Fixed Route
Quality of Service
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Presentation Overview
Learning objectives
Performance points of view
Quality of service factors
Quality of service framework
Quality of service measures
Applications
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Learning Objectives
Gain an understanding of the different stakeholder perspectives that can
be taken with respect to transit performance
Understand the key components of passengers’ perceptions of transit
service quality
Be able to define quality of service (QOS)
Become familiar with the TCQSM’s approach to fixed-route QOS:
 Framework
 Service measures focused toward transit agencies
 Multimodal level of service measure focused toward planning and engineering
applications
Become familiar with potential applications of the manual’s QOS
measures to real-world transportation planning and transit activities
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Changes from the 2nd Edition
Reorganized transit quality of service framework
 Clearer guidance on performance measures that can be applied to stop,
route/street segment, and system levels of analysis
Removed level of service (LOS) letters from QOS tables
 Responding to transit agency concerns about being “graded”
 Allows more or fewer service levels, as appropriate for a given measure
Added a new “multimodal transit LOS measure”
 Responding to planning agency needs for multimodal LOS evalution
 Can be used in conjunction with corresponding measures for the auto,
pedestrian, and bicycle modes
 Spreadsheet tool provided to help calculate the measure
New section on potential applications of QOS to real-world transit and
transportation planning activities
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Performance
Points of View
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Transit Performance Viewpoints
What aspects of transit performance might each of these groups be most
interested in?




The transit agency
The community as a whole
The public works department
Transit passengers
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Examples of Measuring Different Stakeholder Viewpoints
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
The Ultimate Transit Service
As a passenger, what would your ideal transit service be like?
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
The Ultimate Transit Service
Since we can’t have the ultimate transit service, what trade-offs do we
make?
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Transit Performance Viewpoints
Quality of service focuses on the passenger point of view
Other points of view are also valid and need to be considered
 May have conflicting objectives (e.g., passenger comfort vs. agency resources)
 Best-quality passenger service may not be feasible or desirable
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Quality of
Service
Factors
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
What Matters to Customers?
Customer satisfaction surveys provide insights
 TCRP Project B-11 (customer satisfaction surveying methods)
 Florida transit agency on-board surveys
 NCHRP Project 3-92 (multimodal urban street level of service)
Typical factors:





