Massachusetts Regional Bus Study
Project Manager
Jonathan Belcher
Project Principals
Annette Demchur
Elizabeth Moore
Data Analysts
Steven Andrews
Jonathan Belcher
Thomas Humphrey
William Kuttner
Mary McShane
Paul Reim
Graphics
Kenneth Dumas
Cover Design
Kim Noonan
The preparation of this document was funded by the
Massachusetts Department of Transportation –
Rail & Transit Division.
Central Transportation Planning Staff
Directed by the Boston Region Metropolitan
Planning Organization. The MPO is composed of
state and regional agencies and authorities, and
local governments.
June 2013
To request additional copies of this document or
copies in an accessible format, contact:
Central Transportation Planning Staff
State Transportation Building
Ten Park Plaza, Suite 2150
Boston, Massachusetts 02116
(617) 973-7100
(617) 973-8855 (fax)
(617) 973-7089 (TTY)
ctps@ctps.org
Massachusetts Regional Bus Study
S.2 Study Purpose and Approach
S.3.4 Coordination with Regional Transit Authorities
S.3.6 Coordination with Commuter Rail Fare System
S.3.7 Coordination with the National Bus Network
S.4 Summary of Recommendations
1.3 Organization of This Report
2 The Regional Bus Network: Recent Evolution and Its Interactions with RTA Services
2.2 Changes to Regional Bus Service between 1980 and 2012
2.2.1 Changes in Community Coverage
2.2.2 Changes in Levels of Service
2.2.3 Characteristics of Reduced or Discontinued Services
2.3 Changes in RTA Service in Response to Changes in Regional Bus Service
2.4 Changes to the Passenger Rail Network in Massachusetts between 1980 and 2012
2.5 Communities with Both Regional Bus and Commuter Rail Service to Boston
2.6.2 Connections between Regional Transit Authority Districts
2.7.1 Review of Park-and-Ride Lot Conditions
2.8 Fare Structures, Including Potential Integration of Regional Bus and MBTA Fare Structures
2.8.2 Interaction with the MBTA Rapid Transit System
2.8.3 Interaction with MBTA Commuter Rail
2.8.4 Potential Integration with MBTA Fare Media
3.2 Federal Regulation of Intercity Bus Service
3.3 Massachusetts Regulation of Fixed-Route Bus Service
4 Boston Area Terminal Activity and Capacity
4.1.1 South Station Terminal Fees and Arrangements
4.1.3 Possible Methods to Increase Throughput at South Station during the PM Peak Period
4.2 Boston Regional Bus Services with Stops at Locations Other than South Station
4.2.1 Curbside Stop Operations in Boston
4.2.2 Curbside Stop Conditions in Boston
4.2.3 Potential for Service to Other Locations in Boston (Non-suburban)
4.2.4 Suburban Boston Stop Locations for Long-Distance Regional Bus Service, Actual and Potential
4.2.5 Service to Logan Airport
4.3 Midday Layovers for Regional Buses in Boston
5.1 Fleet Make-Up and Vehicle Requirements
5.1.1 Fleet Descriptions of Carriers Based in Massachusetts
6.1.1 Identification of Underserved Areas
6.1.2 Potential Services to Underserved Areas
6.2 Capabilities and Limitations for Connectivity within the State and Beyond
6.2.1 Urban-Area-to-Urban-Area Connectivity
6.2.2 Latest Allowable Departure Times for Sample City-Pairs
6.2.3 Connectivity to the Boston and New York City Metropolitan Areas
6.2.4 Connectivity to Adjacent States
6.3 Connecting with the National Intercity Bus Network
6.3.1 National Bus Traffic Association Membership
6.3.2 Potential for Rural Service Interlining
7 Marketing and Passenger Demographics
7.3 Statewide and RTA-Level Schedule and Trip Planning Data for Rail and Bus Services
7.4 Existing Passenger Characteristics
7.4.1 Reasons for Riding the Bus
7.4.3 Passenger Ratings of Service
7.4.4 Passengers Preferences for Service Changes
8.1 Federal Intercity Bus Operating Assistance—Section 5311(f)
8.2 Additional Federal Programs
8.2.1 Urbanized Area Formula Program—Section 5307
8.2.2 Bus and Bus Facilities Formula Grants—Section 5339
8.2.3 State of Good Repair Formula Grants—Section 5337
8.2.4 Formula Grants for Rural Areas—Section 5311
8.2.5 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities—Section 5310
8.2.6 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Funds
8.3.1 The Discontinued Interdistrict Operating Subsidy Program
8.4 Peer Review of Regional Bus Funding Programs
8.4.1 Use of Federal Section 5311(f) Funding for Intercity Service
8.4.2 Regional Commuter Bus Services Provided by Private Carriers
9 Other Services Provided by Private Motor Carrier Operators in Massachusetts
9.1 Charter and Tour Operators
A.4 General-Purpose Intercity Bus Operators
A.4.2 Peter Pan Bus Lines, Inc.
