RTS Mobility Final Report - Accessible - 2019 03 15

IBI Group Logo
RTS Logo
Reimagine RTS Logo
Analysis of Mobility Options

Final Report
By IBI Group
March 2019
There are 8 sections in the consultant’s recommendations

Final Report. They are:
Section 1: Introduction
Section 2: Community Mobility Zones (CMZs): Existing

Characteristics
Section 3: Mobility Modes Considered
Section 4: Evaluation of Mobility Alternatives
Section 5: Summary of Recommended Mode Alternatives
Section 6: Service Analysis
Section 7: Recommendations by Community Mobility Zone

Section 8: Next Steps: Implementation of Mobility
Alternatives
1. Introduction
1.1 Analysis of Mobility Options: Purpose and Background
This document summarizes findings and recommendations
of the Analysis of Mobility Options study conducted by IBI
Group on behalf of Regional Transit Service (RTS) of the
Rochester-Genesee Regional Transportation Authority
(RGRTA).
The Analysis of Mobility Options study is Stage 2 of the

Reimagine RTS initiative to restructure and reimagine
transit service delivery in Monroe County, NY, including
the greater Rochester urbanized area.
Stage 1 of Reimagine RTS proposed fixed-route network

restructuring. The objective of this restructuring is to focus
routes in areas with appropriate density, diversity, and
design to successfully support fixed-route service in a
fiscally-sustainable manner:
Density: The measure of intensity of development in a
given area, which means more potential transit customers.
Diversity: The type and variety of uses in an area. A

mixture of uses (residential, office, commercial) in close
proximity creates all-day, all-week activity while also
reducing the need for private vehicles.
Design: The design and scale of the street network,

streets, and surrounding land uses determines whether
development is design for cars and traffic, or people and
places.
However, where sufficient density, diversity, and design

characteristics are not present, certain areas of the
existing RTS service area will see reductions or
eliminations of former fixed-route services. Seven areas
have been identified by RTS and are known as Community
Mobility Zones, or CMZs:
• Brockport CMZ
• Greece CMZ
• Henrietta CMZ
• Irondequoit CMZ
• Lexington Avenue CMZ
• Pittsford/Eastview CMZ
• Webster CMZ
The focus of this mobility study is to identify preferred new

mobility options for each of the seven CMZs, so that
existing RTS fixed-route customers will have continuing
service options following the implementation of the
Reimagine RTS network.
Additionally, this study analyzed how new mobility options

can better meet the needs of those who live, work, play,
and study within the CMZs by better matching service
delivered to the travel needs of specific user groups. This
includes mobility options that may provide more hours of
service, more frequency, greater coverage, universal
access, and improved convenience.
1.2 What is New Mobility?

Across the transit industry, there is a tremendous amount
of innovation underway to develop new mobility options
beyond conventional fixed-route bus and paratransit
services. Many of these alternatives are enabled or
enhanced by new technologies, such as mobile
applications for trip discovery, booking, and fare payment.
Peer transit agencies across the U.S. have been adapting
these new mobility modes to better meet the needs of
communities that are not particularly well-served by
conventional fixed-route transit service.
New mobility captures a wide range of service modes and

variations, including on demand and flex route microtransit,
personal mobility on demand (PMOD), and car/bike
sharing (see Section 3 for detailed descriptions). The
candidate mobility modes considered in the analysis are
introduced later in this document.
While the modes captured under the rubric of “new

mobility” are diverse, they share certain common
characteristics:
• Smaller vehicle capacity, ranging from 4-passenger

sedans to cutaway buses seating 8-12 persons. The
smaller vehicle capacity makes these options more
suitable for areas with low transit trip generation.
• Customer responsiveness, such as the ability to
reserve rides or requesting a flex route service for a
pick-up or drop-off. This provides increased
convenience for the customer, such as the ability to
access destinations out of reach of fixed-route bus
stops, or to travel on a more flexible schedule.
• Enabling Technologies that makes service delivery
possible, or at least more convenient.
An example is the use of a mobile phone app to

request a trip. That said, peer transit agencies and
third-party solution providers have developed tools to
ensure that new mobility services are accessible to
those who do not have access to such technologies.
An example is the use of a call center to make a trip
request in addition to a mobile app.
• Accessibility, so that service is available to the

largest possible number of users. While not always a
complete substitute for conventional ADA Paratransit
services, new mobility options can provide increased
freedom of mobility for travelers with disabilities, such
as more spontaneous same-day travel. An example is
the use of lift-equipped vehicles, or the provision of
curb-to-curb service that can overcome access
barriers related to reaching a bus stop. It is assumed
that any new mobility solutions implemented by RTS
would be ADA accessible.
• New Operating and Business Models that may
include central reservations and dispatch systems,
new customer service interfaces, and operating
schemes that hybridize aspects of fixed-route and
paratransit/demand response operations. Some peer
agencies have initiated operations in-house, using
agency staff and agency-owned fleets and
infrastructure; others have implemented new mobility
through third-party providers such as microtransit
operators, taxi companies, or transportation network
companies (TNCs).
New mobility options can help to overcome some of the

challenges to transit service delivery that are common in
the Community Mobility Zones. These challenges include:
• Low transit trip generation, due to development
patterns, low density and other factors.
• Dispersed origins and destinations, such as arterial
retail shopping centers, housing subdivisions, and
industrial parks.
• Poor first/last mile access to bus stops due to lack of
sidewalks, discontinuous street grids, etc.
• Travel demand outside of traditional peak commuting
hours – for example, shift and retail workers or college
students.
1.3 What is the Role of New Mobility in the Reimagine RTS

Network?
As introduced previously, new mobility options in each of
the seven CMZs are intended first and foremost to provide
continuing service to customers of the existing fixed-route
network that will no longer have fixed route service
following the Reimagine RTS route restructuring. This
includes a diverse array of customers – commuters
traveling to the urban core and major employment centers;
transit-dependent persons who rely on service for
employment, shopping, medical care, and other life
services; school pupils; college and university students,
recreational trips, and others.
In the RTS system, new mobility options may be used to

serve intra-zone trips within the CMZs (such as from home
to a local supermarket or school), as well as connections
to the rest of the RTS network for travel further afield.
RTS envisions Connection Hubs in each CMZ to facilitate

transfers between mobility services and future fixed route
services.
Locations of Connection Hubs were being finalized at the

time of this report, but presumed locations have been
identified by RTS and are discussed through the remainder
of this document. This study assumes that Connection
Hubs will be operational by the start of mobility service to
provide connections to other RTS services.
1.4 Consistency with Reimagine RTS Guiding Principles

The Analysis of Mobility Options study was conducted
within the framework of five Reimagine RTS Guiding
Principles.
The addition of new mobility modes to the transit service
offerings in the region can directly support each of the
guiding principles, as discussed below.
• Maximize Ridership: Fixed routes proposed for

elimination in Stage 1 have underperforming ridership
relative to other RTS routes. This is symptomatic of
the challenges of providing fixed-route service given
the diversity, density, and design of the CMZs, and
also suggests that service provision is not well aligned
with community needs. Adoption of new mobility
services will allow RTS to provide service to areas
with lower transit trip generation, and is also intended
to grow ridership through improved quality of service.
• Enhance the Customer Experience: Existing
challenges for customers using fixed-route services in
the CMZs include: limited bus stop accessibility due to
limited first/last mile connectivity to destinations;
infrequent service; limited service span, and limited
weekend and mid-day. New mobility alternatives can
specifically address some of these challenges,
particularly in areas with relatively low density and
dispersed trip generators like the CMZ.
• Ensure System Sustainability: High fixed operating
costs plus low ridership lead to poor performance of
existing fixed-route services when measured by
productivity metrics such as subsidy per trip or cost
per passenger mile. Financial sustainability is a key
consideration in providing alternative mobility options
that are affordable and responsive to community
needs.
• Expand Public Transit to Include More Mobility
Options: RTS is committed to exploring alternative
service models and modes beyond traditional fixed-
route and paratransit services. This study examines
the applicability of cutting-edge mobility modes that
are being developed and implemented by peer transit
agencies, to determine which of these emerging
options are a good fit for RTS and its customers in the
CMZs.
• Coordinate with Community Initiatives:
Convenient, equitable, and accessible transportation
is fundamental to the prosperity of local communities
and the well-being of residents. From job access for
entry level employment, to mobility of seniors and the
travelers with disabilities; to access to educational,
social, and recreational opportunities, new mobility
options can better align service delivery with
community needs and aspirations.
1.5 Stakeholder and Community Outreach

A series of stakeholder and public outreach events were
conducted to inform the study analysis by identifying
community needs and concerns and reviewing proposed
recommendations for new mobility options. Outreach
activities were led by RTS executive management and
outreach staff, with support from the consultant team.
• In November and December 2018, the team met with

stakeholder representatives in the CMZs to discuss
the objectives of the mobility study and to better
understand community needs and concerns.
Stakeholders varied by CMZ but generally included:
social service representatives, school districts who
currently rely on RTS service for pupil and/or Urban-
Suburban transportation, college and university
representatives, key employers, private sector
stakeholders, and community officials such as Town
Supervisors.
• In February and March 2019, the RTS executive team
presented draft recommendations to stakeholders,
customers, and community representatives through a
series of public information sessions in the CMZs.
• A briefing on the draft recommendations was provided
for the RGRTA Board of Commissioners at its monthly
meeting held on February 7, 2019.
Following the completion of this report, mobility

recommendations will be subject to review and adoption by
the RGRTA Board of Commissioners in summer of 2019,
as part of the overall adoption of Reimagine RTS
recommendations. As part of this process, public hearings
will be conducted in spring of 2019.
1.6 Key Assumptions
The recommendations developed by the consultant team
reflect a set of key assumptions as described below.
These key assumptions guided the team’s interpretation of
objectives, analysis of mobility alternatives, and feasibility
of those alternatives within the context of the RTS
operating environment and the objectives of the
Reimagine RTS initiative.
The key assumptions were reviewed with RTS staff and

the RTS Project Advisory Committee (PAC) during the
development of the recommendations. Note that
modifications to the key assumptions could impact the
validity of the recommendations, and/or approach to
implementation of the recommendations.
The key assumptions are as follows:
• Core Objective to Serve Existing RTS Customers:

The primary objective of RTS is to serve current
customers of fixed-route services that will be curtailed
or eliminated as part of Reimagine RTS. At a
minimum, mobility alternatives must serve a similar
geographic area/corridor to the former fixed routes,
with a similar service span and frequency.
• Service Enhancements: RTS recognizes that
community stakeholders have proposed service
enhancements that meet the needs of
unserved/underserved constituents. Community
enhancement beyond fixed route service replacement
will be considered in development of mobility
alternatives. However, provision of such services may
be contingent on supplemental funding form an RTS
community or business partner.
• Assumption of RTS Direct-Operated Mobility
Services: RTS has stipulated that core mobility
services will be direct operated by RTS and its
employees. This is an important assumption, as it
precludes certain operating and business models
being implemented by peer transit agencies that rely
on contracted or third-party operations.
• Commuter Services: RTS will continue to provide
replacement commuter services for current customers
travelling to and from: Hilton, Hamlin, Clarkson,
Sodus, Lyons, Newark, and Avon to and from
Rochester.
• Contracted Services as a Supplement to Direct
Operations: RTS will consider mobility alternatives
that are contract operated as a supplement to the
core, direct operated service.
• A Seamless, Integrated Network for Customers:
The new mobility options implemented in the CMZs
are part of the larger, regional RTS network, and must
feel like part of that integrated network from the
customer perspective. For example, a significant
portion of customers are expected to transfer to RTS
fixed-route services at Connection Hubs and other
locations. There is also a need for consistency of the
customer experience on issues ranging from trip
“discovery” (knowing that a mobility/transit option is
available), to fare payment, to onboard customer
interactions, and service branding.
• Implementation Timeline: The preferred mobility
option must be operational in all CMZs no later than
the implementation of Reimagine RTS fixed route
service change. This date is currently assumed to be
summer of 2020. This implementation timeline is
critical to ensure that there is no gap in service to
existing customers in the CMZs when the new
Reimagine RTS fixed route network is implemented.
Pilot programs or proof-of-concept in specific locations
may be considered (to be determined in a future
project implementation phase).
• Customer Subsidy: The RTS subsidy per customer
for new mobility options should be consistent with
system-wide subsidy levels. Because existing fixed-
route services tended to under-perform in service
efficiency, this suggests a lower subsidy per customer
than the fixed route services being replaced.
• Service Span: A minimum service span would
replicate the hours/days of week of the existing fixed
route service. A desired enhancement is to provide
service spans and days of week that are consistent
with fixed-route services elsewhere in the network,
most notably connecting services at Connection Hubs.
Future fixed route service span will be 5:00am-
midnight on weekdays (19-hour service span), and
6:00am-midnight on weekends/holidays (18-hour
service span).
• Equity/Title VI Civil Rights Requirements: Mobility
options must comply with federal Title VI Civil Rights
requirements. This includes impacts to populations
affected by service changes in the CMZs, as well as
service design features such as accommodating those
without access to smart devices/technology for ride
booking, fare payment, etc.
• Accessibility and Paratransit: It is assumed that
ADA/paratransit and general customer populations
could be co-mingled on future mobility services, which
will use accessible vehicles. As part of Reimagine
RTS Stage 3, RTS will develop a solution for
paratransit service that meets the needs of the
community and aligns with the recommendations in
this report.
• Pupil Transportation: Urban-Suburban and other
school-age students currently use RTS fixed routes in
3 of 7 CMZs, as primary and/or supplemental
transportation as part of RTS’ contract with the
Rochester City School district (RCSD). RTS and
RCSD are working together to ensure students in this
program currently served by RTS continue to have
transportation when Reimagine RTS is implemented.
• Fare Policy: Base fare for new mobility options
should equal the base fare for fixed route ($1.00
adult). A premium fare would be considered for
extended coverage beyond the existing fixed-route
service areas in the CMZs. Unbanked persons must
have access to equitable fare payment methods that
are not reliant on access to technology, credit cards,
etc.
• Scalability: To the extent feasible, mobility options
should be scalable to support changes in service level
in response to manifest customer demand levels, new
business or community partnerships, or changing
funding availability or costs.
End of Section 1.
2. Community Mobility Zones (CMZs): Existing
Characteristics
2.1 Introduction
The Analysis of Mobility Options covers seven Community
Mobility Zones (CMZs) identified by RTS
(Figure 2-1). These are:
• Brockport CMZ
• Greece CMZ
• Henrietta CMZ
• Irondequoit CMZ
• Lexington Avenue CMZ
• Webster CMZ
This section provides an overview of the existing

demographic, geographic, and transit service
characteristics of each CMZ. It also summarizes
community feedback provided during outreach meetings
on needs, issues, and concerns that were considered in
the evaluation of the mobility alternatives and development
of the recommendations.
A more detailed assessment of CMZ travel and
demographic characteristics may be found in a companion
technical document prepared as part of this study: Analysis
of Mobility Options: Community Mobility Zone (CMZ)
Socio-economic Profiles.
2.2 Summary of CMZ Characteristics