Frequency, wait time, service span
Reliability
Service close to home, destination
Crowding
Fares, driver friendliness, safety/security
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
What Matters to Customers?
Factors can be divided into two main areas:
 Service availability
 Is transit an option?
 Comfort and convenience
 If it is an option, would you want to use it?
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Service Availability
Spatial Availability
(Origin)
Spatial Availability
(Destination)
Is transit an option for a particular
trip?
All five of these factors must be
satisfied
Temporal
Availability
Information
Availability
Capacity
Availability
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Service Availability
Spatial Availability
(Origin)
Spatial Availability
(Destination)
Temporal
Availability
Information
Availability
Is there a transit stop within
walking distance?
OR is demand responsive or
private shuttle service available?
OR is a car AND a convenient
park-and-ride available?
OR is a bicycle AND bicycle storage
available?
OR is a bicycle available AND can it
be brought onboard?
Capacity
Availability
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Service Availability
Spatial Availability
(Origin)
Spatial Availability
(Destination)
Temporal
Availability
Is there a transit stop within
walking distance?
OR is demand responsive or
private shuttle service available?
OR is a bicycle available AND can it
be brought onboard?
OR is a bike-sharing station with
bicycles available?
Information
Availability
Capacity
Availability
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Service Availability
Spatial Availability
(Origin)
Is service offered at or near the
times required?
Spatial Availability
(Destination)
Temporal
Availability
Information
Availability
Capacity
Availability
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Service Availability
Spatial Availability
(Origin)
Spatial Availability
(Destination)
Temporal
Availability
Are the schedule and routing
known?
OR is telephone, text, or Internet
information offered, the service
available when customers use it,
and the information accurately
provided?
Information
Availability
Capacity
Availability
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Service Availability
Spatial Availability
(Origin)
Spatial Availability
(Destination)
Temporal
Availability
Is space available to board the
transit vehicle when it arrives?
When applicable:
 Is space available in the park-and
ride lot?
 Is there an open spot on the
bicycle rack OR is secure bicycle
parking available at the stop?
 Is there an available wheelchair
position inside the vehicle?
Information
Availability
Capacity
Availability
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Typical Comfort and Convenience Factors
In-vehicle crowding
 Can I get a seat, will I have to stand & for how long, how crowded is it?
Reliability
 Can I expect to get to my destination at the scheduled time, or do I need to
allow extra time?
Travel time
 How long will my door-to-door trip take? How long would the same trip take
using other modes? Will I have to transfer, and how easy is it?
Pedestrian and bicycle environment
 Can I get to and from transit stops safely and directly?
Cost
 How much will my trip cost? How easy is it to pay my fare? How much do
would other travel options cost?
Safety and security
Amenities, appearance, maintenance, driver friendliness
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Quality of
Service
Framework
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Developing the QOS Framework
User outreach efforts during the development of the 3rd Edition found
two main user groups for the QOS framework
 Transit agencies
 Like being able to evaluate many different aspects of QOS
 Don’t like level of service (LOS) letters A-F: look too much like grades
 Planning agencies
 Comfortable with the LOS concept, apply it to other modes
 Prefer a single LOS measure that can be compared to other modes
Both groups agreed that the 2nd Edition framework was measuring the
right QOS factors
3rd Edition QOS methods designed to meet the needs of both groups
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
QOS Framework Changes
The 3rd Edition retains the basic QOS framework for transit agencies
 Three aspects of availability, three aspects of comfort & convenience
 Specific performance measure used for a given aspect may vary depending on
scale of analysis (stop/route/system), vehicle type, or service type
 Service level tables have been retained
 LOS numbers and letters have been removed
 Number of service levels allowed to vary from 6 as appropriate
 Comments on the operator point-of-view for a given service level have been added
to the existing comments on the passenger point-of-view
 Designed to support service standards development and aid in interpreting
evaluations of existing and future conditions
Availability
Comfort and Convenience
Frequency
Service Span
Access
Passenger Load
Reliability
Travel Time
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
LOS Approach: 1st and 2nd Editions
Service coverage example
LOS
A
B
C
D
E
F
% TSA Covered
90.0-100.0%
80.0-89.9%
70.0-79.9%
60.0-69.9%
50.0-59.9%
<50.0%
Comments
Virtually all major origins & destinations served
Most major origins & destinations served
About ¾ of higher-density areas served
About two-thirds of higher-density areas served
At least ½ of the higher-density areas served
Less than ½ of higher-density areas served
TSA = transit supportive area (≥3 households/gross acre or ≥4 jobs/gross acre)
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
QOS Approach: 3rd Edition
Service Level
>90% of
service area
population served
>90% of transitsupportive area
served
Passenger Perspective
 Transit serves nearly all destinations within a
community
 On-board travel time may be long, as routes wind
and loop through neighborhoods to meet a
service coverage standard
Operator Perspective
 Transit operator has made a policy decision to
emphasize coverage over cost-efficiency
 Portions of routes covering low-density areas
likely to be unproductive

Transit serves nearly all higher-density areas
within the community
Destinations located in lower-density areas may
not be accessible



May be inefficient to serve isolated portions of
the transit-supportive area due to poor street
connectivity or geographic barriers
Likely inefficient to serve small pockets of higher
density surrounded by large areas of low density
75–90% of transitsupportive area
served

Most destinations within higher-density areas are
served, but not all

Balances coverage and cost-efficiency objectives
50–74% of transitsupportive area
served

A majority of destinations within higher-density
areas are served
Walking and bicycling access to transit likely to be
longer, as service is provided farther away from
many origins and/or destinations

Potential opportunity to add service, as many
areas that could support service have no service
<50% of transitsupportive area
served

Service is typically provided only in the
community’s highest-density corridors
What service is provided is likely to be relatively
direct, resulting in relatively short travel times

Transit operator has made a policy decision to
emphasize cost-efficiency over coverage


Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Multimodal Transit LOS Measure
The 3rd Edition adds a “multimodal transit LOS measure” for planning
agencies
 Measure developed by the NCHRP 3-92 project and subsequently
incorporated into the Highway Capacity Manual 2010
 Provides A-F letters indicating the level of service
 Incorporates most of the same factors in the QOS framework, but provides a
single LOS measure
 Access to transit: pedestrian environment
 Waiting for transit: frequency, reliability, shelter/bench presence
 On-board experience: passenger loads, transit speed
 Index values and associated LOS letters can be directly compared to those
from companion measures for the auto, bicycle, and pedestrian modes
 Can be used to evaluate trade-offs in traveler satisfaction when allocating
street right-of-way between modes
Spreadsheet included on the CD-ROM to help perform the calculations
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Quality of
Service
Measures
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Frequency
Transit service can only be used at discrete times
 If service is only offered hourly, there is a very small window of time during
the hour when a transit trip can be started immediately
More-frequent service provides more opportunities for immediate travel
 Transit service more closely resembles competing modes (auto, bicycle,
pedestrian) in terms of departure time convenience
Frequency is attractive to passengers
 Ridership increases as frequency increases, although a diminishing returns
principle applies
Frequency is a key driver of operating costs
 Improvements to speed and reliability can allow better frequency at the same
cost
When transfers are involved, frequency is only as good as the weakest link
in the trip
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Frequency QOS
Seven levels







≤5 minutes
>5 to 10 minutes
11 to 15 minutes
16 to 30 minutes
31 to 59 minutes
60 minutes
>60 minutes
>5–10 min
 Frequent service, no need for passengers
to consult schedules
 Bus bunching possible, which can result in
longer-than-planned waits for a bus and
more variable loads
 Feasible on high-density corridors with
bus or rail service, and where routes
converge to serve a major activity center
 Short headways needed for circulator
routes to be able to compete with
walking and bicycling (2)
 Exclusive right-of-way desirable to reduce
external impacts on transit operations
and to keep operating speeds high
(minimizing operating costs)
 Traffic congestion, dwell time variability,
and differences in bus operator driving
styles may result in bus bunching
 Increasing frequency to add capacity
usually feasible (budget permitting) when
exclusive right-of-way provided in
congested areas
QOS table listing the passenger and operator perspectives fills most of 2
pages, so only an example is shown here
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Service Span
Service span determines the potential markets that transit serves
 Starting and ending times of activities




Work
School
Medical appointments
Shopping
Longer service spans serve a greater number of potential passengers
 Non-traditional work hours
 Night classes
 Friday & Saturday night activities
Longer service spans than needed to serve a particular market give
passengers flexibility
 Ability to stay late
 Insurance against being stranded
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Service Span QOS
Based on number of hours when service offered at least hourly
Six levels






>18 hours
15 to 18 hours
12 to 14 hours
7 to 11 hours
4 to 6 hours
<4 hours
Hours of
Service
>18 h
Passenger Perspective
Operator Perspective
 A full range of trip purposes can be
served
 Allows bus travel to replace potentially
riskier travel (e.g., crime, drunk driving,
poor visibility) by other modes late at
night
 Often branded as “night” or “owl” service
 May require added driver pay for latenight work
 May require increased security measures
on transit vehicles and in transit facilities
 May only be offered certain days (e.g.,
Friday and Saturday nights)
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
 May be operated on a different set of
routes than operate the rest of the day
(e.g., emphasizing coverage over travel
time)
Service Coverage
Mode used to access transit depends on distance to travel and facilities
provided along the way and at the transit stop
Walking is the most common access mode for urban transit service
 50-80% of persons walk ¼ mile or less to a local bus stop
 50% of persons walk ½ mile or less to rail and BRT service
 Terrain, street connectivity, street-crossing difficulty, demography are factors
Bicycling can extend a stop’s market area
 A person can cover 4 times the distance in the same time,
compared to walking
Autos used in lower-density areas to access commuter/express bus and
rail transit service when park-and-ride facilities are provided
 Market area depends on area topography and access road network
 Typical: 50% of demand comes from within 2.5 miles of lot, 35% of demand
comes from upstream up to 10 miles away from lot
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Transit-supportive Densities
Ridership increases with density
 More people (potential customers) located within a given area
 Greater propensity for a given person to use transit
Household Density
(HH/acre)
(HH/ha)
2.35
5.8
4.7
11.6
10.9
26.9
26.6
65.7
46.9
115.9
Households
1.0
2.0
4.7
11.7
20.0
Multiplicative Change Relative to Base Condition
Likelihood of Using Transit
Overall Transit Demand
1.0
1
2.0
4
5.9
28
15.9
186
24.0
480
TCQSM provides guidance on densities capable of supporting particular
service and modes
 Values dependent on how much one subsidizes transit service
 TCQSM values assume 33% farebox recovery (2010 US average was 27%)
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Service Coverage QOS
Five levels





