sample of the format that was
suggested to the participants for use in filling out their
index cards.
Step 5:
Review of the Vote During a break in the workshop, while other
TAC business was being completed, the index cards were collected
and the priority
voting was reviewed. A weighted score was assigned to each
participant’s indicated improvement preferences in the
following manner: the highest ranked improvement (i.e., ranked
#1) would receive a score of five, the next highest would receive
a score of four, and so on until the fifth-ranked improvement
would receive a score of one. In cases where a participant
ranked two or more improvements similarly, all of these improvements
would be given an identical corresponding score. In this manner,
all of the participants’ listed improvements were scored
and totals were tallied to identify the five topranked service
improvements. The results of the vote then were recorded to
provide a permanent record of the voting process and results.
Lastly, the results were presented to the workshop participants
for their consideration.
Results of the Meeting
Table 7-2 summarizes all of the service improvement ideas
identified by the participants during the workshop, along with
the results of the voting and prioritization process.
As summarized in the table above, five service improvement
priorities were determined by the TAC through this process.
The five top priorities are reiterated below.
1. Later Evening Service (21 points)
2. Customer Service Improvements (20 points)
3. Varied Marketing Techniques (15 points)
4. Improve Transfer Issues (12 points)
5. Increase/Improve Bus Stop Infrastructure (12 points)
It should be noted that, since there was a
tie in weighted score between “Improve Transferring Issues” and “Increase/Improve
Bus Stop Infrastructure,” the priority order between
these two was determined by the initial number of votes each
received.
Analysis of TAC Priorities
Priority 1 – Later Evening Service
The results of the TAC workshop indicate that the participants
believe that supplying later evening service is the highest
priority. According to the participants, the focus of this
improvement should be on the core routes, such as Routes 18,
19, 52, 59, 60 and 74. The TAC members believe that extending
the service until at least midnight could help increase ridership
by serving second shift workers. Such an improvement may also
entice new riders to use the bus system since this improvement
would help it become a more convenient transportation alternative.
Priority 2 – Customer Service Improvements
Many of the TAC members think that customer service could
be improved in a number of ways. For example, it was indicated
that more and enhanced information about the system is needed,
such as larger print media for riders with sight-related disabilities.
Similarly, it would help if customer service representatives
and major transfer facility attendants had specific guidelines
to help them better deal with the public and address their
questions and concerns. Better sensitivity training for PSTA
bus operators also is a desired improvement, especially to
help operators better handle the needs of passengers with disabilities.
Finally, a number of the TAC members believe that rules enforcement
(especially as it relates to strollers and/or mobility aids
blocking the aisles) continues to be an issue and could use
improvement.
Priority 3 – Varied Marketing Techniques
It was suggested that PSTA’s marketing
techniques could be improved and expanded,
especially in terms of the types of media that are utilized.
For example, the use of newspaper advertising was strongly
recommended. In addition, some of the TAC members indicated
that it would be extremely beneficial for the newspaper to
carry a regular column on transit that could educate readers
about the system and answer frequently asked questions. One
of the more interesting marketing techniques suggested was
the advent of an occasional “Free Fare Day” to
help attract new riders and as a way to thank regular users
of the system.
Priority 4 – Improve Transfer Issues
Transfer issues were another of the priority concerns cited
by the TAC members during the workshop. Although some individuals
did acknowledge that the transfer process has improved over
time, there still is room for improvement. For example, the
timing of transfers between routes with different frequencies
must be improved. It was indicated that increased service frequencies
on routes could help address this issue. Also, there was a
general desire indicated for minimizing the overall need to
transfer. Additional interlining and route synthesis can be
utilized to decrease the need to transfer.
Priority 5 – Increase/Improve Bus Stop
Infrastructure
There is a general concern that, although the
system’s
existing shelters and benches are
adequate in style, there are more bus stops that could benefit
from additional infrastructure improvements. In addition, it
was indicated that bus stop signage could be improved, as well,
such as the implementation of bi-directional signs and specific
improvements to the signs to assist patrons with sight-related
disabilities (e.g., Tactile Signage). Another suggested improvement
involves PSTA ensuring that trees do not block the signs.
Summary of TAC Workshop
In summary, a workshop was conducted to obtain consensus from
TAC attendees (including WorkNet-Pinellas) regarding PSTA service
improvement priorities for the next five years. Numerous suggestions
were made, all of which were discussed and prioritized by the
workshop participants. The final results reflect the five most
important service improvements from the perspective of the
TAC members.