Each CMZ is a unique community with its own history, user
needs, and future aspirations. However there are certain
commonalities among the seven CMZs that are noteworthy
from the perspective of the mobility analysis.
The report includes a map showing each of the seven

CMZ zones within the RTS Monroe County service area.
Existing Transit Services

Fixed-route service today includes a mix of ‘local’ and
‘express’ style routes (serving a point-to-point central city
commuter market, sometimes via the expressway). Overall
service span tends to be short, with rapidly diminishing
service frequency after 7:00pm and on weekends (if
service is operated at all). Service frequencies are low,
with 60-minute or greater headways outside of peak
periods.
The minimal service levels, and the low ridership they have
historically generated, speak to the need to overhaul
transit service delivery in these communities, and justifies
the elimination of a substantial number of fixed route miles
in the CMZs in the Reimagine RTS plan.
Existing fixed-route structures in the CMZs tend to fall into

two categories, linear and dispersed structures:
• Linear Route Structures: These include the

Brockport, Pittsford/Eastview, and Webster CMZs. In
these zones, the fixed route services being replaced
generally follow a linear corridor. Examples include
the Route 104 corridor in Brockport and the Route 103
corridor in Webster. The Pittsford/Eastview CMZ is
more complex, with local and expressway routes
operating in the zone. However, there is a
predominantly linear corridor between the Village of
Pittsford on the North, and the Eastview Mall area on
the south.
• Dispersed Route Structures: These include the
Greece, Henrietta, Irondequoit, and Lexington Avenue
CMZs. In these zones, the fixed routes being replaced
form a grid-like or radial pattern across a wide swath
of the CMZs, rather than a single linear corridor. The
dispersal of origins and destinations suggests a “many
to many” pattern of trips within the existing route
structure. An example is the Lexington Avenue CMZ,
where the zone contains numerous employment
centers, social services, and residential areas;
however there is not one dominant destination or
interface point with the future fixed-route network.
Future mobility trips in the area once served by fixed
routes could involve a large number of origin-
destination pairs that cannot be conveniently linked by
a linear route structure.
Other Transportation Service Providers

Current providers of transportation services in the seven
Community Mobility Zones (CMZs) may play a role in
shaping new mobility solutions for each Zone.
A detailed summary of existing transportation service
providers in the CMZs has been prepared in a technical
document: Analysis of Mobility Options: Community
Mobility Zone (CMZ) Service Provider Identification.
In each of the CMZs, a network of multiple, special-

purpose transportation providers have evolved to fulfill the
needs of specific constituencies requiring specialized
transportation services. Examples include:
• Medical Transportation
• Senior Center/Senior Housing Transportation
• Services for Travelers with Disabilities/Social
• Service Transportation
• Faith-Based Groups
• Veterans Services
• Private Community Shuttles
Because the geographical areas served by many providers

are county-based, there is significant overlap between
service providers in each CMZ.
RTS recognizes that current providers of transportation

services may benefit from more inclusive and versatile
transportation options in the CMZs. The ability to service
multiple users that currently rely on stand-alone
transportation will increase community adoption and may
reduce financial burden for non-profit and volunteer
organizations.
Land Use, Density, and Demographics

While there are pockets of higher-density, walkable
development within the CMZs, such as the Villages of
Brockport and Webster, the land use patterns and density
of the CMZs are dominated by post-war, automobile-
oriented development patterns. This includes a
proliferation of commercial retail strips along major
arterials, suburban single-family and multi-family housing
tracts, office and industrial parks, and self-contained
institutional campuses such as Rochester Institute of
Technology (RIT), St. John Fisher, and Nazareth Colleges.
Newer development, such as along the Calkins Road
corridor in Henrietta, is continuing this pattern of
development to areas that are removed from existing RTS
services.
The prevailing land use and development patterns, as well
as the relatively high auto-ownership of households in the
CMZs, likely have contributed to the relatively low
performance of fixed-route transit in these areas. However,
it also speaks to challenges that certain new mobility
options can help overcome to improve the responsiveness
of transit service to community development and user
needs.
User Groups and Identified Needs

Demographic analysis and outreach to community
stakeholders suggests that there is a gap between existing
needs of customers and the existing fixed route service
that is provided (or, any fixed route service that can be
provided).
For example, community stakeholders noted the need for

persons engaged in entry-level retail or service work to
have access to employment transportation outside of peak
commuting hours, including early mornings and late
evenings. Affordable housing, group housing, and assisted
living facilities are often located away from existing fixed
transit routes. Seniors and those with disabilities may have
difficulty accessing bus stops from their origins and
destinations. Students without cars or below driving age
often have limited mobility options in auto-oriented
communities. This includes access to off-campus housing
and services throughout the day and into late evenings for
college and university students.
Current fixed-route limitations in weekend and evening

service can also pose a challenge for transit dependent
persons for a variety of trip purposes.
Pupil Transportation and Urban-Suburban Interdistrict Transfer

Students
RTS provides pupil transportation for Rochester City
School District (RCSD) students per contract with RCSD,
including students within the District as well as students
enrolled in the Monroe County Urban-Suburban
Interdistrict Transfer Program. The purpose of the program
is “To voluntarily decrease racial isolation, deconcentrate
poverty and enhance opportunities for students in the
Rochester City School District and in the suburban districts
of the Greater Rochester Area.”
Student transportation can include regular school day

transportation organized around morning and afternoon
“bell times,” as well as before-and after school
transportation. The involvement of RTS has evolved
organically over time based on the availability for suitable
RTS services and the needs of the district.
Three of the seven CMZs have existing Urban-Suburban

student arrangements that may be impacted by changes to
RTS services in the CMZs. These are:
• Brockport CMZ (Brockport School District Elementary,

Middle, and High Schools; after school transportation
only)
• Irondequoit CMZ (West Irondequoit High School and
Dake Middle School)
• Pittsford/Eastview CMZ (9-12 grade students at
Pittsford Mendon and Sutherland High Schools)
Each of the above CMZs has approximately 50-80 Urban-

Suburban students that may be affected by changes to
fixed route services, according to estimates provided by
RTS and the school districts.
School district representatives participating in the public

outreach stressed the importance of Urban-
Suburban student transportation, particularly services that

allow students to participate in after school activities, such
as sports and clubs. A strong preference was stated for
RTS direct-operated services, as well as consideration of
student safety surrounding onboard transportation and
transfers to fixed-route services at Connection Hubs.
It is noteworthy that other secondary school students could

benefit from increased flexibility and availability of mobility
options in the CMZ.
For example, the availability of transit options for intra-

zone travel to nearby neighborhoods and destinations
could be of value to students involved in after school
activities, part-time jobs, etc. The availability of a mobility
option may reduce the need for certain students to drive to
school, and/or can reduce burdens on families in providing
pick-up and drop-off for their students.
The report includes a table that provides an overview of
how well existing RTS fixed route services address the
needs of individual travel markets, including traditional city
center commuters, shift and retail workers, transit-
dependent non-work trips, seniors and disables persons,
school pupils, and university students. Because existing
service is focused on weekdays during traditional business
and commuting hours, many of these non-commuter travel
markets are not served as well as they could be. For
example, bus service may be infrequent or non-existent
late at night when a retail worker or university student
needs the service. Also, those with mobility limitations
may have difficulty reaching the existing fixed-route bus
stops.
2.3 Brockport CMZ
Overview
The Brockport CMZ will provide service in areas affected by the
proposed discontinuation of the current Route 104 Brockport in the
towns of Ogden and Sweden and the villages of Brockport and
Spencerport.
This proposed 30.56 square-mile Zone, the largest of the CMZs,

focuses on the relatively more populated areas north of NY Route
31. This zone will provide an important link between Rochester and
the College at Brockport, State University of New York campus
(SUNY Brockport) through a transfer to the fixed route network at a
Connection Hub located at the Rochester Tech Park in the Town of
Gates.
The CMZ has an estimated population of 26,982, and a median

household income of $61,853.
User Groups Identified

• Brockport School District Urban-Suburban students
• College at Brockport students, faculty, and staff
• Employees at Bonduelle and Sunking, Inc.
• Senior citizens
• Individuals served by Lifetime Assistance
Key Stakeholder Issues and Concerns
• Safety, security and accountability
o Sixth through twelfth grade students using mobility options

to connect to fixed-route or those waiting for a connection
at the Rochester Tech Park.
o The College at Brockport students traveling to their homes
in the city of Rochester after evening classes.
• Ability of Urban-Suburban students to access extracurricular
activities based on availability of return transportation to
Rochester.
• Affordability and availability of mobility options based on
partnerships with TNCs for SUNY Brockport students.
• Expectation of paratransit customers to have curb-to-curb
service and in some cases, dedicated runs.
• Service for residents who currently have to walk down Owens
Road.
Key Origins and Destinations

• The College at Brockport
• Brockport Central School District facilities, including Brockport
High School and A.D. Oliver
• Middle School.
• Frances Apartments, Woodlands Apartments and retail on
Owens Road
• Lifetime Assistance
• Sweden Senior Center
• Bonduelle and Sunking, Inc.
2.4 Greece CMZ
Overview
The Greece Community Mobility Zone will provide service to
residents and businesses in the town of Greece where 40-foot bus
service has been determined to be infeasible.
The 24.35 square-mile CMZ is bisected by the I-390 expressway

and encompasses major retail locations such as The Mall at
Greece Ridge and Northgate Plaza, as well as a site of higher
education in Bryant & Stratton College. Future Connection Hubs
are envisioned near The Mall at Greece Ridge and the Eastman
Business Park (serving both the Greece and Lexington Avenue
CMZs).
The Greece CMZ has an estimated population of 76,664, and a

median household income of $54,332.

• Transit-dependent households
• Service/retail workers
• Senior citizens
• Elderly population
• Secondary students

• Access to local services and employment for transit dependent
residential populations.
• Mobility for elderly and persons with disabilities.
• Service and retail employment transportation

• Affinity Orchard Place Apartments
• Bryant & Stratton College
• Kodak Park
• Northgate Plaza
• Retail/Shopping Centers (Walmart, Wegmans, etc.)
• Ontario Beach/Charlotte Recreation Facilities
• The Mall at Greece Ridge
• Ridge Road Retail and Service Corridor
• K-12 Schools
2.5 Henrietta CMZ
Overview
The Henrietta CMZ will provide connections beyond the fixed-route
network to destinations within the Town of Henrietta. The Henrietta
Community Mobility Zone (CMZ) is a 19.57 square-mile area
located south of the City of Rochester.
The CMZ is bisected by the I-390 expressway, Jefferson Road

(Route 252) and West Henrietta Road (Route 15) and is home to
regional retail destinations, such as Marketplace Mall, Southtown
Plaza, a Walmart Supercenter and Frontier Commons.
Henrietta CMZ has 34,277 residents and 16,020 employees. The

median household income in the Henrietta CMZ is $52,723.
Fixed route bus service is currently concentrated along the

Jefferson Road corridor and around Marketplace Mall, located in
the center of the CMZ. A Connection Hub is envisioned in the
vicinity of Marketplace Mall.