A.4.3 Bonanza Acquisition, LLC
A.5 Companies Mostly Providing Boston Express Commuter Service
A.5.2 Bloom’s Bus Lines and H & L Bloom, Inc.
A.5.4 Plymouth & Brockton Street Railway Company
A.6 COMPANIES OPERATING CONTRACT SERVICE ONLY
A.6.3 Joseph’s Transportation (also known as Joseph’s Limousine & Transportation)
A.6.5 McGinn Bus Company, Inc.
A.6.6 Paul Revere Transportation, LLC
A.7 COMPANIES OPERATING LIMITED-PURPOSE ROUTES ONLY
A.7.2 Brush Hill Transportation Company
A.8 COMPANIES HOLDING CPCNs BUT NOT OPERATING FIXED ROUTES IN 2011
A.8.1 Cavalier Coach Trailways
A.8.3 Knight’s Airport Limousine Service
A.8.6 Reliable Bus Lines, Inc.
A.8.10 Trombly Motor Coach Service, Inc.
A.8.11 Vocell Bus Company, Inc.
Figure
Figure 1 Massachusetts Transit Map
Figure 2 Massachusetts Regional Bus Routes
Figure 3 New England Regional Bus Routes
Figure 4 Massachusetts Regional Bus Routes and Commuter Rail
Figure 5 Massachusetts Regional Bus Routes by Regional Transit Authority with Fixed-Route Service
Figure 6 Massachusetts Regional Bus Routes, Commuter Rail, and Park-and-Ride Lots
Figure 7 Bus Carrier Stop Locations in Downtown Boston
Figure 8 Regional Bus Stops and Commuter Rail Stations, with Buffers
Figure 13 Population Density of Persons 65 Years Old or Older by Census Tract (2010 Census)
Figure 14 Major Traffic Generators in Relation to Regional Bus and Commuter Rail Service
Figure 15 Urban-Area-to-Urban Area Schematic
Table
1 Intercity and Commuter Bus Routes Operating to the Boston Area
2 Intercity Bus Routes in Massachusetts Not Directly Serving the Boston Area
3 Ridership and Survey Response Rates on Routes Primarily Operating within Massachusetts
4 Corridor Comparison of Massachusetts Regional Bus Routes 1980 to 2011 (listed in decreasing order by change in trips)
5 Round-Trips per Day on the Commuter Rail Network by Line
6 2009 Amtrak Station Annual Boardings and Alightings in Massachusetts
7 Regional Bus Service in the Brockton Area Transit (BAT) District
8 Regional Bus Service in the Berkshire Regional Transit Authority (BRTA) District
9 Regional Bus Service in the Cape Cod Regional Transit Authority (CCRTA) District
10 Regional Bus Service in the Franklin Regional Transit Authority (FRTA) District
11 Regional Bus Service in the Greater Attleboro Taunton Regional Transit Authority (GATRA) District
12 Regional Bus Service in the Lowell Regional Transit Authority (LRTA) District
13 Regional Bus Service in the Montachusett Regional Transit Authority (MART) District
14 Regional Bus Service in Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) Local Bus Service Area
15 Regional Bus Service in the Merrimack Valley Regional Transit Authority (MVRTA) District
16 Regional Bus Service in the MetroWest Regional Transit Authority (MWRTA) District
17 Regional Bus Service in the Pioneer Valley Regional Transit Authority (PVTA) District
18 Regional Bus Service in the Southeastern Regional Transit Authority (SRTA) District
19 Regional Bus Service in the Worcester Regional Transit Authority (WRTA) District
20 Existing Park-and-Ride Facilities with Private Carrier Bus Service
21 MassDOT Park-and-Ride Lots with No Regional Bus Service
22 Bus Access Mode for Boston-Bound Riders
23 Fares Charged per Mile, by Carrier
24 Percentage of Passengers Utilizing Multi-Ride Tickets, by Route
25 Percentage of Regional Bus Passengers Transferring to or from MBTA Rapid Transit System
26 Boston–Worcester Combined Bus/Commuter Rail Schedule
27 Arrival and Departures by Day of Week at South Station Bus Terminal
28 Friday Activity by Gate at South Station Bus Terminal
29 Activity by Gates Grouped by Affiliated Carriers at South Station Bus Terminal
30 Activity by Hour (All Gates) at South Station Bus Terminal
32 Earliest Arrival Times for City Pairs
33 Availability of Direct Service to Boston and New York
34 How Passengers Learned about Regional Bus Service
35 Reasons for Using Regional Bus
36 Passenger Demographics: Gender
37 Passenger Demographics: Age
38 Passenger Demographics: Household Income
39 Passenger Ratings of Service Characteristics
40 Passenger Preferences for Changes to Service
Over the past 30 years, the private carrier regional bus network in Massachusetts has seen a reduction in locations served within the state. This coverage contraction, often accompanied by reductions in service frequencies, has occurred in both intercity and commuter bus services. There has also been a decrease in the number of carriers. While these changes reflect to some extent development patterns and car ownership trends, they have been exacerbated by reductions in state-administered subsidy and vehicle finance programs. Continued reductions in service and attrition of regional carriers in the future remain distinct possibilities.