>90% of population served
>90% of transit-supportive area served
75 to 90% of transit-supportive area served
50 to 74% of transit-supportive area served
<50% of transit-supportive area served
Transit-supportive area defined as an area capable of supporting hourly
weekday transit service
 At least 3 households per gross acre or 4 jobs per gross acre
 Assumes 33% farebox recovery
QOS planned for depends very much on transit agency’s policy emphasis:
coverage vs. cost-efficiency or frequency
QOS table shown on a previous slide
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Passenger Loads
Passengers perceive travel in crowded conditions as being more onerous
than travel in less-crowded conditions, even when they have a seat
 Value of time begins to increase when 80% of seats are occupied
 Standing passengers’ perceived value of time considerably higher than seated
passengers’
Cost-effectiveness improves as passenger loads increase
Passenger throughput generally improves as passenger loads increase
Passenger boarding & alighting times increase as the number of standing
passengers on-board increases
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Passenger Load QOS:
Vehicles Designed for Most Passengers Seated
Nearly all buses, all commuter rail, all ferry, some other rail vehicles with
narrow aisles and transverse seating
Six levels






Up to 50% seated load
Up to 80% seated load
Up to 100% seated load
Up to 125% seated load
Up to 150% seated load
>150% seated load
Up to 125%
seated load
 Up to 20% of passengers must stand
 Very productive service
 Standees may need to shift position
within the vehicle at each stop as other
passengers board or alight
 Perceived travel time up to 1.25x actual
travel time for seated passengers and up
to 2.1x actual travel time for standees
 Often used as a service standard for offpeak bus service
 Time to serve boarding and alighting
passengers goes up when standees are
present, resulting in longer dwell times
and potentially slower travel speeds than
at lower loading levels
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Passenger Load QOS:
Vehicles Designed for Most Passengers Standing
Special-purpose buses, most light and heavy rail
Six levels






>1.0 m2 (10.8 ft2) per passenger
0.5 to 1.0 m2 per passenger
0.4 to 0.49 m2 per passenger
0.3 to 0.39 m2 per passenger
0.2 to 0.29 m2 per passenger
<0.2 m2 (2.2 ft2) per passenger
2
<2.2 ft /p
2
<0.20 m /p
 Crush loading conditions
 Moving to and from doorways extremely
difficult, increasing dwell time (13)
 Passengers waiting to board may try to
shift to a door in a less-crowded section
of the vehicle, increasing dwell time
 Passengers waiting to board may choose
to wait for the next vehicle, increasing
platform crowding
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Reliability
The more unreliable the service, the more extra time passengers have to
allow for their trip
 Arriving at stops earlier than necessary
 Taking an earlier trip than necessary
The more unreliable the service, the more recovery time that agencies
need to insert into the schedule to compensate
 Time could be better used in service (operating the route more frequently,
operating a longer route)
Reliability issues depend in part on the scheduled headway
 Short headways: bus bunching and train stopping/starting
 Long headways: on-time performance, early departures
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Reliability QOS:
Headway-based Service
Applicable to service that operates at 10-min headways or better,
or to service without fixed departure times
Based on headway variability (standard deviation of headways divided by
the scheduled headway)
 Described in terms of the probability that a passenger arriving at a stop will
experience a vehicle more than ½ headway off the scheduled headway
Six service levels
cvh
0.00-0.21
0.22-0.30
0.31-0.39
0.40-0.52
0.53-0.74
≥0.75
P (abs[hi-h] > 0.5 h)
≤2%
≤10%
≤20%
≤33%
≤50%
>50%
Passenger and Operator Perspective
Service provided like clockwork
Vehicles slightly off headway
Vehicles often off headway
Irregular headways, with some bunching
Frequent bunching
Most vehicles bunched
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Reliability QOS:
Schedule-based Service
Applicable to service that operates to a fixed schedule
Based on on-time performance
 Defined as a departure no more than 1 minute early and up to 5 minutes late
Five service levels