• RIT and MCC students
• Marketplace Mall customers and employees
• Veterans (including service to future VA outpatient facility near
Calkins Rd.)
• Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Communities
• Affordable housing residents and individuals with
developmental disabilities
• Dissatisfaction of Marketplace Mall employees with frequency
and hours of operation of current service
• Safety and security of MCC/RIT students waiting at the
Connection Hub
• Perception that Marketplace Mall is not a frequent destination
for RIT students (Monroe Community College was identified as
a potential alternative Connection Hub location)
• Support for a flex route service loop
• Support for differentiated pricing depending on trip destinations
• Accessibility of mobility options for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing
Communities
• Need to fill RIT shuttle service gaps

• Calkins Road: Future VA facility, municipal offices, library, and
apartments
• Lehigh Road development, student housing and community
path
• East Henrietta Road south of Jefferson Road
• Marketplace Mall and surrounding retail cluster, both for
shopping and as a service sector employment hub
2.6 Irondequoit CMZ
Overview
The Irondequoit CMZ is proposed to better serve areas in which
fixed-route service is recommended to be discontinued as part of
the Reimagine RTS plan.
The 12.12 square-mile area encompasses or abuts some of the

region’s most popular recreational and cultural opportunities,
including Ontario Beach, Seneca Park Zoo, Durand Eastman
County Park and Seabreeze Amusement Park.
Retail is centered on the Ridge Road corridor to the north, and is

home to major employers such as Rochester Regional Heath. The
Zone has a population of 33,213 and a median household income
of $59,013.
Connections to fixed-route service is envisioned at Connection

Hubs near Irondequoit Plaza and Skyview on the Ridge in southern
Irondequoit.
• Students
• Seniors
• Healthcare patients
• Transit users by choice
• Municipal funding of enhanced service in area
• Quality of amenities at Irondequoit Plaza Connection Hub
• Serving Urban-Suburban Students
• Access to healthcare providers
• Access to water recreation opportunities on Lake Ontario and
Irondequoit Bay
• Improved mobility for senior and student populations

• Wegmans
• Schools
• Town Campus/library
• East Ridge corridor
• Irondequoit Plaza
• Pattonwood Drive
• Seabreeze Amusement Park
• Bay Park
• Skyview on the Ridge
2.7 Lexington Avenue CMZ
Overview
The Lexington Avenue Community Mobility Zone represents a
mostly industrial area within the City of Rochester.
The Zone is roughly bounded by Ridge Road West to the north,
Dewey Avenue to the east, Lyell Avenue (New York State Route
31) to the south and Long Pond Road to the west. The Zone
partially overlaps with the Greece CMZ along Ridge Road West.
At 8.89 square miles, the Lexington CMZ is the smallest Mobility

Zone by area but is an employment destination for RTS customers.
Kodak, Lidestri Foods and other major employers are located within
the Zone, as well as community services such as FoodLink.
The Zone has an estimated population of 27,020 and a median

Connection Hubs are envisioned near the Mall at Greece Ridge

and Eastman Business Park (serving both the Greece and
Lexington Avenue CMZs).

• Industrial/manufacturing employees
• Retail/service sector employees
• Low income households
• Secondary students

• Industrial/manufacturing/wholesale employers – workforce
transportation.
• Retail employment – access during off-peak shift start/end
times.
• Low income households – access to employment, education,
and social services.

• Kodak Park
• LiDestri Foods, Love Beets, and other light industrial
employers
• General Motors
• Canal Ponds Industrial Park
• Community services, e.g. FoodLink
• Edison Technical high School
• Eastman Reserve mixed-use development
• The Mall at Greece Ridge
• Retail Employers
2.8 Pittsford/Eastview CMZ
Overview
The Pittsford/Eastview CMZ contains the New York Route 96
corridor between Eastview Mall and the Town of Pittsford, with a
planned Connection Hub proposed to be located at Concentrix in
Pittsford.
The CMZ has a population of 29,307 and a median income of
$103,745. The zone encompasses Nazareth College and St. John
Fisher College, as well as the Cloverwood Senior Living complex.

• Urban-Suburban students
• St. John Fisher College and Nazareth College students and
employees
• Seniors
• Eastview Mall employees and customers

• Safety and security of Urban-Suburban students
• Access for college students and employees to key destinations
• Access for employees commuting to Eastview Mall

• St. John Fisher College/Nazareth College
• Eastview Mall
• Cloverwood Senior Living
• YMCA at Clover Street and Jefferson Road
• Concentrix Plaza
• Pittsford Village Center
• Pittsford Plaza
2.9 Webster CMZ
Overview
The Webster Community Mobility Zone provides connections to the
fixed-route system through a Connection Hub at Baytowne Plaza in
Penfield.
The 10.8 square-mile Zone has important retail and commercial

corridors along Ridge Road, in the village center and is home to a
Xerox facility. The Zone has a population of 21,936 with a median

• Subsidized housing residents
• Park & Ride commuters
• Seniors
• Incoming healthcare workers

• Access to groceries and other key destinations for subsidized
housing residents
• Misalignment of bus hours of operation and healthcare worker
shifts
• Affordability of new mobility options for subsidized housing
residents
• Coordination with Town of Webster on state-funded Ridge
Road corridor enhancements
• Need for curb-to-curb service because of area’s low walkability
• Recruitment of businesses to Xerox Campus
• Encouragement of shoppers to go downtown

• Webster Square Park & Ride
• Village Center
• Phillips Village
• Xerox Campus
• Hill Haven on Empire Boulevard
• Basket Road
• Apartment complexes on Holt Road and Hard Road
End of Section 2.
3. Mobility Modes Considered
3.1 Introduction
This section describes mobility option service design alternatives
for consideration in each of the Community Mobility Zones.
Table 3-1 presents a summary of the service design alternatives

and their attributes for each of the following:
1. Personal Mobility on Demand (PMOD)

2. Scheduled Microtransit
3. On Demand Microtransit
4. Flex Route Microtransit
5. RTS Access Plus – Comingling eligible ADA registrants and
general public
6. Vehicle Sharing
The report includes a table that summarizes characteristics of the
mobility modes considered. The table includes details for each
mobility mode on the following: a description of each service;
vehicle types that can be used; potential providers; level of service;
customer access options, and financial models and structures.
3.2 Personal Mobility on Demand (PMOD) Service
Service Description
PMOD is a low-capacity service designed for individuals and small
groups (up to five persons) traveling together or between various
origins and destinations located along a dynamic itinerary formed in
response to customer reservations for “next vehicle available” and
“advance booking” travel. These services also are referred to as:
shared-ride taxi (SRT); general public dial-a-ride; personal demand-
response, car service, and paratransit, among others.
Service Design Variations

PMOD is potentially suited to area-wide, zone-based, or corridor
coverage operating either as a feeder service to RTS transit lines
and major employment districts; or dynamic routed and scheduled
in response to customer demands.
Industry examples include:
Tampa’s HyperLINK is reconsidering options for the continuation

1
of this service. service is designed to “extend the footprint” of the

HART fixed route network with subsidized shared rides to local bus
stops within defined zones for a flat $1.00 fare. Additionally, point-
to-point service anywhere within the zone is offered for a $3.00 flat
fare. HART encourages the use of a branded mobile app
1
As a result of HART’s contractor Transdev, notifying HART of their requirement for twice the rate for the provision of service, HART
developed by Transdev for reservations and fare payment;
however, traditional telephone reservations and cash payment of
fares are accepted as well.
Detroit Department of Transportation (DDOT) partners with Lyft

to offer late night first/last mile service along the outer 5.7 miles of
the 9.2-mile
Woodward Avenue corridor, one of Detroit’s busiest transit

corridors (Line 53) and one of just three lines in the system with late
night service. Additionally, the inner 3.5 miles east of Grand
Boulevard to the Detroit riverfront is covered by the Q Line (Phase
1 LRT). The Woodward 2 Work zone extends northwest from
Grand Boulevard to the State Fair Transit Center near Eight-Mile
Road. DDOT offers a $7 credit to customers using Lyft for access
to and posted bus stops between the hours of midnight and 5 am.
Line
53 operates hourly owl service. Non-smartphone users can call Lyft

Concierge, and the unbanked can use prepaid gift cards (minimum
$25 balance).
Livermore-Amador Valley Transit Authority, d/b/a Wheels,

partnered with DeSoto Cab, Lyft and Uber to offer subsidized local
rides in the City of Dublin through the GO Dublin program. Wheels
pays half the cost of a one-way ride up to a maximum of $5 for trips
that begin and end in the city. Customers book trips using the
provider’s app and a promo fare code to obtain the discount for a
one-way ride anywhere within 15-square mile city of 55,000
residents.
In eastern LA County, the City of Monrovia partners with Lyft and

LimeBike to offer subsidized Lyft rides and dockless bike sharing as
parts of its GoMonrovia” initiative. Customers use the Lyft app with
a promo code for a $0.50 flat fare for a one-way ride anywhere
within 14-square mile city of 38,000 residents.
Vehicle Types
Small vehicles ranging from sedans to SUVs and minivans with
seating capacity for up to five persons, excluding the operator. Most
vehicles are owner-operated, although some taxis are leased.
Private companies Uber and Lyft offer branded service variations
based partly on vehicle size and model. Other custom vehicles
include electric Gem Carts, and “e-tuk” electric rickshaws.
LimeBikes is developing a two-seat vehicle called a “transit pod” for
potential use in car share or e-hail mode.
Potential Providers – Mostly private for-profit companies regulated

either as taxicabs or as transportation network / rideshare
companies (TNC). Notable distinctions between taxis and TNC
rideshare services include:
• Taxis are designated using exterior markings on the vehicles;
TNCs are typically unmarked; and
• Taxis may be hailed curbside; TNCs may be “e-hailed” only,
meaning no curbside hailing.
Level of Service
PMOD span and frequency/response times can include defined
time periods (e.g., commuter peaks; late night “owl” service when
RTS is not operating) to around-the-clock “24/7” service.
Providers commonly target 15-30 minutes for “next vehicle

available” service; however, actual times vary based on the number
of vehicles in service at a given time, travel demand by time of day,
and travel itineraries of individual customers. These are the same
parameters that impact traditional complementary paratransit
services.
Vehicle routing and scheduling occurs dynamically in response to

the demand for service. Uber and Lyft use “surge pricing” to level
out demand, with peak surcharges ranging from two to nine times
the base fare. Some sponsoring agencies do not allow surge
pricing.
Customer Access Options
Reservations are required for most trips for either “next vehicle
available” and “advance booking” basis.
As noted earlier, private services emphasize the use of a branded

mobile app available in iOS and Android phones and tablets. Public
services also allow traditional telephone reservations to
accommodate customers without smart mobile devices.
Financial Model / Fare Structure

The prevailing financial model typically involves subsidization of taxi
/TNC services for targeted or area-wide service. Many transit
systems choose to offer a flat subsidy per one-way trip taken on a
participating taxi or TNC service. Most defer to the provider’s
distance-based fare structure, and pay the subsidy after a customer
fare is paid, up to a capped maximum amount; after which the
customer is responsible for any cost above the cap. For example,
the customer might pay the first $3 of the cost of a ride; the transit
agency or other sponsor might pay up to $12 to a cap of $15; and
the customer might pay any amount over $15. Flat fares also may
be used.
3.3 Microtransit –Scheduled, Flexible and On Demand; RTS Access Plus
Service Description
Microtransit provides moderate capacity service designed for
individuals traveling between various origins and destinations
located along a fixed route operating on set schedules. Microtransit
is sometimes referred to as shuttles; circulators, and minibus
routes. The term “microtransit” initially described private
technology-oriented companies entering the passenger
transportation industry; but now include comparable services
operated by transit agencies and other non-profit entities.

Microtransit is potentially suited to area-wide, zone-based, or
corridor coverage operating either as a feeder service to RTS
transit lines and major employment districts; or dynamic routed and
scheduled in response to customer demands. Select examples
include:
Groveport Rickenbacker Employee Access Transit (GREAT) –

COTA (Columbus, OH) collaborated with the City of Groveport and
Village of Obetz to implement a three-route first-last mile shuttle
service linking the end of COTA Lines 22 and 24 (London-
Groveport Road & Alum Creek Drive) to various businesses located
throughout the Rickenbacker Industrial Park. Again, shuttle service
is free and customer information is integrated in COTA system
information. Groveport operates the service running on fixed
weekday schedules and flexible weeknight and weekend
schedules.
Transit Corridor Coverage

Some transit systems (e.g., AC Transit, OCTA) deploy On Demand
Microtransit to replace or avoid adding marginal fixed route service
in lower demand corridors. Service is structured to encourage travel
between posted stops to achieve moderate service productivity (8 –
12 boardings per hour); however, travel between a posted stop and
any point within a defined zone (i.e., a specific CMZ) may be
allowed as well.
In the suburban Oakland (CA) cities of Castro Valley and Newark,

AC Transit replaced marginal fixed routes with On Demand
Microtransit operated by AC Transit employees. Customers book
trips via a personal account portal powered by Google Translate
and accessed on the AC Transit website. The cost to ride Flex is
the same as any other AC Transit local service. Discounted Clipper
fares and day passes apply. AC Transit, which directly operates AC
Flex microtransit service, uses a website-based customer account
portal.
Zone Coverage
With this approach, Microtransit provides flexible coverage within a
defined service area or jurisdiction.
In the suburban Sacramento cities of Citrus Heights, Antelope and

Orangevale, Regional Transit (RT) operates SmaRT Ride directly
with RT employees. Customers book trips using a branded
Microtransit mobile app supported by Transloc. On-line
reservations also are accepted on the Transloc website. Customers
also track their bus in real-time and receive texted bus arrival and
destination arrival alerts. Travel may be anywhere within defined
zone boundaries, including connections to the Folsom Light Rail
Station.
Destination Coverage
With this approach, Microtransit provides On Demand Microtransit
service between residential areas and commercial districts,
employment and regional centers.
A variation on microtransit delivery scenarios is co-mingling ADA

paratransit registrants with the general public. A hypothetical
example would be RTS Access services providing transportation to
the general public in a CMZ if trip requests and travel times are
compatible, as coordinated through the RTS Access
operations/dispatch center.
Vehicle Type
Microtransit vehicle type ranges from large SUVs and vans, to
shuttle buses and custom vehicles with seating capacity for
typically 6-12 passengers.
Potential Service Providers