PSTA works closely with the TAC on a regular basis and the
service improvement priorities identified through this workshop
will be considered strongly as PSTA evaluates and prioritizes
service improvements for the next five years.
PSTA
MARKET RESEARCH STUDY – 2003/04
Introduction
In spring of 2004, the PSTA conducted a market research study
of riders and the general public in Pinellas County to obtain
information about ridership characteristics and identify perceptions
of the agency and various aspects of its service and operations.
(Two survey methods were employed: an on-board survey of riders
from a random sample of routes based on ridership levels; and
a telephone survey of the general public throughout Pinellas
County in areas where PSTA service operates.
PSTA typically conducts a survey to assess
its market and rider characteristics every three years to
gauge trends and
determine which service enhancements and marketing strategies
may have the most support or benefit. The last such survey
was conducted in spring of 2001. The 2004 Market Research Study
was conducted by Renaissance Planning Group, with assistance
from CB&A Research. These two firms also prepared the previous
Market Research Study in 2001.
This brief summary is intended to highlight some of the key
demographics and attitudes that relate to service development
and potential enhancement, as well as certain communication
strategies. It is not intended to provide a complete summary
of the survey findings.
On-Board Survey
The on-board component of the PSTA Market Research Study was
conducted on March 10-13 and March 18, 2004. The survey period
generally coincided with peak season for visitors and tourists
in Pinellas County. Surveys were conducted on weekdays and
Saturday throughout the span of service.
Objectives include gauging the trends in public
perceptions of PSTA service and to identify the program’s
strengths/opportunities and weaknesses; examining customer
interest and acceptance
of the PSTA web site, including features desired in the web
site; examining the potential for future service and additional
routes, and determining rider perception regarding existing
facilities, such as bus stops and shelters.
The on-board survey instrument was largely
the same as the one used in the 2001 PSTA Market Research
Survey, to allow
for comparison of responses over time. However, a few key changes
distinguish the 2004 survey: the survey itself was considerably
shortened for riders’ convenience, and surveys were collected
by the surveyor during the trip, rather than mailed back to
PSTA by the rider. The survey was printed on card stock to
allow easy use, and pencils were provided. As a result, the
response rate and total number of valid responses was significantly
higher than in 2001.
Over 2,000 surveys were collected, a 40 percent rate of return.
Analysis of the results reveals the following key findings:
• The greatest number of responses was
on Local/Circulator routes (973 surveys, 46.0%); followed
by Cross-County (634
surveys, 30.0%), Beach (465 surveys, 22%), and Inter-County
(44 surveys, 2.1%).
• Of 2040 valid responses, more than
one-third indicated that they ride the bus 7 days a
week. About 70 percent of PSTA riders report that they ride
at least five days per week.
• Only about 30 percent of riders are
new to PSTA; there is an increasing trend among riders who
have ridden PSTA for
six years or more. This indicates that PSTA is retaining riders
for a relatively long period of time.
• While trips to St. Petersburg and Clearwater are the
largest destinations cited (25 and 16 percent, respectively),
the information points to a rise in mid-county destinations.
A review of zip code results indicates that many of the riders
listing St. Petersburg and Largo destinations are traveling
to locations within the mid-county area. Otherwise, the data
show that destinations are spread widely throughout much of
the county, reflecting the county’s general level of
development intensity and good transit coverage.
• Work-related travel (52 percent) is still the dominant
purpose for people using PSTA, with shopping following at 14
percent. However, trips to work declined considerably from
previous surveys (64 percent in 2001 and 67 percent in 1998).
Several factors may be contributing: 1) Many respondents gave
more than one answer, indicating people use the bus to solve
multiple trip purposes; the “Other” category increased
significantly from previous years, while shopping, social,
medical, and school have remained relatively constant, indicating
that trip purposes are increasingly diverse; 2) the simpler,
easier to use survey resulted in a larger sample than in 2001,
which may also reflect a broader range of participants and
trip purposes; 3) Popularity of the beach trolley; 4) PSTA
is meeting a broader range of travel needs compared with previous
years; and 5) The inter-county trips bus routes had 72% of
trips for work, indicating that even commuter-oriented routes
show a fair range of trip purposes.