95-100%
90-94%
80-89%
70-79%
<70%
80–89%
 Passenger making one round trip per
weekday with no transfers experiences
up to two not-on-time vehicles every
week
 Typical range for commuter rail that
shares track with freight rail
 Typical range for light rail with some
street running
 Achievable by bus services in small to
mid-sized cities
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Travel Time
Travel time is an important consideration in mode choice
Travel time impacts operating costs: the slower the route, the more
vehicles that are required to be in service to provide a given headway
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Travel Time QOS
Based on the ratio of in-vehicle transit time to in-vehicle auto time
Six service levels
Transit–Auto
Travel Time
Ratio
Passenger Perspective
Operator Perspective
≤1
 Faster trip by transit than by auto
 Feasible when transit operates in a
separate right-of-way and the roadway
network is congested
>1–1.25
 Comparable in-vehicle travel times by
transit and auto
 For a 40-min commute, transit takes up to
10 min longer
 Feasible with express service
 Feasible with limited-stop service in an
exclusive lane or right-of-way
>1.25–1.5
 Tolerable for choice riders
 For a 40-min commute, transit takes up to
20 min longer
>1.5–1.75
 Round trip up to 1 h longer by transit for
a 40-min one-way trip
>1.75–2
 A trip takes up to twice as long by transit
than by auto
 May be best possible result for mixed
traffic operations in congested downtown
areas
>2
 Tedious for all riders
 May be best possible result for small city
service that emphasizes coverage over
direct connections
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Multimodal Transit LOS
Measure draws from research into ridership response to QOS changes and
passenger values of time
Three main elements:
 Frequency (average % increase in ridership as frequency improves)
 Travel time (average % increase in ridership as travel time decreases)
 Pedestrian environment (adjusts LOS up or down based on particularly good
or bad pedestrian access to a stop)
Travel times are based on perceived travel times, expressed as a travel
time rate (minutes per mile)