The fundamental purpose of this study is threefold: to gain an increased understanding of regional bus service and its market in Massachusetts, identify issues that have historically prevented the retention or expansion of important services, and suggest measures for making the service better meet the Commonwealth’s needs.
Owing to the large number of carriers and diversity of services, study of the regional bus industry presents unique challenges. In order to create a reasonably complete picture, the present analysis includes three broad areas of investigation:
The trends in travel markets and service strategies examined in this study shed light on today’s service offerings, and they point to possible viable expansions of intrastate regional bus services to reach under- and unserved markets. This study also considers opportunities for improving service in other ways and for retaining valuable routes. In addition, it reviews the potential for regional transit authorities to provide services that feed the intercity bus network, discusses the potential use of the MBTA CharlieCard on intercity and commuter bus services, considers the capital needs of an improved and expanded intercity bus network, including requirements for vehicles, stops, stations, and parking facilities, and discusses funding support.
Despite a contraction of the service network over the last 30 years, overall fixed-route coverage in Massachusetts remains good. All urban areas in Massachusetts have direct bus or rail service to Boston, and many also have direct service to New York City. Outside of these two large travel markets, service offerings are less convenient. Trips between many pairs of urban areas (even including New York City and Boston in a few cases) require indirect journeys with multiple trip segments and in some cases different carriers. For example, most trips between Worcester and New York City require changing buses in Hartford, Connecticut. Similarly, the less frequent service between the Berkshire region and eastern Massachusetts limits viable departure time windows available to travelers.
Several communities in the state with reasonable population density presently do not have any fixed-route transit available, notably Clinton, Hudson, Northbridge, and Uxbridge. In the Route 2 corridor between Fitchburg and North Adams, service to Boston can involve multiple transfers, and there is no service at all crossing the Berkshires from Greenfield to North Adams.
The intrastate services operating to and from Boston that have retained the strongest ridership and service frequencies share several key characteristics. They operate primarily along limited-access highways, make a limited number of stops along the route, provide service to both downtown Boston and Logan Airport, make use of parking facilities at the outer end of the route, and operate an extensive schedule, giving riders a large selection of trip choices. Even in corridors with rail service available, bus services with these characteristics have been able to retain and build ridership.
Services discontinued since 1980 in many instances operated along non-limited-access roadways, made multiple local stops, had limited parking available for riders, operated a limited schedule, and did not attract a diverse customer mix that could include commuters, Logan Airport passengers, or travelers connecting with other long distance bus services. Services with these weaknesses that were also near new or expanded rail service were especially vulnerable to ridership loss.
The total average daily ridership on intrastate private carrier bus routes in Massachusetts was over 5,700 in 2011, based on surveys conducted by the Central Transportation Planning Staff (CTPS). On intrastate and interstate routes together, over 400 round-trips per day operate to or from locations in Massachusetts. That is enough scheduled capacity to carry over 43,000 passengers. Regular route service is one part of the larger motor coach industry, which also operates charters and tours. The American Bus Association estimates that in Massachusetts in 2009 the motor coach tourism industry employed 9,820 workers with a payroll of $371 million.
The state is presently acquiring 30 buses, obtained through a competitive FTA program, which will be made available to private carriers on advantageous terms. This bus procurement will both reduce the average age of the private regional bus fleet and make possible the addition of selected services.
The acquisition of 30 buses can be placed in perspective by considering the optimal replacement cycle for coach-type buses. Buses are considered depreciated after 12 years of service. An appropriate average age for a fleet’s buses is six years. If 1/12 of the buses in a fleet are retired (replaced) each year, the average age of its buses will eventually stabilize at six years. The fleet size required to maintain the existing regional bus service in Massachusetts is 95 buses; therefore, reaching and sustaining an average age of about six years would require a replacement rate of approximately eight buses annually.
Bus emissions standards began to tighten significantly in 1994 and have been tightened further periodically since then. The new buses will be appreciably cleaner than most buses now operating, especially those few still operating that are over 20 years in age. Also, all will be accessible to passengers using wheelchairs, a feature becoming prevalent on coach-type buses.
A CTPS review of bus stops at commuter park-and-ride facilities found that signage and schedule information identifying the service available was frequently not in place, especially at smaller facilities. Most of the larger parking facilities had schedules and some form of on-site ticketing; however, very few had actual station buildings, and most only had shelters. Many smaller facilities do not have shelters. Park-and-ride facilities at several locations are near or at capacity on typical weekdays.
The Boston end of regional bus trips is either at the intercity bus terminal located at the South Station Transportation Center (commonly referred to as South Station) or at one or more curbside locations. A review of regional commuter bus curbside boarding locations in Boston found that none of them have any signs identifying the service and some did not even have signage identifying the location as a bus stop.
Regional private carrier buses and regional transit authorities (RTAs) share terminals and service hubs in a number of municipalities, including Barnstable (Hyannis), Fall River, Greenfield, Holyoke, Lowell, New Bedford, Pittsfield, Springfield, Taunton, and Worcester (as of mid-2013). The common facilities facilitate transfers between the different services. RTA routes also connect with regional private carriers at stops in Framingham and Plymouth.
In the cases of the Berkshire Regional Transit Authority (BRTA), Cape Cod Regional Transit Authority (CCRTA), Pioneer Valley Regional Transit Authority (PVTA), and Southeastern Regional Transit Authority (SRTA), private carrier regional service can be used to make local trips entirely within the boundaries of the transit authority service area. While RTA websites frequently have links to the websites of regional carriers that provide service within the RTA service areas, they typically do not provide specific information about those services, despite the fact that they can be utilized for local journeys.
Much of the traveling public is unfamiliar with the many regional bus services operating in the commonwealth; an opportunity therefore exists to expand use of this mode through marketing. The widespread use of new Internet and smartphone technologies should be fully exploited to bring passengers into regional buses.
Almost all the regional bus companies have their own websites, and these are accessible through the MassDOT website. However, the powerful, widely used Internet trip-planning application Google Transit currently utilizes the schedule of only one Massachusetts regional carrier.
The sale of MBTA commuter rail tickets via smartphone has proved very popular since its initiation late in 2012. Regional carriers presently do not have smartphone ticketing available, which in addition to selling tickets can support marketing and potential synergies with other bus or rail services.
Bus carriers presently offer deep discounts to riders using multi-ride fare media. On services with large numbers of commuters, the majority of riders utilize discount tickets.
There are several communities that have both regional private carrier bus service and MBTA commuter rail service operating to and from Boston. CTPS passenger surveys show that the greatest amount of mixed usage (travelers alternating between the two types of service) takes place between Boston and Worcester. This is also the one corridor where both modes use the same terminal facility at the non-Boston end of the route (Union Station in Worcester), where many commuters park-and-ride or make connections from local transit. A joint-ticketing system (in which a purchased ticket could be used for either bus or rail) would provide more trip choices for riders traveling between the two urban areas. The smartphone ticketing system recently implemented by the MBTA could be a potential method for implementing a joint-ticketing system with private-carrier buses. .
Greyhound, Peter Pan, and Plymouth & Brockton are part of the National Bus Traffic Association (NBTA) ticketing network and can sell through-tickets to any location in the national bus network. Acquiring through-ticketing capability is also possible for smaller regional carriers and RTAs.
Massachusetts receives federal §5311(f) funds that are expended exclusively to support intercity bus service. Currently, Plymouth & Brockton receives an operating subsidy for off-season service on outer Cape Cod, and Peter Pan has received capital funds for terminal modernization and vehicles. Other federal grant programs that are also available for other transportation modes might be utilized for regional bus service. An example of using these broader funding programs to support regional bus service is the use of Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program funding by New Hampshire to build new regional bus facilities and partially fund the startup of new commuter bus services.
Most states now provide §5311(f) operating subsidies to at least one intercity regional carrier in their state. Most private carrier commuter bus operations are in the Northeast, and levels of state support of these services vary greatly, ranging from no support to both capital and operating subsidies.
Massachusetts eliminated operating subsidies for private commuter bus service several years ago. However, capital support is being provided; 30 new buses are being acquired which will be allocated to both commuter routes and longer-distance regional routes.
The South Station bus terminal operates close to capacity during peak hours; the available capacity varies by carrier. In most cases, additional commuter trips could only be accommodated during the earlier and later parts of the peak period, but not during the busiest half-hour. Available off-peak capacity at South Station also varies by carrier.
Interstate service that crosses state lines has been largely deregulated at the federal level (except for issues of safety and insurance) since 1982. The state still has in place a requirement for carriers to hold Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCNs) for services operating entirely within the state; it has no such requirement for a service that crosses a state line, even if the route provides significant service within the state. There appear to have been very low levels of CPCN requests for new or changed intrastate services in recent years.
Local municipalities can regulate the use of their sidewalks and parking locations, and this has had an impact on curbside boarding in Boston. The City has continued to allow curbside boarding only for commuter routes, which, by their nature, have very short dwell times, and it has taken legal action against intercity carriers attempting to use curbside stops as terminals with longer dwell times.
Based on review of existing conditions, trends in travel markets and service strategies, and practices in other states, this study identified possible action items for the Commonwealth to consider for maintaining, improving, and possibly expanding the services constituting the regional bus system:
The average age of the bus fleet should be brought down to six years. The 30 new buses being procured by the Commonwealth are a first step toward that objective. Given a fleet of 95 buses (the number required to provide the existing level of service within the state), maintaining an average age of six years would require replacing vehicles at the rate of eight per year. The Commonwealth should work with carriers on developing an annual equipment procurement plan.
Prominent signage, along with route and schedule information, should be in place at all bus stops.
Park-and-ride lots that regularly reach capacity should be considered for possible expansion.
Passenger amenities at park-and-ride lots should be improved. While central stops in most urban areas in the state are made at RTA intermodal centers, which provide shelter, restrooms, and some food options for waiting passengers, the Newburyport park-and-ride facility is the only large park-and-ride facility with such amenities. Building similar facilities at other park-and-ride stops with frequent service and good ridership should be a goal for the state.
Peak-period capacity at South Station should be expanded by increasing the number of direct trips operated to Logan Airport and by operating additional commuter trips to the Back Bay or perhaps new trips to the Longwood Medical Area. Transporting airport and Back Bay customers on their own peak-period buses would free up capacity for buses that continue to serve South Station.
Construction of a midday layover storage yard in Boston, which would simplify operations for existing services and reduce deadhead moves to carrier facilities outside of Boston, should be considered.
Regional bus routes entirely within RTA service areas should be promoted by RTAs on their websites and trip planners.
Google Transit’s trip planner should include schedule data for all Massachusetts regional bus carriers. MassDOT should take the lead in making these data available to Google in the required format. MassDOT should also include regional bus service in any new statewide initiatives to facilitate trip planning by travelers.
Carriers should consider supporting smartphone ticketing. Coordination with the MBTA’s smartphone ticketing initiative should be encouraged.
A trial program of joint ticketing for regional bus and commuter rail services should be encouraged. It would benefit the most customers in the Boston–Worcester corridor. If this were successful, other markets such as Kingston/Plymouth–Boston and Newburyport–Boston could be explored for possible joint ticketing.
Offering introductory, discounted single tickets with a price similar to the per-ride price of multi-ride tickets should be considered as a way to attract new riders to low-profile services. These single tickets could be offered as part of short-term promotional efforts and should be considered as a method to market and increase ridership on some services.
Surveys of passengers on the Boston-based routes suggest that users of the New Bedford–Boston service could benefit from NBTA through-ticketing with other carriers. NBTA has a program that allows rural RTAs to join the NBTA network; through-ticketing with the mostly rural Franklin Regional Transit Authority (FRTA) and Berkshire Regional Transit Authority (BRTA) services in western Massachusetts may have the greatest potential.