There is a diverse array of potential service providers for
microtransit, including both agency direct operated and contracted
services. Contract service options include: a growing number of
startup enterprises (e.g., Hopper); more established service
contractors (e.g., Ford Mobility, Transdev); traditional transit
contract operators (e.g., First Transit, MV); regional charter
operators; taxi/TNC companies. RTS would need to acquire small
vehicles and may need to amend the collective bargaining
agreement to operate microtransit service directly.
Level of Service
Span and frequency models range from defined time periods (e.g.,
commuter peaks, nights), to coverage of full system operating
hours as a stand-alone solution to an area’s mobility needs.
Customer Access Options

• Scheduled: Operating on a fixed route, fixed-scheduled basis,
customers’ walk-up to access the service, requires no booking.
Enhanced customer information, including scheduled and
actual vehicle location are available via mobile app, website,
and bus.
• On Demand: Reservations are required for most trips for
either “next vehicle available” or “advance booking” basis. As
noted earlier, private services emphasize the use of a branded
mobile app available in iOS and Android phones and tablets.
Public services also allow traditional telephone reservations to
accommodate customers without smart mobile devices.
• Flex Route (hybrid): Operating on a set route with ‘some’
designed scheduled stop locations supplemented by deviating
off the route within a prescribed buffer zone to respond to
customer requests.
Financial Model / Fare Structure

Financial models for microtransit services include traditional service
contracting with compensation based on revenue hours operated;
third-party revenue guarantees; sponsorship; advertising revenues.
Most systems avoid onboard fare collection from customers.
3.4 Vehicle Sharing
Service Description
Vehicle sharing includes bike share and car share services
designed to expand the reach of the Reimagine RTS network at
strategic access points including park-ride lots and transit hubs.

Bike Sharing - Short-term bike rental, usually for individual periods
of an hour or less over the course of a membership (periods which
can range from a single ride, to several days, to an annual
membership). Information technology-enabled public bike sharing
provides real-time information about the location and demand for
bikes at docking stations throughout a community. The City of
Rochester currently has a bike sharing program, Pace, located
within the central city and nearby urban neighborhoods.
In Milwaukee, MCTS partners with local non-profit Bublr to locate

bike stations along bus routes and co-brand mobile apps to make
bike sharing more readily available to bus customers. MCTS
markets bike sharing as an added convenience for customers who
use the bike racks on MCTS buses, and as a seamless expansion
of the reach of the fixed route network. The Bublr app is accessed
via an RFID sticker applied to the MCTS M-Card.
In Pittsburgh, the Port Authority of Allegheny County partners
with Healthy Ride, Pittsburgh’s non-profit bike sharing program, to
make short-term bike sharing available as a FLM service for PAT
customers with a Connect Card. Transit customers with a Connect
Card link to a Healthy Ride account at any Healthy Ride kiosk to
obtain limited free use of a bike for up to 15 minutes. A charge of
$2 per half-hour is charged for rides over 15 minutes. Healthy Ride
has 175 stations with 700 bikes in targeted sections of metro
Pittsburgh.
The suburban city of Monrovia in eastern Los Angeles County

partnered with LimeBike to launch “GoMonrovia” offering residents
a new bikeshare program as part of a mobility on demand initiative.
Over 200 bicycles are available for rent at various locations around
the City, including the Metro Gold
Line LRT station and the downtown retail area. LimeBike costs
$1.00 per 30 minutes of use, or via a monthly membership.
Electric Scooter Sharing is similar to bike sharing, using electric

scooters operating in a dockless mode.
Service is accessed and paid for using a mobile app. LimeBike

provides electric scooters powered by a 250-watt motor with a 20-
mile range and 14.8 mph maximum speed. The app also contains a
battery monitoring function. LimeBike experience in Austin, TX and
San Francisco, CA speaks to the need for regulation to address
scooter parking, sidewalk operation, and other issues.
Car Sharing provides members with access to an automobile to

complete transit trips that cannot be made on the Reimagine RTS
network. Car sharing services offer several models, including:
• Round-trip, which requires the user to borrow and return the

vehicle at the same location;
• Free-flowing, which allows the user to pick up the vehicle at
one location and drop it off at a different location.
• Peer-to-peer, which allows individual owners to rent their
vehicle to other car share program members.
In Seattle, King County Metro has four parking spaces at its

Northgate Park-Ride facility set aside for free-floating car share
vehicles operating as Car2go and ReachNow. The pilot project was
undertaken because Northgate’s frequent all-day transit service
attracts customers throughout the day and evening. Parking spaces
fill early and usually remain full all day, yet customers continue to
need to get there throughout the day. While many customers arrive
on foot, by bike, and by transferring from other buses, other
customers prefer to drive and park. Metro decided to test the use of
designated car share spaces at Northgate so that some spaces
could more easily serve several different customers over the course
of the day. Northgate also has the only Metro-owned park & ride
lots within the current service area of the two-current free-floating
car share operators in Seattle, (Car2Go and ReachNow).
3.5 Industry Experience – Peer Agency Mobility Case Studies

As the mobility landscape continues to evolve, connected travelers,
continued advancements in transportation technologies, and private
sector involvement present unprecedented opportunities for public
transportation improvements. In recent years, concepts such as
microtransit and mobility-on-demand have helped agencies fill first
and last mile gaps by developing and integrating unconventional
modes into their services, engaging the private sector in the form of
transportation network companies (TNCs), car-share, bike-share
and other modes as alternative to private vehicles. However, while
transit agencies continue to experiment with new business models,
suppliers, and technologies to extend service into lower-density
areas, challenges related to providing cost-effective, efficient, and
equitable service to all people remain.
Given such opportunities in the area of innovative service delivery,

RTS is examining immediate and actionable strategies to extend its
service delivery beyond its Reimagine RTS fixed route bus network
and mitigate any impact of service changes in seven identified
community mobility zones (CMZs). Strategies are sought for
travelers who could potentially take transit, but whose origin or
destination cannot be conveniently accessed from the nearest
available transit service options. In support of this initiative, this
report presents examples of transit agency initiatives related to
innovative service delivery models, in the United States and
Canada. Lessons learned from these experiences will help to
assess how different services can be coordinated and integrated
with RTS’s services.
While other contexts for innovative service delivery exist, we have

summarized examples of such services from other agencies as
described in Table 3-2 given their applicability to RTS’ needs in
general and mobility solutions in one or more of the CMZs.
The report includes a table that summarizes select industry

examples of mobility options. These include examples of services
for providing local mobility solutions, commuter services, and
destination-based services.
3.6 Local Mobility Case Studies
San Clemente, CA (OCTA Project V Program)

Project V, part of Measure M2 initiative, establishes a process for
local communities to develop their own transit services that
complement the regional transit services. When Orange County
Transportation Authority (OCTA) decided to eliminate two of its
unproductive routes (191 and 193) due to low ridership in the City
of San Clemente, the City and OCTA decided to partner with Lyft to
provide on demand services to customers dependent on those
routes.
In October 2016, City Council approved a $900,000 contract with

Lyft to provide on demand service to customers within the City
limits. The contract is funded by an OCTA grant. Overall, OCTA
pays 90% of operating deficit and the City pays local match of 10%.
This contract will allow customers affected by discontinued routes
to travel locally, travel to another OCTA route or to regional
Metrolink (rail) service. The contract establishes the following
guidelines for trip payments
• Passenger pays the first $2.00 of the regular Lyft fare

• City pays remainder up to a maximum of $11.00 (up to $9.00
subsidy)
• Customer is responsible for any amount above $11.00
Customers can use the discount code SCRIDES when booking

rides.
Given potential difficulties of seniors and customers with disabilities

to take services offered by Lyft vehicles and operators, customers
eligible for OCTA Access service can request services from San
Clemente’s Senior Mobility Program for local trips. The program
offers free on demand fixed-route service for shipping and senior
center trips.
AC Flex – Operated by AC Transit

In early 2017, AC Transit, the transit service operator in Alameda
and Contra Costa counties launched a flexible service in the
neighborhoods of Newark and Castro Valley (also available in
Union City and Fremont), areas that had low transit demand. The
service is designed as an alternative to fixed route service. As part
of the service the AC Transit operates 12-passenger buses
equipped with wheelchair access, fare boxes and Clipper Card
readers.
All trips must begin and end within the flex service area around Line
275. AC Transit suspended operation of Line 275 from March 2017
through March 2018 to evaluate the service. The service area also
includes two BART rail stations Implemented as one-call-one-click
concept, the service allows trip booking using a web application
(smartphone, tablet, computer) anytime or through the call center
during restricted hours, AC Transit recommends trips are booked
30 minutes in advance. Recurring trips may get booked up to 3
months in advance.
The trip booking platform is implemented using MobilityDR platform

from Demand Trans. Operators gets turn-by-turn direction on Flex
vehicles. Customers can also subscribe to receive text or email
alerts when their vehicles are 10 minutes away.
Direct Connect Service by Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA)

In 2016, PSTA launched a unique public private partnership
program to enhance local mobility by partnering with Uber and
United Taxi. This service is designed to addresses the county’s
sprawling population and service gaps that require customers to
walk long distances to get to a bus stop. The service is designed
such that:
• Customers can travel within a defined geographic service zone

• To or from designated stops within a zone
The service was primary designed to serve areas of PSTA where

low ridership bus service was eliminated. Initially, the service was
launched such that customers can use low cost Uber (Pinellas Park
neighborhood) or United Taxi (Pinellas Park and East Lake
neighborhoods). Based on the success of the program, PSTA has
expanded the service to entire Pinellas County and now also
partners with Lyft, however rides through Lyft are currently not
offered. Often TNCs prefer to be exclusive partners with an agency.
PSTA service partners (now include Uber, United Taxi, Care Ride,
and Wheelchair Transport) use app-based e-hailing platform. PSTA
provides a discount of $5.00 per trip. Customers pay an average of
$1.00. Customers can pay by bankcards or PayPal. On taxis,
customers can also pay by cash.
HyperLINK Program–Hillsborough Area Regional Transit (HART),

Hillsborough County, FL
HART offers HyperLINK service to provide direct connections to
bus stops in Brandon, Temple, Terrace and University Area
neighborhoods. Designed as a shared ride service, this first and
last mile solution was launched in the University of South Florida
area with $1.2 million capital from Florida Department of
Transportation (FDOT). The service is operated by Transdev who is
paid $10 per trip. Customers pay $1 to connect to a designated
HART stop or $3 to connect to anywhere else in the service zone.
Customers can pay by cash or credit cards.
Private business donors (led by TECO, a local electric utility) are

funding the $170,000 two-year leases for four Tesla Model X SUV
vehicles. The program aims to expand using Tesla vehicles
equipped with autonomous vehicle technology (initially will have
“drivers” to ensure safety). Also, in addition to regular shuttle buses,
one accessible MV-1 van from AM General is used to meet the
needs of customers who may need accessible vehicles.
LYNX offers a flex service called, NeighborLink (NL), for its

customers living in low density areas that are underserved by its
local bus system. LYNX has currently defined 13 NL routes and
zones. Customers can use an app to book trips to travel anywhere
within the zone or to and from a stop on a NL route. Similar to AC
Flex, LYNX operates small vehicles branded for NL service.
Customers pay fare similar to a regular fixed route service- $2 for

full fare and $1 for reduced fare.
LYNX has been offering NeighborLink for several years, but it

required booking customers two hours in advance until recently
when an app was launched. LYNX has partnered with DoubleMap
to provide the trip booking, dispatching platform. Additionally,
DoubleMap provides real-time information and alerts to customers.
The service is operated by LYNX’s paratransit service (ACCESS)

contractor, MV Transportation.
3.7 New Local Mobility Initiatives
Uber Express Pool

Uber is currently piloting share ride service called express pool.
Unlike Uber Pool that provides curb-to-curb service, Express Pool
offers services to/from designated stops. Express Pool is currently
being piloted in Boston, San Francisco, D.C., L.A., Philadelphia,
Denver, and San Diego.
UberWAV and Uber Assist
Uber provides rides for persons with disabilities through branded
service called Uber WAV and Uber Assist. WAV is offered for
customers who may need wheelchair and Assist is offered for
seniors and customers with disabilities who may require additional
assistance. Customers can bring Personal Care Attendants (PCA)/
companions with them. Also, they are allowed to bring service
animals. “Driver-partners” providing the service are certified by a
third party in safely driving and assisting people with disabilities.
3.8 Commuter Services Case Studies
Altamonte Springs – (suburban Orlando, FL)