Bus stop amenities (value of time of shelter, bench)
Reliability (excess wait time)
Passenger load (perceived travel time rate)
Travel speed (actual travel time rate)
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Multimodal Transit LOS
Transit wait-ride score represents ridership for the route being evaluated,
relative to a route with hourly headways and a baseline speed (typically 15
mph, 10 mph in major city downtown areas)
 Score of 2.0 indicates a route would be expected to attract twice the ridership
of the same route operating hourly with a 15 mph average speed
Transit LOS score incorporates the wait-ride score and the pedestrian LOS
score and adjusts the result to use the same scale as the other modal LOS
scores:
𝐼𝑡 = 6.0 − 1.50𝑠𝑤−𝑟 + 0.15𝐼𝑝
LOS
A
B
C
D
E
F
LOS Score
≤2.00
>2.00–2.75
>2.75–3.50
>3.50–4.25
>4.25–5.00
>5.00
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Demand Responsive QOS
There is a corresponding QOS framework and measures for demand
responsive transit
 Covered in the DRT presentation
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Applications
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Potential Applications
Comprehensive planning
Long-range transportation planning
Statewide transportation planning
Service standards development
Comprehensive operational analysis
Transit development plans
Service planning
Corridor planning
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Comprehensive Planning
Multimodal comprehensive plans provide goals, policies, and objectives
for the transit service provided, or desired to be provided, within a city or
county
 Service goals may be aspirational (city/county is not the service provider)
 Service goals may become the basis for service standards (city/county is the
service provider)
QOS measures relating to availability can be used in setting objectives
 For example, minimum span of service for trunk and local routes
Information in QOS chapters can be used to demonstrate the impact of
different land use densities, street connectivity, and sidewalk provision
policies on transit access
 Impact on ridership
 Impact on number of households/persons with transit access
 Impact on transit operating costs (e.g., number of route miles required to
meet a service coverage goal)
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Long-range Transportation Planning
LRTPs identify city- or region-wide transportation needs over a longer
period of time (e.g., 20 years)
 If plan preparer is not the service provider, LRTPs often focus on the actions
that can be taken to support transit (e.g., sidewalk improvements)
 If plan preparer is the service provider, the transit element may be more
specific and contain many of the elements of a transit development plan
A common application of the TCQSM 1st and 2nd Editions was to evaluate
existing transit service quality
Much more valuable to also use it to evaluate service quality provided by
various future alternatives, to aid decision-making
Possible types of analysis:
 Activity center analysis (origin–destination trips)
 Corridor analysis (transit streets, priority/frequent bus network)
 Service coverage analysis (areawide, corridor)
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Statewide Transportation Planning
QOS measures derivable from National Transit Database data can be used
to track trends in fixed-route transit provision across the state
 Statewide, or broken out into population ranges
Example measures
 Average system peak-period headway
 Average system speed (revenue miles/revenue hours)
 System service span
Measures require no special data collection
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Service Standards Development
Service standards are used to state the QOS the transit agency intends to
deliver and to compare actual performance to promised/targeted
performance
The redesign of the QOS framework for the 3rd Edition was done with
service standards development in mind
Set service standards based on desired passenger QOS to be delivered and
available agency resources
The comments on the passenger and operator perspectives for each
service level in the QOS tables can be used to match agency goals to a
corresponding service level
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Comprehensive Operational Analysis
COAs provide a detailed, route-by-route evaluation of existing service and
an evaluation of systemwide operations
 May be conducted in conjunction with, or immediately prior to, a transit
development plan update
QOS measures can be incorporated into a COA to:
 Describe evaluation results in terms of passenger experiences
 Compare results to established service standards
 Compare changes in results from the previous analysis
When archived AVL and APC data are not available to an agency, COAs
provide a rare opportunity to evaluate in detail the comfort and
convenience aspects of transit service
 Passenger loads, reliability, travel time/speed
Availability measures can be used as part of an environmental justice
analysis, comparing relative service quality between areas
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Transit Development Plans
TDPs set out a transit agency’s near-term service strategy
Example applications:
 Mapping current and/or planned conditions (route-by-route, street-by-street)
 Frequency, hours of service, loading, reliability, coverage
 Service levels help to group routes on the basis of similar service quality
 Prioritizing improvments
 Loading, reliability, transit–auto travel time
 Service equity & environmental justice comparisons
 Comparing relative service quality between communities
 Peer reviews
 Relatively few QOS measures derivable from National Transit Database data
(see statewide transportation planning slide for examples)
 May be possible to directly contact peers to obtain additional QOS-related
information
 Exhibit 5-42 gives examples of potential measures and data sources
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Service Planning
Service monitoring
 Regularly compare existing service to adopted service standards, and make
adjustments as needed when service falls outside the standards
 Loading, reliability are commonly monitored
 QOS tables can be used to set realistic expectations
Service development
 Identify service requirements for new/future developments when fully built
out
 Identify and prioritize origin–destination patterns that may require quicker
transit connections
 Prioritize locations/corridors for transit prefererential treatments and/or
operations measures to improve speed and reliability
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Corridor Planning
Corridor master plans, preliminary design/project development studies,
and premium transit studies address improvements over an extended
section of roadway
 Transit may the focus of the study, or one of multiple modes addressed
Example applications:
 Scoping transit improvements (guideways, spot improvements)
 Identifying access improvements to transit stops
 Determining required service frequency to meet a given ridership demand at a
given passenger load service standard
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
More Information
TCRP Report 165: TCQSM
 Chapter 4, Quality of Service Concepts
 Chapter 5, Quality of Service Methods
The TCQSM is available as:
 Free individual printed copies and PDF downloads through the TCRP
Dissemination Program
http://www.tcrponline.org
 Free PDF downloads directly from TCRP
http://www.trb.org/TCRP/Public/TCRP.aspx (Publications section)
or simply do an Internet search for the report number (e.g., TCRP Report 165)
 Individual or multiple copy purchases from the TRB Bookstore
http://books.trbbookstore.org/
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition
Acknowledgments and Permissions
Presentation author
 Paul Ryus (Kittelson & Associates, Inc.)
Photo credits
 All photos: Paul Ryus
This presentation was developed through TCRP Project A-15C
 Research team: Kittelson & Associates; Parsons Brinkerhoff, Quade &
Douglass; KFH Group; Texas A&M Transportation Institute; and Arup
 This presentation and its contents may be freely distributed and used, with
appropriate credit to the presentation authors and photographers, and the
Transit Cooperative Research Program
Transit Capacity & Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition