I have found a large number of service gaps that are needing to be filled following the change day that occurred yesterday, which put into effect the 2007 redesign of routes in Salt Lake County. This will be an extensive gap analysis, detailing somewhere around 15 new routes needed, and expanded service needs on others.
I've found that 700 East from Downtown needs the service required for such a major road, Redwood Road south of the SLCC Campus is missing Saturday service, and other areas have excessively long walks (I consider three Salt Lake blocks between buses to be the absolute maximum between buses, that however excepts areas where there is no collector road to service the area due to natural obstructions or major industrial facilities that temporarily would disallow that interval requirement to be met. Examples are 13th West and Redwood Road (13th West does not have a route), and so forth.
Watch for this post in the next few days. I have been unable to see a system map showing the overall view of the effects of the changes, so have not been able to completely assess the needs and analyze budgetary and bus resource needs.
A few other cosmetic changes such as numbering changes needed for a few intercity routes and Weber Division routes, all for clarity purposes only, will also be noted.
Monday, August 27, 2007
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Half empty or half full, how ISO may be slowing down buses.
So your bus is nearly full, will it get behind schedule, or if it's only got three or four passengers, will it run early and miss some passengers?
The answer to both is yes.
The 'Year 2000 Redesign in Utah County, the 2003 redesign in Weber County, and the 2007 redesign in Salt Lake County have brought out some interesting issues that were not taken into account in ISO 9001 documentation that may cause more problems than intended for UTA as well as the ridership.
Here's how it works with the issue of how many people are on any given bus.
I have found that if a bus is over half full, more likely this will happen if the bus is over 2/3 full (doesn't apply to 25-footers that were put into service in 2006 and begin with the number '06' on the vehicle ID), then the bus will almost always run somewhat behind schedule. The end result is missed connections, frustrated riders, and drivers that get stressed out.
Now the flipside is that if a bus is only 1/3 full or less, and there are few people getting on board and getting off, then the bus will invariably get ahead of schedule, the only real issue is that passengers get left behind, or the bus has to stop in lanes of traffic in some cases but not all, thus frustrating drivers who have to change lanes to get around a bus that is stopped for several minutes because they have to wait until they can safely go further without riders missing that particular bus at the time the schedule says it's supposed to be there.
So how can you schedule things properly? The redesigns invariably change rider habits for the worse if the bus runs less frequently than every half hour. Buses that run every 15 minutes are optimal, and that was the good side of the Salt Lake redesign in that more routes are that frequent than ever before.
If a bus runs only hourly, it's likely people will lose interest in using it. Moderately used routes like along 78th South are going to have even less users now that the new route on that road for example, are going to only have half the service they had during the weekdays, and none of the weekend service.
In fact, half of Salt Lake County got left out of the redesign's benefits, and that seems to be deliberate. That's like saying 'We don't care about you the rider, our drivers are more important than the customer'.
How can ISO 9001 help rectify the problems? A lot.
For one, service must be more consistent and promotional materials can be developed to encourage use of those routes. I have maintained this option should have been on the table for years, but no one, and I mean no one at UTA, has ever listened to the idea. The advertising for the new redesign is partly deceptive in that only the areas north of 53rd/54th South are getting anything that runs every 15 minutes, the rest only gets service every 30 minutes if not less frequently. ISO 9001 is there to ensure better quality service for the south half of Salt Lake County, which has grown substantially.
In fact there are only 38 routes that cover an area larger than Las Vegas covers, and Las Vegas is said to have over 40 regular routes plus some express service. Job growth here will bring us 100,000 more people in the next two years, that is the euivalent of a city the size of West Jordan, which on Saturdays may only have ONE regular route running throuhg it!
South Jordan is 40,000 with projected population of 100,000 including fill-in development between Daybreak and even Daybreak does not have weekday service into it, never mind that TRAX will be there eventually but not for several years. They need one route at least hourly to that location now, maybe more frequently, from 5am to 12midnight right now.
That's just some examples. But UTA doesn't seem to see that buses are needed to feed TRAX, so they don't buy enough buses. That violates the spirit of their certification. They are only going by the letter. 'The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life' as the Bible says.
More will follow later.
The answer to both is yes.
The 'Year 2000 Redesign in Utah County, the 2003 redesign in Weber County, and the 2007 redesign in Salt Lake County have brought out some interesting issues that were not taken into account in ISO 9001 documentation that may cause more problems than intended for UTA as well as the ridership.
Here's how it works with the issue of how many people are on any given bus.
I have found that if a bus is over half full, more likely this will happen if the bus is over 2/3 full (doesn't apply to 25-footers that were put into service in 2006 and begin with the number '06' on the vehicle ID), then the bus will almost always run somewhat behind schedule. The end result is missed connections, frustrated riders, and drivers that get stressed out.
Now the flipside is that if a bus is only 1/3 full or less, and there are few people getting on board and getting off, then the bus will invariably get ahead of schedule, the only real issue is that passengers get left behind, or the bus has to stop in lanes of traffic in some cases but not all, thus frustrating drivers who have to change lanes to get around a bus that is stopped for several minutes because they have to wait until they can safely go further without riders missing that particular bus at the time the schedule says it's supposed to be there.
So how can you schedule things properly? The redesigns invariably change rider habits for the worse if the bus runs less frequently than every half hour. Buses that run every 15 minutes are optimal, and that was the good side of the Salt Lake redesign in that more routes are that frequent than ever before.
If a bus runs only hourly, it's likely people will lose interest in using it. Moderately used routes like along 78th South are going to have even less users now that the new route on that road for example, are going to only have half the service they had during the weekdays, and none of the weekend service.
In fact, half of Salt Lake County got left out of the redesign's benefits, and that seems to be deliberate. That's like saying 'We don't care about you the rider, our drivers are more important than the customer'.
How can ISO 9001 help rectify the problems? A lot.
For one, service must be more consistent and promotional materials can be developed to encourage use of those routes. I have maintained this option should have been on the table for years, but no one, and I mean no one at UTA, has ever listened to the idea. The advertising for the new redesign is partly deceptive in that only the areas north of 53rd/54th South are getting anything that runs every 15 minutes, the rest only gets service every 30 minutes if not less frequently. ISO 9001 is there to ensure better quality service for the south half of Salt Lake County, which has grown substantially.
In fact there are only 38 routes that cover an area larger than Las Vegas covers, and Las Vegas is said to have over 40 regular routes plus some express service. Job growth here will bring us 100,000 more people in the next two years, that is the euivalent of a city the size of West Jordan, which on Saturdays may only have ONE regular route running throuhg it!
South Jordan is 40,000 with projected population of 100,000 including fill-in development between Daybreak and even Daybreak does not have weekday service into it, never mind that TRAX will be there eventually but not for several years. They need one route at least hourly to that location now, maybe more frequently, from 5am to 12midnight right now.
That's just some examples. But UTA doesn't seem to see that buses are needed to feed TRAX, so they don't buy enough buses. That violates the spirit of their certification. They are only going by the letter. 'The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life' as the Bible says.
More will follow later.
Monday, August 13, 2007
How can UTA resolve this issue? (811 transfering to other buses at UVSC)
How can UTA resolve this issue using the 9001 processes to ensure that things like this don't happen?
I just got off an 811 and needed to catch another bus by UVSC. The bus I got off of was on 12th South by the gas station, and the bus I needed was pulling in. Traffic in front of the UVSC stop was a little more so I had to wait to cross, but when I got to the stop the driver pulled out.
He likely did not realize there was at least one, and I think I saw a couple more, needing that bus as well.
What I think happened is the 811 was actually late, by about seven minutes. But it was not and should not be considered either driver's fault as to why I missed the 2nd bus. It is simply a matter of the 811 route is one of the toughest to plan in UTAs system. I've known that since about 1990 (when parts of this existed as Route 1 to Downtown Salt Lake) when Kip Billings told me of it, many drivers since have also told me it is a tough one to keep a schedule on. Today's matter may have been the result of the detour.
I left a complaint with customer concerns, but feel that its more for the planning team to sort out under the Service Delivery processes of ISO rather than to call either driver on the carpet for.
What does UTA, or any reader of this blog, have as far as things a rider can do if he realizes that the bus he might need to connect from is going to be late enough that it will get to the stop at the same time the connecting bus he will take is going to be there? Please chime in! This will help everyone.
I just got off an 811 and needed to catch another bus by UVSC. The bus I got off of was on 12th South by the gas station, and the bus I needed was pulling in. Traffic in front of the UVSC stop was a little more so I had to wait to cross, but when I got to the stop the driver pulled out.
He likely did not realize there was at least one, and I think I saw a couple more, needing that bus as well.
What I think happened is the 811 was actually late, by about seven minutes. But it was not and should not be considered either driver's fault as to why I missed the 2nd bus. It is simply a matter of the 811 route is one of the toughest to plan in UTAs system. I've known that since about 1990 (when parts of this existed as Route 1 to Downtown Salt Lake) when Kip Billings told me of it, many drivers since have also told me it is a tough one to keep a schedule on. Today's matter may have been the result of the detour.
I left a complaint with customer concerns, but feel that its more for the planning team to sort out under the Service Delivery processes of ISO rather than to call either driver on the carpet for.
What does UTA, or any reader of this blog, have as far as things a rider can do if he realizes that the bus he might need to connect from is going to be late enough that it will get to the stop at the same time the connecting bus he will take is going to be there? Please chime in! This will help everyone.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)