While LYNX provides NeighborLink service as a Flex service in its
service area, cities in the northern suburbs have teamed up to
provide innovative service through public private partnership to
compensate for any service gaps. The implementation was led by
the City of Altamonte Springs and now is joined by the communities
in Maitland, Longwood, Sanford and Lake Mary.
This is an example where cities leapfrogged a conventional transit

option in favor of an innovative service delivery in partnership with
the private sector. For several years since the early 2000s,
Altamonte
Springs partnered with LYNX and other local communities of
Maitland, Longwood, and Cassleberry to develop a flexible service
concept, called FlexBus that would involve 25+ fixed stations,
where customers could walk up to and book a ride using kiosks and
take trips or use their smartphones to book rides and board at fixed
stations. After going through preliminary design and engineering
process for over 10 years a pilot was launched in 2014. However,
the pilot was not successful due to lack of definitive agreements
among partners on operations and maintenance and concerns
about profitability of the service. Hence, FlexBus plans were
cancelled and given Uber’s interest in the transit industry around
the same time, Altamonte Springs decided to partner with them.
While creating a public private partnership with Uber, cities have

created an organization called
Municipal Mobility Working Group (MMWG) through an interlocal

agreement. Main purpose of the service and agreement is to
provide feeder service to Sun Rail stations, but customers can
travel anywhere within city limits and areas that are part of the
MMWG agreement. Cities currently contract with Uber, where cities
pay 20% of the cost of travel within their city limits or for travel to a
location within a city that is part of MMWG. Also, cities pay 25% of
the cost of customers that begin or end at the SunRail commuter
rail station.
3.9 Destination-Based Services Case Studies
Rosemont Entertainment Circulator (PACE - Suburban Chicago)

Pace, the agency responsible for providing services in suburban
Chicago, has launched a shuttle service between the CTA Blue
Line subway station and nearby destinations in the Rosemont
Entertainment District, Outlet Mall & Convention Center. The
service is provided through partnership between Pace and the
Village of Rosemont. Key landmarks serviced by the stop are
Donald E. Stephens Convention Center, Fashion Outlets of
Chicago, MP Financial Entertainment District and Rosemont CTA
Station. The service is free and offered as Pace route 811. The
route has designated pickup and drop-off locations and the service
is offered every 10-15 minutes per the following schedule:
• Mon-Thurs: 7:30 am – midnight

• Fri and Sat: 8:30 am - 3 am
• Sun: 11:30am - 9:30 pm
The service is operated for PACE under contract by MV

Transportation.
USC Safe Ride Program – Lyft Partnership (University of Southern
California)
The University of Southern California provides free safe rides
program through partnership with Lyft in the University Park
neighborhood, nighty from 7:00pm-2:00am.
Students can board Lyft LINE vehicles from designated pickup and
drop off locations within the University Park.
Ride credits for unlimited rides are applied to student accounts,

however, excessive PrimeTime fares or tips are not covered by the
ride credits.
The service allows student customers to bring a companion for

free, this service is designed to supplement Campus Cruiser
service and is operated as a pilot program from Jan 7-May 9, 2018.
3.10 State of Applicable Technologies

The rapid advancement of communications and scheduling
technologies is a critical consideration when thinking about service
design alternatives. Emerging technologies create new
opportunities all the time, as the latest innovations are overtaken by
even new innovations. To address this “moving target” issue
directly, this section (building on previously prepared best practices
and emerging technologies working papers) provides a snapshot of
the current state of the technology as a baseline for inclusion in any
proposed PMOD or microtransit services under consideration by
RTS.
Use of mobile phone apps is spreading rapidly across the transit

industry and is becoming indispensable in today’s market for
transit/mobility services. All service design alternatives discussed
assume the availability of either an RTS branded app or a branded
app by a third-party service provider.
In addition to fare payment and vehicle tracking, trip booking is an

essential feature of innovative first-last mile services designs.
Most widely distributed mobile apps allow customers to book trips

for personal mobility, microtransit, and complementary paratransit
services. RTS needs to assess the relative merits of incorporating
trip booking capacity into its own branded app, or, relying on a
third-party contractor to supply a separately branded app.
Third-party apps are available both as part of service delivery

contracts (e.g., Chariot, Transdev, Uber, etc.) or as a stand-alone
technology product (e.g., Transloc, Via). For example, Transloc
offers a microtransit pilot program through which it provides
software licenses for up to 10 vehicles for a period of three to six
months; as well as service design guidance and performance
monitoring in terms of key performance indicators such as
ridership, productivity, and cost. Via is supporting Capital Metro’s
Pickup service in Austin.
3.11 Conclusion
Transit agencies in the United States have been partnering with
private sector such as TNCs, private microtransit companies, and
real-time routing and dispatching software providers for many years
now, particularly since the MoD Sandbox initiative was launched by
USDOT. However, transit agencies are still assessing how best to
position themselves in the shifting paradigm of mobility. Throughout
this time agencies have experimented with replacing existing
services, complementing current services, and adding new
services.
Given most of the operating cost in transit industry is attributed to

direct operator employment and vehicle ownership, agencies have
experimented with a variety of models, where they 1) operate a
service on their own; 2) use a contractor to run their services; or 3)
partner with TNC or Taxis and subsidize trip cost. There is no clear
conclusion on the best model and it varies largely on the type of
service being provided and the ridership demography.
Further, the transit industry is witnessing a rapidly changing world

fueled by internet age technologies. The power of the internet
allows agencies to plan and deploy technologies at a rapid pace
even in situations when multiple service providers are involved. A
number of technologies/solutions have either been field tested as
part of a pilot program or have been widely deployed. Solutions
such as Mobility as a Service, while still having very limited
deployments, promise a great future given their ability to bring
different providers together under a common service model.
New technologies and renewed customer demand have yet to

significantly change the fundamental economics of personal
mobility and transit. There are examples of mobility services
operating on a self-sustaining basis; however, these mostly exist in
areas where market economics, corporate underwriting or
advertising revenues are uniquely available to avoid the need for
public subsidy.
End of Section 3.
4. Evaluation of Mobility Alternatives
Informed by an understanding of industry practice with next-
generation mobility solutions combined with detailed profiles of the
respective CMZs, stakeholder and RTS staff input, this section
presents an evaluation of mobility solutions for each of the CMZs.
To evaluate the applicability of mobility solutions for each of the

CMZs, several tools have been developed including:
• A Decision Framework
• A Service Mode Evaluation Framework
• A Ridership Estimation Tool
4.1 Mobility Evaluation Decision Framework

The Decision Framework is intended to guide both internal
discussions as well as conversations with key external
stakeholders. The Decision Matrix is shown in Figure 4-1.
The Decision Framework may be used to guide discussion where

there is expressed interest in advancing a mobility service.
Decisions affecting service design characteristics, service mode
and a potential role for RTS may be determined based on
consideration of the needs of a particular CMZ and the
characteristics of the candidate service modes.
The report includes a figure that describes the Mobility Evaluation
Decision Matrix used by the consultant team to evaluate the
suitability of specific mobility alternatives for RTS Community
Mobility Zones. This includes consideration of Service Design
factors such as the markets served, travel demand, costs, equity
considerations, etc. Each service mode is evaluated these criteria
to understand how well the modes meet the objectives of the
community needs and objectives of the RTS mobility initiative. The
decision matrix also considers the role of RTS in direct operating
services, versus developing community partnerships to implement
the services.
4.2 Service Mode Evaluation Framework

Figure 4-2 through 4-7 present Service Mode Evaluations for each
of the CMZs. This evaluation framework inform on travel demand
potential and specific evaluation criteria as described below.
Mode Evaluation Matrix - Criteria Definitions and Assumptions
In consultation with RTS staff, the project team

developed a set of evaluation criteria for each mode covering a
range of factors that influence the
applicability of each mode alternative to the CMZ.
Each of the criteria was weighted based on discussions with RTS
as to the relative importance of the criteria in the overall evaluation
process, as is shown below.
Partnership (P3) – 1x Weight

• Potential to foster partnerships with key
constituencies that might include: the business community
(major employers), health or
education communities; municipality, etc.
• Partnerships may include financial contributions (cost
sharing/cost allocation), assistance in
marketing/promoting/branding, etc.
Ridership Potential – 2x Weight

• Ability/probability of generating ridership. May reflect transit
dependent populations, specific market segments such as
students, commuters, older adults, etc.
Net Cost of Service (subsidy per trip) – 3x Weight

• Outcome of preliminary cost estimates as reflected by cost per
hour or subsidy per trip.
Service Quality – 3x Weight

• Impact on transit level of service in the CMZ – e.g., service
frequency, response time, days of week, hours of day
Social Equity (Title VI Compliance) – 3x Weight

• Degree of impact (positive or negative) on Title VI populations
• Equitable access to transit/mobility services including those
without a smart device (for trip planning, booking, mobile
payment) and/or the unbanked. Need to provide alternate
modes of access and payment.
Community Support – 2x Weight

• Degree to which mode accommodates
additional identified needs of community and key stakeholder
constituencies, beyond the core objective of serving current
RTS customers.
Organizational Capacity – 2x Weight

• Ability of RTS to support the preferred/
recommended approach. May include operations, finance,
marketing, communications and branding, customer service,
planning; IT, etc.
Sustainable Funding – 1x Weight

• Stable budgeting forecasts and funding sources
• Scalability of preferred/recommended approach responsive to
available funding
Low Technical Risk – 1x Weight

• Implementation risk associated with start-up and operation of
the mode
• Ability of RTS to support any prescribed technologies (i.e., e-
hailing, trip discovery/planning, booking/request, tracking,
mobile payment, data management)
4.3 Evaluation Matrix Scoring Criteria

As part of the evaluation, suggested scoring is provided whereby
each of the criteria has been scored on a scale ranging from
Positive to Negative in order to quantify an overall rating. The
resulting ratings helped to inform on recommended strategies
presented later in this document.
The report includes a table that summarizes the Evaluation Criteria

scoring as follows:
A score of +2 is a Positive relationship
A score of +1 is a Somewhat Positive relationship
A score of 0 is a Neutral relationship
A score of -1 is a Somewhat Negative relationship
A score of -2 is a Negative relationship
4.4 Conclusion: Mode Evaluation Results for Community Mobility Zones

A series of seven figures in the report show the evaluation of each
candidate mobility mode in each CMZ based on the evaluation
criteria introduced above.
The analysis shows that two modes rank consistently high across
the seven CMZs against the weighted evaluation criteria:
Flex Route Microtransit is the highest ranked multimodal

alternative in the following CMZs:
• Brockport CMZ
• Webster CMZ
On Demand Microtransit is the highest ranked multimodal

alternative in the following CMZs:
• Greece CMZ
• Henrietta CMZ
• Irondequoit CMZ
• Lexington CMZ
While not the highest ranked alternative in any CMZ, Personal

Mobility on Demand scores consistently high against two criteria:
• Low Net Cost of Service (because the cost is based on service
consumed, not service hours provided)
• Service Quality, because PMOD service provides curb-to-curb
trips in response to customer demand. In other words, a high
degree of convenience to accommodate customers where they
want to travel, when they want to travel.
Both of these criteria receive a 3x weighting in the evaluation,
making them two of the most important individual criteria.
Based on this evaluation, and in consideration of peer agency

experience, PMOD is considered a complementary mode to
supplement the two highest-ranking “core” microtransit modes.
The strategy for combining microtransit and PMOD in each CMZ is

discussed in the following sections of this document.
End of Section 4.
5. Summary of Recommended Mode Alternatives
This section provides a summary of the three mobility mode
alternatives that are recommended for implementation in the CMZs
as part of the Reimagine RTS initiative.
The three recommended services for the RTS CMZs are:
• Flex Route Microtransit

• On Demand Microtransit
• Personal Mobility on Demand
5.1 Flex Route Microtransit
Description
As introduced previously, microtransit is a moderate capacity
service designed for individuals traveling between various origins
and destinations, and which operates on set schedules.
Flex Route Microtransit is a variant of microtransit suited in

particular to areas with a linear characteristic and a relatively
defined route. The service operates in a fixed schedule and
incorporates traditional bus stops much like existing fixed-route
services.
However, flex route service offers substantial advantages over fixed

route in that it has 1.) a lower vehicle capacity more suited to
demand in the CMZs, and 2.) the ability to deviate from the set
route, typically by up to ¾ mile, to provide a more curb-to-curb
experience. Route deviations are based on customer requests
though an online/mobile app or a customer call center.
5.1.1. Service Description:

• Flex Route Microtransit operates along a defined route with a
relaxed schedule that allows flexibility for route deviations. The
model is similar to existing RTS Route Deviation services in
the outlying counties.
• Upon customer request, the vehicle will deviate from the route
to serve points within approximately ¾ mile, or as designated
within the CMZ, to provide a curb to curb service.• Following an
off-route deviation, the bus will return to the point where it left
the route it left, so that all fixed stops are served.
5.1.2 Rider Experience:

• Customers can board the service at designated, posted bus
stops, similar to fixed route stops today, based on schedule
time points.
• If a customer cannot reach regular bus stops, route deviation
may be a good option.
• To reserve a ride for curb to curb service (route deviation),
customers can either:
o Book a ride from a computer, tablet or mobile phone using
an RTS website or app; or
o Call an RTS dispatch or customer service center.

• Route deviated trip requests are required typically 15 to 30
minutes in advance, based on RTS policy to be determined.
• When making a deviated trip request, an approximate time of
arrival at the requested destination will be provided. The
customer can use this information if planning on making a
connection to fixed route transit. (In the future a Mobility on
Demand platform may be able to provide an integrated trip
planning capability with fixed route service.)
• Rides will be shared with other passengers, similar to other
transit modes. Intermediate stops may be made between the
trip origin and destination to accommodate other passengers.
5.1.3 Fares:
• Flex Route fares with route deviation requests will be charged
$2.00, without discounts. This is similar to RTS Route
Deviation fare policy in outlying counties.
5.1.4 Service Span:

• Service operates weekdays from 6:00AM – 7:00PM in the
Pittsford/Eastview and Webster CMZs. In Brockport, service is
extended to 10:00 PM on weekdays during the school year.
Weekend service is provided in all three CMZs from 6:00AM –
7:00PM.
5.1.5 Base Service Recommendations and Enhancements:

• The base recommendation service level proposes 1 vehicle (7-
passenger accessible microtransit van) per CMZ.
• Route length, travel time, allowable deviations, break/recovery
time requirements, etc. determine the service
frequency/schedule that can be provided in a given CMZ. This
is subject to detailed service planning analysis.
• This base level of service assumes that NOT ALL arriving and
departing fixed route trip (30-minute frequency) will be
synchronized with a Flex Route Microtransit vehicle. This is
because the round-trip cycle time to travel the route, including
break/recovery time, is likely to exceed 30 minutes. There is a
need to balance microtransit/fixed-route schedule coordination
with acceptable vehicle utilization, based on assumed cycle
times.
• For Brockport CMZ, the round trip cycle time between
Brockport and Rochester Tech Park will likely approach 90
minutes. Given the longer distances/travel times involved,
Brockport CMZ may require an additional vehicle to provide
hourly service in each direction. This will be determined based
on detailed service design analysis and confirmation of RTS
service design objectives.
• Transfer opportunities between fixed-route and microtransit
services can be communicated to customers through
schedules and ride booking/trip planning applications.
Passengers should be made aware whether particular arriving
fixed route trips to the Connection Hub provide a transfer to
flex route service within a reasonable connection window.
• Service could be enhanced by providing additional trip
frequency for Microtransit. At an upper extreme, flex route
service frequency would match fixed route service to provide
convenient transfers for every trip at the Connection Hub. A
detailed service analysis of run times and cycle times for flex
route service in each CMZ could be used to determine the
additional fleet and service hours required to meet a given set
of RTS service design criteria.
• Another enhancement option is increasing flex route service
frequency only in peak periods, while shoulder and mid-day
services operate at lower frequencies.
• Caution is warranted, however, in expanding microtransit
frequency. The additional direct operated service hours will
quickly increase operating costs, and will have a negative
impact on productivity due to service over-supply. Existing
fixed route service frequency should be kept in mind as a point
of reference. Providing substantially increased service levels
with lower productivity would run contrary to the Reimaging
RTS Guiding Principle of “Ensuring System Sustainability.”
Recommendation for RTS Community Mobility Zones

There are three zones where Flex Route Microtransit is particularly
well suited due to their linear nature: Brockport, Pittsford/Eastview,
and Webster.
A major drawback of the current fixed route service, however, is the

relatively poor pedestrian and “last mile” connectivity to and from
existing bus stops.
Flex route service will provide more curb-to-curb

service in areas that are predominantly low-density and auto-
oriented in character, and will therefore reach a potentially larger
ridership base in the CMZs.
Additionally, because Flex Route Microtransit vehicles are

accessible, the curb-to-curb service provide greater freedom and
mobility to seniors and persons with functional limitations that
prevent them from walking to or from bus stops.
5.2 On Demand Microtransit
Description
Like Flex Route Microtransit, On Demand Microtransit is a variant
of microtransit service that provides moderate capacity and a fixed
schedule.
On Demand Microtransit, however, does not rely on a pre-

determined linear route. Rather, the route is based entirely on
customer demand and stop requests at any permissible location
within the CMZ.
On Demand Microtransit customer pickups are based on customer

requests though an online/mobile app or a customer call center.
5.2.1 Service Description:

• On Demand Microtransit operates based on customer
requested trips, serving any number of origins and destinations
within the permissible CMZ area.
• There is no set route or schedule like a conventional transit
service. Vehicles alter their routes based on particular
customer demand, rather than using a fixed route or timetable.
• On Demand Microtransit does not use fixed bus stops. Instead,
all trips are curb-to-curb based on requested customer origin
and destination.
• Customers can use the on demand service to make a
complete trip within a CMZ, or connect to fixed route service at
the Connection Hub or bus stop for travel outside of the CMZ.

• Customers no longer board the service at fixed bus stops; all
trips must be booked in advance.
• To reserve an on demand ride for curb to curb service,
customers can either:
o Book a ride from a computer, tablet or mobile phone using

an RTS website or app; or
o Call an RTS dispatch or customer service center.

• On demand trip requests should be made 15 to 30 minutes in
advance, though the trip is accommodated soon as an
available vehicle is matched to the trip request and can reach
the origin.
• When making an on demand trip request, an approximate time
of arrival at the requested destination will be provided. The
• Rides will be shared with other passengers, similar to other
transit modes. Intermediate stops may be made between the
trip origin and destination to accommodate other passengers.
5.2.3 Service Span:

• Service operates weekdays from 6:00AM – 7:00PM in each
CMZ, and weekends from 6:00AM – 7:00PM.
• There is no weekend service in the Lexington Avenue CMZ.
5.2.4 Fares:
• On Demand fares are assumed to be $1.00 to the Connection
Hub or bus stop, or $3.00 for a premium service connecting
any two points within the CMZ.

• The base recommendation service level proposes 1 vehicle (7-
passenger accessible microtransit van) per CMZ.
• On Demand Microtransit does not operate on a traditional
schedule with a set cycle time—two factors that would
traditionally influence fleet requirement. Rather, the fleet
requirement is determined by 1.) the anticipated level of
demand and 2.) the RTS service performance standard, such
as the allowable wait time to serve each ride request.
• A longer advanced booking requirement (e.g. 30 minutes or
more) would allow a smaller fleet to serve more requests at an
acceptable performance level. If RTS can accommodate
multiple service requests to various directions within the
prescribed pick-up window, an adequate service level can be
maintained with a minimal fleet.
• As an enhancement, additional vehicles can be provided at
peak periods in response to latent demand. The customer
experiences a decreased wait time for requested trips, and
RTS may be able to reduce the advanced booking requirement
to a shorter timeframe.
• As with Flex Route Microtransit, however, RTS should be
cautious of expanding the fleet due to the risk of service over-
supply and the additional service costs that will be incurred by
providing multiple vehicles and operators. Providing
substantially increased service levels with lower productivity
would run contrary to the Reimaging RTS Guiding Principle of
“Ensuring System Sustainability.”
• Establishment of clear service performance metrics for on
demand services are recommended so that RTS can monitor
the balance of service supply and demand, and increase or
decrease fleet and service hours as warranted.
On Demand Microtransit is suited for the four CMZs that lack a
strong linear transit corridor, and which have rather dispersed trip
origins and destinations. This includes the Greece, Henrietta,
Irondequoit, and Lexington Avenue CMZs.
On Demand Microtransit allows for efficient service that is more

direct than a comparable loop or fixed-route shuttle service that
attempts to provide access to dispersed origins and destinations
across a wide area. In Henrietta, for example various residential,
retail, college, social service, and healthcare destinations are
spread across the zone along multiple arterial corridors. The
locations served on any particular On Demand Microtransit run will
be tailored to only those locations where customers require pick up
and drop off.
5.3 Personal Mobility on Demand
Description
Personal Mobility on Demand, or PMOD, is a low-capacity service
designed for individuals and small groups (up to five persons)
traveling between various origins and destinations located along a
dynamic itinerary formed in response to customer reservations.
Like microtransit, reservations are made through an online/mobile
application or a call center.
The key advantage of PMOD in the context of the CMZs is the cost
structure based on service consumed (i.e., fixed subsidy per ride)
versus cost based on hours of service provided (i.e., cost per
revenue hour).
This means that service coverage can be provided at off-peak

periods, such as early mornings and evenings, at a far lower cost
that other modes including fixed-route and paratransit service.
Because PMOD is customer demand driven, and provided curb-to-

curb service, it is also highly convenient and responsive to
customer needs. This is a significant contrast with alternatives such
as low-frequency fixed-route service, which may provide service
along a set schedule only once per hour or less. Those looking for
convenient transit alternatives and transfers at off-peak periods can
greatly benefit from the implementation of PMOD.
5.3.1 Service Description:

• PMOD provides curb-to-curb service on demand, during hours
when microtransit service is not operating. This allows the total
service span in the CMZs to match the service span of fixed-
route services: 5:00AM-Midnight on Weekdays, 6:00AM-
Midnight on Weekends.
• Customers can use the PMOD service to make a complete trip
connecting any two points within a CMZ, or connect to fixed
route transit service for travel outside of the CMZ.
• PMOD will be operated by a third-party contractor such as a
taxi company or transportation network company (TNC) such
as Uber or Lyft.
• RTS only pays for PMOD services consumed, not service
hours provided. This drastically reduces the cost of extending
the service span hours for low ridership volumes as compared
to direct-operated services.

• There are no bus stops or fixed pick-up locations for PMOD
services; service is curb to curb
• To reserve a PMOD ride, customers can either:
o Book from a mobile phone (using the PMOD provider’s

App) to request a pick-up, or
o Call a dispatch or customer service center (operated by

RTS or the PMOD provider, such as Lyft’s Concierge
service).
• PMOD requests are typically made 15 to 30 minutes in
advance, though the trip is accommodated soon as an
available vehicle is matched to the trip request and can reach
the origin.
• When making a PMOD trip request, an approximate time of
arrival at the requested destination will be provided. The
• PMOD can be exclusive ride or shared with other passengers,
as determined by RTS policy. If shared, intermediate stops
may be made between the trip origin and destination to
accommodate other passengers.
5.3.3 Fares:
• Fares are reflected as an RTS subsidy per trip. A subsidy of up
to $5.00 per trip has been recommended. The balance of the
trip cost is paid out-of-pocket by the customer.
5.3.4 Service Span:

PMOD service is provided during hours when Microtransit service
is not operating. This includes early morning on Weekdays
(5:00AM-6:00AM), and evenings (7:00PM-Midnight) on
Weekdays and Weekends.
• Weeknight evening service in Brockport CMZ during the school
year is from 10:00PM-Midnight, due to extended Flex Route
Microtransit operating hours in this zone.
• PMOD service is not provided on weekends in the Lexington
Avenue CMZ.

• The base recommendation is to provide PMOD service within
the designated hours. PMOD will use accessible vehicles and
is subject to operating conditions and performance standards
as specified in a future RTS agreement with the PMOD
provider.
• Because PMOD uses a third-party operator, there is no RTS
fleet requirement in the conventional sense. Vehicle/operator
supply is managed by the third-party provider based on
contract performance standards.
• PMOD service enhancement options include:
o Expanding PMOD service hours, along with a

corresponding reduction in microtransit hours, to reduce
operating costs. This may be considered if microtransit
productivity (e.g. cost/trip, trips/hour) is insufficient based
on operational experience and low demand.
o Offering supplemental, subsidized PMOD service to RTS

Access registrants to destinations within or outside the
CMZ. The advantage is more spontaneous, same-day
travel, at reduced cost to RTS compared to Access trips.
An example of this type of partnership is the Lyft pilot
program with MBTA “The Ride” clientele in Boston.

A common concern of community stakeholders was the need for
transit service that is more responsive to the needs of transit-
dependent persons traveling outside of peak commuting periods
and the traditional daytime/early evening service span of many of
the existing fixed routes in the CMZs.
PMOD provides a mobility option that is more responsive to these

community needs and offers higher quality of service during
shoulder periods of the day. PMOD can be summoned on demand
versus requiring customers to adhere to a low-frequency fixed-route
schedule.
Finally, because PMOD costs are based on service consumed,

RTS can supply service over a long service span that matches the
frequency of future fixed route services – up to 19 hours per day on
weekdays. Because costs only accrue on a per-customer basis, low
customer volumes can be served much more cost effectively as
compared to extending microtransit hours of service.
For these reasons, PMOD is proposed as a supplement to Flex
Route Microtransit and On Demand Microtransit services in each
CMZ.
End of Section 5.
6. Service Analysis
6.1 Introduction
Based on the preferred mobility modes, the project team developed
an operational scenario to assess cost and ridership impacts for
future CMZ service.
This section presents the preferred service plan based on a service

plan and key assumptions developed in partnership with RTS.
Preferred Service Plan

The three recommended mobility modes (Flex Route Microtransit,
On Demand Microtransit, and Personal Mobility on Demand) are
applied to the RTS service area in accordance with the following
service plan as shown in Table 6-1.
Ridership estimates have been generated based on a delivery

scheme whereby RTS self-operates microtransit (on demand and
flex route services) is the primary mode of delivery. PMOD
supplemental service will be provided early mornings and later
evenings only.
As the service plan shows, a majority of core hours of service for

microtransit in each CMZ will be operated by RTS (self-performed
PMOD will provide early morning and evening service on a
contracted, pay per service consumed cost model, as opposed to
the pay per hour of service provided model of the microtransit
services.
Fare Policy Assumptions

Preliminary Fare Policy assumptions for analysis purposes are as
follows:
• PMOD – Customers will receive a $5.00 RTS subsidy per trip.

Any remaining balance would be paid out of pocket by the
customer.
• On Demand Microtransit: $1.00 to Connection Hub/fixed-route
transfer location, $3.00 anywhere within zone.
• Flex Route Microtransit: $1.00 for pick-up at a stop along the
route. Additional $1.00 for route deviation request.
The report includes a table that summarizes the Proposed Service

Plan by Community Mobility Zone and Mode. In all zones,
microtransit service options operate between 6:00AM and 7:00 PM.
In the Brockport CMZ, service is extended until 10:00 PM during
the school year. Weekend service in all zones is from 6:00AM until
7:00 PM, except for the Lexington CMZ which does not have
weekend service.
The table also shows that Personal Mobility on Demand operates

during certain hours when Microtransit is not available. This
includes early mornings between 5:00AM and 6:00AM on
Weekdays, and evenings between 7:00PM and Midnight on
Weekdays. In the Brockport CMZ, PMOD service is extended
begins at 10:00 PM during the school year. PMOD service is also
provided on weekend evenings between 7:00PM and Midnight,
except for the Lexington CMZ which does not have weekend
service.
6.2 Ridership Estimation for Mobility Options

A Ridership Estimation Model was developed and provided to RTS
to assist in planning and deployment of, or modifications to, mobility
service scenarios in the future.
The service concepts and assumptions in populating and

developing the model formulas are presented below.
Service Design
• Microtransit – As noted in the service plan description, On
Demand or Flex Route service to be provided by RTS (self-
performed).
• PMOD service provided by taxi/TNC companies when RTS
operated services are not operating in the CMZs: i.e., from
7:00PM to 12:00AM in most zones.
Level of Service
• PMOD - Assumes up to 3 vehicles available in each CMZ for
the span of service as indicated.
• Microtransit – As a base service assumption, assumes 1
vehicle in each CMZ for the span of service as indicated.
• Additional peak period capacity could be considered based on
realized demand levels in each CMZ, if those levels exceed
• Note that future service design decisions and operating
policies determined during implementation planning could
impact induced demand levels and/or fleet vehicle count and
capacity requirements.
Ridership
• The ridership forecasting tool provides for a ‘low’ and ‘high’
demand estimate and are based on an assumed utilization
ranging from 0.33 to 0.50 (for PMOD) and 0.50 to 0.67 (for
microtransit) of available capacity for each span of service
hour.
• “Coverage hours” refer to the maximum number of potential
revenue service hours that could be deployed if necessary to
meet demand for personal mobility service.
Fares Calculations
• PMOD – The net cost of service is calculated on an assumed
maximum of$5.00 per trip flat subsidy distributed through fare
policy. Assumes that the customer pays an initial fare
equivalent to a regular transit fare; followed by the subsidy;
after which the customer is responsible for the cost of longer
trips. Example: Customer pays the first $2.00 of taxi/TNC
market-based fare; RTS pay up to $5.00 subsidy; customer
pays any amount above $7.00 for a one-way ride.
• On Demand Microtransit: $1.00 to transit hub. $3.00 to any
location within CMZ.
• Flex Route Microtransit: $1.00 for walk-up, fixed route. Plus
$1.00 for advanced booked, route deviation pick up and/or
drop off requests. For the purposes of analysis, it was
assumed that fifty-percent of ridership estimates would request
route deviation pick-ups and hence an average fare of $1.50.
6.3 Analysis Summary

Service coverage and ridership estimates are presented in the
following in two tables. One table shows the assumed operating
span and vehicle requirements. Another table shows the proposed
coverage hours and ridership estimates.
The preferred service plan scenario assumes a total of 32,550
annual revenue hours (self-performed service).
RTS will require a minimum of seven (plus spare ratio) vehicles – 7-

passenger, ADA-accessible vehicles according to base service
level and demand estimates.
Additional service levels, induced demand, and/or high peaking of

service demand in specific time periods could require additional
fleet. These factors and the underlying service policy decisions that
affect service supply and demand should be further investigated
during future detailed implementation planning.
End of Section 6.
7. Recommendations by Community Mobility Zone
7.1 Introduction
This section provides a summary of preferred mobility
options by CMZ based on the recommended mobility
options identified previously:
• On Demand Microtransit
• Flex Route Microtransit
• Personal Mobility on Demand (PMOD)
The recommendations reflect the modes and assumptions

uses in the ridership model, as well as response to
community demographics, geography, needs, and existing
fixed-route service patterns in each CMZ.
A summary of recommendations for all seven CMZs is

provided in the Table 7-1 below. Detailed descriptions and
maps for individual CMZs are presented in the remainder
of this section.
A map of all CMZs with the proposed CMZ boundary

modifications is shown in the report. Details of the
proposed boundary modifications are discussed within the
detailed descriptions for each CMZ.
The proposed mobility services in each zone have a

combined total service span of 19 hours on weekdays
(5:00 AM – Midnight) and 18 hours on weekends (6:00 AM
– Midnight) to match the span of the Reimagine RTS fixed
routes.
This extended service span ensures that connections are

possible to and from the fixed route system for those who
rely upon transit very early or very late in the day. It also
provides expanded service availability for intra-zone travel
compared to existing fixed-route service. The relative cost-
effectiveness of PMOD, based on cost per service
consumed in low demand periods, allows for this extension
of service span at a considerable cost reduction as
compared to fixed cost per hour of service modes like fixed
route and microtransit.
A table summarizes the recommended modes by

Community Mobility Zone. Flex Route Microtransit is
recommended in the Brockport, Pittsford/Eastview, and
Webster CMZs. On Demand Microtransit is recommended
in the Greece, Henrietta, and Lexington Avenue CMZs.
Personal Mobility on Demand is recommended for all
seven CMZs.
7.2 Brockport CMZ Recommendations
Overview
The linear, point-to-point nature of the existing Route 104
corridor in the Brockport CMZ is suited to a Flex Route
Microtransit service model.
The proposed flex route serves destinations in the villages

of Brockport and Spencerport, as well as rural locations
along the corridor with poor pedestrian connectivity to
conventional bus stops.
Supplemental PMOD service provides additional travel

options outside the peaks, replacing the former infrequent
fixed route service.
Connections to RTS fixed route service will be provided

though the proposed Connection Hub at Rochester Tech
Park.
Service Modes in CMZ
Flex Route Microtransit – Microtransit along the former
Route 104 corridor from Rochester Tech Park to Brockport
(via Spencerport).
Personal Mobility on Demand (PMOD) provides

additional service span in shoulder periods at a lower
operating cost based on service consumed.
A table in the report summarizes the proposed weekday

and weekend service spans for each mode in this
Community Mobility Zone.
The service span for microtransit in the Brockport CMZ

extends longer than other CMZs, until 10:00 pm on
weekdays during the school year, to accommodate
customers traveling to and from The College at Brockport.
At other times of year, microtransit service will conclude at
7:00 pm, with PMOD from 7:00 pm to Midnight.
CMZ Boundaries
The service within the CMZ generally includes flex route
service within 3/4 mile radius provided route deviation
within ¾ mile radius of the Microtransit route along the
531/31 corridor. Additionally, the CMZ boundary includes
the corporate boundary of the Villages of Brockport and
Spencerport, given the density of destinations in this area.
Key Destinations Served

Key destinations in the proposed CMZ boundary include:
• The College at Brockport

• Village of Brockport
• Village of Spencerport
• Rochester Tech Park
• Brockport High School
• A.D. Oliver Middle School
• Brockport Retail Corridors
• Sweden Senior Center
A map in the report shows the proposed boundaries of the

Brockport Community Mobility Zone. It shows a Flex Route
service area centered along NY 31 and 531 serving the
Villages of Brockport and Spencerport. A future
Connection Hub is shown at Rochester Technology Park,
where connections to RTS fixed route services will be
available.
7.3 Greece CMZ Recommendations
Overview
The Greece CMZ includes a number of truncated former
fixed route segments in a low-density zone with dispersed
travel patterns. This pattern is not suited to linear or loop
services.
The proposed service connects dispersed origins and

destinations within the CMZ, as well as last-mile
connectivity to and from Ridge Road fixed route services
and the Connection Hub near Greece Ridge Mall.
Connections to frequent service on Lake and Dewey as
well as Eastman BP connection hub.

On Demand Microtransit to serve dispersed origins and
destinations within the zone.

CMZ Boundaries
The Greece CMZ is bounded by North Greece Road to the
west; West Ridge Road to the south; Lake Avenue to the
east; Beach Avenue, Edgemere Drive, Dewey Avenue,
and English Road to the north.
The CMZ boundary allows connections to Lake Ave. fixed

route transit, and recreational amenities in Port of
Rochester/Ontario Beach Park area (Charlotte). Direct
connections to the Irondequoit CMZ are also possible in
the Port of Rochester area.

• The Mall at Greece Ridge (Fixed Route Connections)

• Bryant & Stratton College
• Affinity Orchard Place Apartments
• Ridge Road Retail Corridor
• Latta Road Corridor/Wegmans
• Walmart (2 Locations)
• Charlotte Beach/Ontario Beach Park

Greece Community Mobility Zone. Future Connection
Hubs are shown near The Mall at Greece Ridge and
Eastman Business Park, where connections to RTS fixed
route services will be available.
7.4 Henrietta CMZ Recommendations
Overview
The dispersed travel patterns and geographic
characteristics of the Henrietta CMZ are not conducive to
linear or loop routing, but are suited to an On Demand
Microtransit model.
The proposed service provides flexibility in trip times and

origins-destinations, both within the zone and as a feeder
to RTS fixed route service at the Connection Hub near
Marketplace Mall.
RTS services are supplemented by the RIT shuttle system,

and offer university students and staff additional
accessibility options to destinations not directly served by
RIT shuttles. Connections with the RIT shuttle are
envisioned at the Connection Hub.
Extended PMOD service will benefit retail workers,

students, and recreational trips within the CMZ.
There are additional employment centers on John St south

of Bailey, and along Thruway Park Drive, that RTS should
consider serving in the future as funding permits.


CMZ Boundaries
The Henrietta CMZ is an area defined as the Town of
Henrietta north of Lehigh Station Road, and bounded on
the north by Jefferson Road and Brighton-Henrietta Town
Line Road.
The CMZ is bounded on the west by West Henrietta Road

and Southtown Plaza, and on the east by the Henrietta-
Pittsford town line.
This CMZ boundary includes the core retail and

commercial areas of Henrietta, and numerous dispersed
residential and service destinations.

• Marketplace Mall and Henrietta Retail Core

• Jefferson Road Corridor
• Henrietta Town Hall
• Henrietta Public Library
• Future Veterans Administration Outpatient Facility,
Calkins Road
• Dispersed senior, affordable/assisted housing, and
student housing locations throughout the CMZ

Henrietta Community Mobility Zone. A future Connection
Hub is shown near Marketplace Mall, where connections to
RTS fixed route services will be available.
7.5 Irondequoit CMZ Recommendations
Overview
The Irondequoit CMZ has multiple future fixed route
services in the southern reaches of the zone, and two
proposed Connectivity Hubs - Irondequoit Plaza and
Skyview on the Ridge. Destinations within the CMZ are
predominantly low density and residential, with dispersed
origins and destinations and no dominant travel corridor.
The proposed service will serve many-to-many travel

connections within the CMZ, as well as last-mile
connectivity to the regional fixed route system.


CMZ Boundaries
The Irondequoit CMZ is outlined by the Genesee River on
the west; Lake Ontario to the north; Irondequoit Bay to the
east; and East Ridge Road to the south.
The CMZ includes connections to fixed route transit within

the southern reaches of the zone. Access to recreational
amenities are available in the north, including the Port of
Rochester/Ontario Beach Park area (Charlotte). Direct
connections to the Greece CMZ are also possible in the
Port area, as well as Lake Ave. corridor fixed route service.
• Skyview on the Ridge

• Ridge/Titus Retail Corridors
• Irondequoit Bay Park
• West Irondequoit High School
• Dake Middle school
• Seabreeze Amusement Park (supplements
• seasonal fixed route service)
• Lakeshore communities and attractions
• Seneca Park Zoo
• Irondequoit Plaza
• Durand Eastman Park

Irondequoit Community Mobility Zone. Future Connection
Hubs are shown near Irondequoit Plaza and Skyview on
the Ridge, where connections to RTS fixed route services
will be available.
7.6 Lexington Avenue CMZ Recommendations
Overview
The proposed On Demand Microtransit service is oriented
towards serving the industrial zone with dispersed
destinations, with a need to serve shift workers over a wide
service span. Demand patterns and zone geography are
less conducive to linear or looping route.
The periphery of the Lexington CMZ will continue to be

served by fixed route, providing walking access to
destinations near the zone edges.
CMZ travelers will benefit from the increased service span

and more convenient connections, including shoulder
period PMOD options supporting shift and retail workers in
particular.


The proposed service in the Lexington CMZ is Monday

through Friday only. No weekend or holiday service is
proposed in the Lexington Avenue CMZ.
CMZ Boundaries
The Lexington CMZ is bounded by West Ridge Road to
the north; Lake Avenue, Ridgeway Avenue, and Dewey
Avenue to the east; Lyell Avenue and Spencerport Road to
the south; and Long Pond Road to the west. Service also
extends south past Lyell Avenue into an area bounded by
Mt. Read Boulevard and Cairn Street to the west, Chili
Avenue to the south, and Hague Street to the east.
Access to fixed route services is possible along the north,

south, east, and west edges of the zone, as well as the
Connection Hubs at Eastman Business Park, near Greece
Ridge Mall, and near the intersection of Lyell Avenue and
Howard Road.

• Lexington Ave. Industrial Corridor

• Eastman Business Park
• Edison Career and Technology HS
• Greece Ridge Mall

Lexington Avenue Community Mobility Zone. Future
Connection Hubs are shown near The Mall at Greece
Ridge and Eastman Business Park, where connections to
RTS fixed route services will be available.
7.7 Pittsford/Eastview CMZ Recommendations
Overview
The Pittsford/Eastview CMZ contains both local and long-
distance, commuter-oriented fixed route services that will
be eliminated.
The proposed service focuses on serving local origins and
destinations along the north-south NYS Route 31/96
corridor, including the Village of Pittsford, schools,
colleges, and major retail/employment destinations like
Eastview Mall.
Connections to fixed route service will be possible through

the proposed Connection Hub located at Concentrix in
Pittsford.

Flex Route Microtransit – Microtransit along a central
spine within the Pittsford/Eastview Corridor from Pittsford
Plaza to Eastview Mall.


CMZ Boundaries
The Pittsford/Eastview CMZ runs between Pittsford Plaza
in the Town of Pittsford to Eastview Mall in Victor, (Ontario
County) along NYS Routes 31 and 96.
The primary route travels along Monroe Avenue/Route 31

into the Village of Pittsford, where it continues southeast
along Route 96 through Bushnell’s Basin to Eastview Mall.
Route deviations are typically up to ¾ of a mile on either

side of the main route, but expands to include the area
near the intersection of Clover Street and Jefferson Road.
This allows service to key destinations including St. John
Fisher College and Cloverwood Senior Living.

• Nazareth College
• St. John Fisher College
• Village of Pittsford
• Cloverwood Senior Living
• Concentrix
• Pittsford Plaza
• Pittsford Sutherland HS
• Southeast Family Branch YMCA
• Eastview Mall/Retail Corridor
• Eastview Mall Park and Ride

Pittsford/Eastview Community Mobility Zone. A future
Connection Hub is shown at Concentrix Corporation in
Pittsford, where connections to RTS fixed route services
will be available.
7.8 Webster CMZ Recommendations
Overview
The proposed service focuses on the linear Ridge Road
corridor where Route 103 service currently operates.
Curb-to-curb route deviation provides improved system

access to transit in a corridor dominated by automobile-
oriented land use and low pedestrian connectivity.
PMOD provides additional service span in shoulder
periods for retail workers, healthcare workers, and transit-
dependent persons.

Flex Route Microtransit – Microtransit along the Ridge
Road corridor from BayTowne Plaza to Phillips Village.


CMZ Boundaries
The Webster CMZ is defined as an area that runs between
BayTowne Plaza in the Town of Penfield and Phillips
Village (Phillips Road) in the Village of Webster along
Empire Boulevard and Ridge Road.
Route deviations are permitted within 3/4 of a mile on

either side of the main route, plus within the Village of
Webster. This includes a northerly extension that
encompasses the Xerox Webster site. Connections to
fixed route service will be available at the BayTowne Plaza
Connection Hub.

• Ridge Road Retail and Service Corridor

• BayTowne Plaza
• Town Center at Webster
• Webster Town Hall
• Phillips Village
• Village of Webster
• Xerox Webster Site

Webster Community Mobility Zone. It shows a Flex Route
service area centered along Ridge Road and Empire
Boulevard, terminating on Phillips Road near Phillips
Village. A future Connection Hub is shown at Baytowne
Plaza, where connections to RTS fixed route services will
be available.
End of Section 7.
8. Next Steps: Implementation of Mobility Alternatives
8.1 Introduction
Following adoption of the Reimagine RTS plan by the
RGRTA Board of Commissioners, RTS will need to
embark on a series of inter-related activities to prepare for
the implementation of new mobility alternatives in the
seven CMZs by summer of 2020.
This section contains a brief discussion of activities that

will be required to implement the recommendations.
Included is a list of internal activities required to prepare

the RTS organization, staff, fleet, infrastructure, and
technology.
Additionally, the process includes activities to continue to

engage community stakeholders to refine the service
concept, educate future customers, and develop
operational and financial partnerships.
An advantage for RTS in launching its new mobility

services is the increasingly rich set of peer agency
examples and lessons learned regarding many of the
topics introduced below. Peer agency consultations and
site visits to experience operational mobility services
firsthand is encouraged for key RTS staff responsible for
implementation.
8.2 RTS Mobility Working Group

As an industry best practice, the study team recommends
formation of a Mobility Working Group to steer
implementation of Mobility alternatives through the
Summer 2020 launch and initial operational period.
The Mobility Working Group should consist of cross-

functional representation from key departments within
RTS responsible for launch of what is effectively a new

service mode for the agency. Key representatives within
the Mobility Working Group should include but are not
limited to:
• Chief Executive Officer/Executive Team

• Community Engagement and External Relations
• Service Planning and Scheduling
• Transportation Services
• Information Technology
• Fleet Maintenance
• Facilities Maintenance
• Marketing and Communications
• Finance
• Labor Representative
• Engineering
8.3 Service Planning

The foregoing analysis is based on service planning
assumptions developed by the study team in consultation
with RTS.
The service planning assumptions are intended for

planning and comparative purposes, but further service
planning will be required as a next step to refine
operational parameters, develop run-cutting, confirm fleet
requirements, and improve operations and maintenance
cost forecasts. There are also service optimization
opportunities, such as sharing vehicles among CMZs
during off-peak periods, which were beyond the scope of
this analysis. Coordination with future fixed-route
scheduling, to facilitate convenient transfers at Connection
Hubs, is another future consideration.
It is anticipated that service plan refinement will also

include fine-tuning service delivery, service routing, hours
of service, and fare policy.
Further community engagement may also identify RTS

business partnership opportunities to support service
expansion or to address specific needs. Such partnerships
may have an impact on service plan development, fleet
requirements, etc.
User comprehension is an important element of the

success of new mobility options. This includes where it
goes, how to use the service, and what to pay.
Adjustments to CMZ boundaries to ensure user
comprehension (e.g., alignment with political boundaries,
inclusion of local landmarks) is likely to be a topic of
ongoing discussion with community stakeholders.
Finally, the initial service plan at the summer 2020 launch

should be revisited based on community response.
Realized customer demand after the service launch will
merit a re-evaluation of service levels within each CMZ,
including coverage, frequency, service span, etc. Should
customer response be less than initially anticipated, RTS
should make clear to external stakeholders that it reserves
the right to redeploy resources to more productive uses.
8.4 Operational and Organizational Readiness

As a new mode, implementation of the mobility alternatives
will require organizational/staffing capacity, development of
policies and standard operating procedures, process re-
engineering, and training. These changes will impact
senior management, support departments, and front-line
customer service personnel including operators.
An important aspect of organizational change is

establishment of a call center function to support customer
trip requests and other questions or concerns. RTS may
build upon its existing capacity and infrastructure for
customer service or paratransit reservations, for instance,
but a new set of standard operating procedures and
policies must be developed.
Modal integration is another consideration to ensure that
new mobility alternatives are integrated appropriately with
fixed route and paratransit operations at Connection Hubs
for the convenience and safety of transferring customers.
8.5 Marketing and Branding

As a new service offering, RTS must consider the
branding, marketing, and roll-out of the new mobility
services, in addition to other concurrent service changes
being implemented as part of the Reimagine RTS
scenario.
Several peer agencies have opted to create a unique sub-

brand for their mobility services, to create a more visible
brand presence and to generate interest around the new
service. That said, it is important that RTS communicates
that the service is an integral part of the overall transit
network.
User awareness and training is a key aspect of a

successful launch. Existing and potential customers must
understand what the service is, where it goes, and how to
use it. Customers must also be familiarized with the
technology tools that support the service, as well as the
options available to them if they cannot access those tools.
8.6 Technology Procurement and Implementation

As a technology-enabled mode, the new mobility
experience is highly dependent on the quality and
functionality of RTS technology systems.
RTS has extensive experience with advanced technology

implementation for fixed route and paratransit services; a
lesson learned at RTS and other peer agencies is the
significant amount of time and effort that is required to
ensure successful technology implementation that meets
the operational requirements of the system and the
expectations of increasingly tech-savvy customers.
The following are technology systems that will be required

to support new mobility implementation. As a direct-
operated service, it is assumed that RTS will be
implementing the following supporting technologies
directly, rather than outsourcing to a third-party operator:
• Trip planning/trip discovery application and/or

integration with enterprise systems
• Mobility dispatch and operations management system
• Customer reservations/trip booking system
• Customer service/call center reservations support
system
• Fare system integration and/or mobile or in-app fare
payment options.
It is anticipated that RTS will procure the necessary

technology systems through a competitive procurement
based on system functional requirements developed as
part of the procurement documentation.
8.7 PMOD Operator Procurement

Personal Mobility on Demand, or PMOD, is envisioned as
a contract-operated supplement to direct operated RTS
services. Payment to the vendor will be based on service
consumed, not hours of service provided.
It is assumed that RTS will issue a competitive

procurement to retain a contract operator for supplemental
PMOD services. There is an increasing body of transit
agency experience with procurement, contracting, and
performance monitoring for PMOD services. RTS can also
consider an industry request for information or similar
discovery process to gauge interest among potential
operating partners and inform the procurement process
and contract structure.
As with all procurements, RTS should be mindful of the

timeline for vendor procurement, selection, and startup of
service, and is encouraged to initiate the process well in
advance of the summer 2020 service launch date.
8.8 Microtransit Fleet Procurement

Microtransit will rely on acquisition of a new fleet of ADA
accessible vehicles, of approximately 7-12 person
capacity, outfitted with the requisite technology and
branded with a new RTS mobility livery. These vehicles
are assumed to be RTS owned, operated, and maintained,
and possibly procured through an existing procurement
mechanism.
A potential option for the initial launch is use of retrofitted

paratransit vehicles drawn from the existing RTS fleet, or
surplus RTS regional vehicles if available.
8.9 Infrastructure Readiness
The connection of mobility services to fixed routes and
paratransit presumes the implementation of RTS
Connection Hubs in each CMZ. At the time of writing, final
Connection Hub locations, facility requirements, and
designs were being developed by RTS.
Implementation of the Connection Hubs is presumed to be

a prerequisite for implementation of the new mobility
services, as they provide an essential link to the RTS
network. The Mobility Working Group should be closely
involved in the ongoing development of the Connection
Hubs to ensure that they meet the customer, operational,
and technology needs of the future mobility hubs.
Minor modifications to existing bus route signage is

anticipated in CMZs where flex route service is proposed.
This signage should incorporate the new branding of the
mobility services as discussed above. Other existing bus
stop signage for cancelled fixed route services in the
CMZs will be removed.
End of Section 8.
End of Consultant’s Recommendations Final Report.

RTS Mobility Final Report - Accessible - 2019 03 15

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RTS Mobility Final Report - Accessible - 2019 03 15

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

RTS Mobility Final Report - Accessible - 2019 03 15

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IBI Group Logo

Analysis of Mobility Options

There are 8 sections in the consultant’s recommendations

Section 2: Community Mobility Zones (CMZs): Existing

Section 3: Mobility Modes Considered

Section 4: Evaluation of Mobility Alternatives

Section 5: Summary of Recommended Mode Alternatives

Section 6: Service Analysis

Section 7: Recommendations by Community Mobility Zone

The Analysis of Mobility Options study is Stage 2 of the

Stage 1 of Reimagine RTS proposed fixed-route network

Diversity: The type and variety of uses in an area. A

Design: The design and scale of the street network,

However, where sufficient density, diversity, and design

The focus of this mobility study is to identify preferred new

Additionally, this study analyzed how new mobility options

1.2 What is New Mobility?

New mobility captures a wide range of service modes and

While the modes captured under the rubric of “new

• Smaller vehicle capacity, ranging from 4-passenger

An example is the use of a mobile phone app to

• Accessibility, so that service is available to the

New mobility options can help to overcome some of the

1.3 What is the Role of New Mobility in the Reimagine RTS

In the RTS system, new mobility options may be used to

RTS envisions Connection Hubs in each CMZ to facilitate

Locations of Connection Hubs were being finalized at the

1.4 Consistency with Reimagine RTS Guiding Principles

• Maximize Ridership: Fixed routes proposed for

1.5 Stakeholder and Community Outreach

• In November and December 2018, the team met with

Following the completion of this report, mobility

The key assumptions were reviewed with RTS staff and

The key assumptions are as follows:

• Core Objective to Serve Existing RTS Customers:

(Figure 2-1). These are:

This section provides an overview of the existing

2.2 Summary of CMZ Characteristics

The report includes a map showing each of the seven

Existing Transit Services

Existing fixed-route structures in the CMZs tend to fall into

• Linear Route Structures: These include the

Other Transportation Service Providers

In each of the CMZs, a network of multiple, special-

Because the geographical areas served by many providers

RTS recognizes that current providers of transportation

Land Use, Density, and Demographics

User Groups and Identified Needs

For example, community stakeholders noted the need for

Current fixed-route limitations in weekend and evening

Pupil Transportation and Urban-Suburban Interdistrict Transfer

Student transportation can include regular school day

Three of the seven CMZs have existing Urban-Suburban

• Brockport CMZ (Brockport School District Elementary,

Each of the above CMZs has approximately 50-80 Urban-

School district representatives participating in the public

Suburban student transportation, particularly services that

It is noteworthy that other secondary school students could