• Transfers between two routes increased
in 2004 from 2001 (45 percent of riders transfer once), but
multiple transfers
declined considerably.
• The overwhelming majority of riders get to the bus
stop on foot (90%). Slightly over half of respondents do not
possess a driver’s license, and most have only the bus
for transportation (68%).
• Among fare payment methods, cash showed
a large decline from the 2001 survey, while the 7-day GO
Card posted the highest
increase.
• Reflecting national trends, Internet
access for transit riders is increasing significantly (59
percent of all riders
have access versus 40 percent in 2001), suggesting that the
PSTA website and use of Internet advertising/promotions may
be an effective method for reaching existing and potential
riders.
• Overall, PSTA’s service ratings
are positive. PSTA receives the highest excellent/good service
ratings on
safe driving (86%), driver courtesy (78%), safety at bus stops
(77%), and bus temperature (74%). PSTA receives the lowest
excellent/good service ratings on transfer wait time (51%)
and trip length (61%). In 2004, excellent/good ratings for
safe driving, safety at bus stops, bus temperature and shade/shelter
increased significantly.
• St. Petersburg is mentioned most often
as an area in Pinellas County that needs
new/improved service (28%), followed distantly by Clearwater
(8%) and Oldsmar (8%). The high percentage of St. Pete responses
likely reflect the growing demand for service in the mid-county
employment area of the city, where service is less concentrated
than in other areas.
• When asked about the one aspect of
service that PSTA should improve, by a wide margin, riders
would most like PSTA
to offer later service on existing routes (35%) and more frequent
service on existing routes (29%).
Demographic Summary • The majority of riders are employed
(72%).
• Riders work an average of 5.25 days
per week.
• Riders work an average of 37.47 hours
per week.
• Riders ride the bus an average of 5
days per week.
• 34% of riders work in St. Petersburg,
21% work in Clearwater, and 13% work in Largo. The remaining
32% work in
other areas.
• Only 10% of riders start work before
7am, 46% start work 7am to before 9am, 23% start work 9am
to before 12pm,
13% start work 12pm to before 5pm, and only 8% start work after
5pm.
• Riders report modest hourly wages:
-34% earn $5 to $7 per hour
-43% earn $10 to $12 per hour
-23% earn $15 or more per hour
• A similar number of males and females
ride the bus (52% versus 48%, respectively).
• The majority of riders are white (62%),
27% are black, 6% are Hispanic.
Trends
In 2004…
• Employment decreased significantly
(72 percent of riders are employed versus 79 percent in 2001)
• The average number of days per week
worked increased significantly.
• The average number of days riders ride
the bus to work increased significantly.
• Employment in St. Petersburg increased significantly,
while employment in ‘other areas’ decreased significantly.
• Significantly fewer riders are starting
work before 9am and significantly more riders are starting
work after 12pm.
• A significantly higher number of tourists/visitors
are riding PSTA buses.
• The number of riders earning $5 to
$7 per hour decreased significantly, while the number of
riders making $15 or more
per hours increased significantly.
Summary
In addition to the bullet points provided above,
this 2004 Market Research Study provides a wealth of information
about
the habits, preferences, perceptions and characteristics of
PSTA riders, non-riders and self-defined potential riders.
The results are compared with the most recent survey where
applicable, conducted in the spring of 2001. The information
in this summary report is intended for use by PSTA’s
Marketing and Planning Department staff to better understand
trends and issues, and assess opportunities for potential improvements.
A more detailed summary of the results with graphic illustrations
of the findings has been prepared in a separate document.
PSTA STRATEGIC PLANNING WORKSHOP
In order to help focus PSTA’s strategic direction for
service, PSTA staff conducted a workshop with the agency’s
Board of Directors on Wednesday, March 3, 2004 with the assistance
of Tindale-Oliver & Associates, Inc. The results of this
workshop provide yet another important input into the needs
analysis for PSTA’s 2004 transit planning process.
A workshop was held with the 11 members of the PSTA Board
of Directors to discuss strategic direction and provide a forum
for the Board members to generate ideas concerning potential
future service enhancements, discuss proposals in detail, and
establish priorities for the PSTA system in the near term and
beyond. Also in attendance was the PSTA Executive Director,
who participated in the proceedings, as well, and helped facilitate
discussion on a number of issues.
Analysis
of Board Comments, Ideas, & Priorities
The following sections summarize the Board workshop discussion,
including ideas, comments, suggestions, all of which are grouped
according to the subject areas outlined in the agenda (see
Figure 7-2). It should be noted that, due to the variable nature
(in terms of topics) of the discussion during the workshop,
similar ideas and/or issues may have been raised in more than
one topic area, or that concepts discussed in one topic area
may have similar applicability in another area. However, with
follow-up review and discussion, this overlap can be reconciled
to establish clear priorities.
1. Improvements to Existing Service vs. New Service Areas
New Vehicles – A suggestion was made
that PSTA needs to invest in new vehicles for its fleet to
help the system
attract new riders. It was mentioned that the new express service
buses (i.e., MCI vehicles) are extremely nice and seem to be
helping promote the service.
More Local Express Service – In relation
to the express services being provided by PSTA currently,
it was mentioned
that more of this type of service is needed, both in terms
of frequency on existing routes and areas served (e.g., between
Clearwater and St. Petersburg, to the Carillon area on Ulmerton
Road).
Travel Time Issues – One of the issues
that make transit use unattractive to potential users is
the amount of time it
takes to reach a destination. This is due to access/egress
times, travel times, and wait times, all of which can be exacerbated
by the need to transfer. It was strongly suggested that improvements
be considered to PSTA service that would minimize overall travel
times. One potential solution that was brought up is improved
service frequencies.
Steps Toward Ridership Growth – In addition
to the need to increase ridership, it was discussed that
steps must be
taken to increase ridership over time in a fiscally responsible
way. For example, PSTA may first look to improve service frequencies,
then expand the hours of service later into the evening. Finally,
as ridership continues to grow along major corridors, these
routes would become prime candidates for additional express
service and possibly even Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) applications.
Eventually, the growth model would result in the application
of higher capacity and speed alternatives such as light rail.
2. Expansion of Existing Bus Service
Weekend Service – As discussion shifted
to more specific issues related to the improvement of existing
service, it was
questioned whether there was enough weekend service being provided
by PSTA at this time. It was suggested that additional weekend
service may be warranted, if not in terms of routing, possibly
in relation to the frequency or span of service.
Bayside Bridge Linkage – The lack of service across
the Bayside Bridge was expressed as a “major missing
link” in the PSTA network. It was suggested that, given
the large public investment for this roadway improvement, potential
transit service enhancements along this corridor might warrant
examination.
3. Extension of Bus Service to New Service Areas
Everyone a Part of PSTA – It was strongly
recommended that all the municipalities in the
County be required to be a part of the Transit Authority. This
was indicated as being a “major priority.”
Intra-County Connections – The Board
members discussed several counties and areas with which PSTA
should pursue transit
connections. Specifically mentioned were Pasco and Manatee
Counties and the Westshore area in Tampa. During this discussion,
it also was mentioned that a park-and-ride facility was needed
in Indian Rocks Beach.
4. Implementation of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)
BRT as a Priority – In the discussion of BRT, it was
indicated that this particular mode should be a priority for
PSTA. Further, it was suggested that PSTA seek to begin buying
the necessary equipment and get started “now.”
McMullen-Booth Corridor – Among the potential
corridors in which to begin experimenting with BRT, the McMullen-Booth
corridor was mentioned as a key candidate.
Keep BRT Apolitical – In determining
whether and where to implement BRT services, it was strongly
indicated that these
decisions should not be politically driven.
Summary of Workshop
In summary, a workshop was conducted on Wednesday, March 3,
2004, with the PSTA Board of Directors to help strategize the
direction the transit system should take in improving and/or
expanding its services. The workshop resulted in a productive
and beneficial dialogue among the participants. Numerous ideas
and suggestions were made during the workshop, which are summarized
herein. A second workshop will help establish specific service
improvement priorities for the Five-Year TDP Program.
TEN-YEAR VISION PLAN
At its March 3, 2004, workshop, the PSTA Board of Directors
outlined several categories for service enhancements and asked
staff to provide specific recommendations in each category.
The following is a summary of specific service improvements
recommended for implementation during the next ten years.
1. Recommendations for Enhanced Express/Premium Transit Service
Routes 18, 19, and 52 – Express service
in addition to local service for Routes 18, 19, and 52. These
routes account
for nearly 30% of total PSTA ridership and facilitate intra-county
trips.
Extension of Route 100X – Extend service
south from Gateway Mall to downtown St.
Petersburg. This improvement would establish transit service
connecting downtown St.
Petersburg and downtown Tampa. A corridor development study
is already underway in the current fiscal year.
Express Service to Westshore Business District
(New Route 301X) – New express service originating
from the current Park-and-Ride on Ulmerton Road would serve
commuters working
in the Westshore Business District in Tampa. A corridor development
study is necessary prior to implementation.
East Lake/McMullen Booth Road (New Route 62X) – New
express service along this corridor to Carillon and the eventual
establishment of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT).
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) – Corridors for
BRT development include Ulmerton Road, East
Lake/McMullen Booth Road, and Central Avenue in St. Petersburg.
Development of BRT could also occur in coordination with the
Pinellas Mobility Initiative (PMI) to enhance transit ridership
along specific corridors in advance of light rail or monorail
service.
2. Recommendations for Enhanced Evening Bus Service
Schedule Improvements – Routes 14, 15,
18, 19, 52, 59, and 60 are the highest priorities for additional
evening service.
Route 68 is recommended for later Friday and Saturday evening
service for connections with the Suncoast Beach TrolleySM.
3. Recommendations for Weekend Service Improvements
Additional Sunday Service – Routes 11,
14, 18, 61, and 66 have greater than 60-minute service frequency
on Sunday.
It is recommended that these routes have 60-minute Sunday service.
New Weekend Service – Route 58 currently
provides weekday service only and it is
recommended that hourly service be provided on this route on
Saturday and Sunday.
4. Recommendations for New Service Corridors
A number of service corridors are identified for new service
including: CR 1 and Tampa Road (currently served during the
peak periods with Commuter Route 93); 54th Avenue North, east
of US 19; Highland Avenue north of East Bay Drive; Belcher
Road north of SR 60; and Keystone Road.
5. Recommendations for Intercounty Connections with Pasco
and Manatee
Establish express service to support the large volume of commuter
trips originating in Pasco and Manatee counties, along with
the development of Park-and-Ride infrastructure.
6. Recommendations for Improved Service Frequencies
NOTE: Additional Buses = 39.5 + 20% Spares = 47 Total Additional
Buses
Based on 365 days/year, 12 revenue hrs./day = 4,380 add'l rev.
hrs./yr. (total service).
8 rev. hrs. X 255 weekdays = 2,040 add'l rev. hrs./yr. (peak).
6 rev. hrs. X 255 weekdays = 1,530 add'l rev. hrs./yr. (peak).
6 rev. hrs. X 255 weekdays = 1,530 add'l rev. hrs./yr. (off-peak).
+ = Line haul routes have peak hours of 6:00-10:00a.m./3:00-7:00p.m.
(8hrs./day M-F)
All others (locals) have peak hours of 6:30-9:30a.m./3:30-6:30p.m.
(6hrs./day M-F)
* Several bus routes are interline combinations for scheduling
efficiency including: Routes 3/35, 5/30, 7/15,
14/23, 22/32 and 76/78.
** Synthesis of Routes 3/35 along the Central/Pasadena Avenue
Corridor.
1. Ridership estimate based upon passengers/revenue hour productivity
for each route in FY 2003/04.
2. Revenue based upon PSTA's current average fare of $.823.
3. Weekday bus assignments=139 buses in FY 2003/04.
* Net Operating Cost is the total operating cost minus passenger
revenue.
**Note: Capital costs include a 20% Spare Ratio.
Capital cost for express service includes the purchase of commuter
coaches at cost of $410,000/unit.
Capital cost for local service based upon a unit cost of $310,000
for a standard transit coach.
Specialized vehicles for BRT service not included in capital
costs for Category #1 service improvements.
Summary of 2nd PSTA Strategic Planning Workshop A follow-up strategic planning workshop was
held with the PSTA Board of Directors on May 7, 2004. As
noted previously,
at its initial strategic planning workshop, the Board outlined
several categories for service enhancements and requested that
staff provide specific recommendations for each of the categories.
PSTA staff addressed this request at the second workshop by
presenting a number of specific service improvements recommended
for implementation during the next ten years. Based on the
staff recommendations, it was the consensus of the Board to
prioritize the following service enhancements for the agency’s
10-Year Vision Plan: night service; weekend service; express
service on Routes 18, 19, and 52; service frequency; and bus
rapid transit (BRT).
|
