CHAPTER 5
Conclusion

The main purpose of this synthesis is to provide an overview of transit services that agencies use to support nighttime ridership within their service area, in light of continuing travel pattern changes associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. The synthesis aims to address how nighttime economies influence transit needs, how nighttime services are planned and operated, the treatment of nighttime service compared to daytime transit needs, and the solutions agencies employ to meet nighttime travel demand. Findings from the literature review, survey, and case examples paint a picture of how agencies conceptualize the role of nighttime transit and deliver service to riders.

The synthesis succinctly presents key findings and highlights across the literature review, survey, and case examples. It discusses the barriers and challenges that agencies face in nighttime transit provision, as well as solutions and lessons learned. The final section notes that no one study can be exhaustive and additional understanding related to specific topics is needed.

Key Findings

The nighttime economy is growing. The literature review found that major nighttime industries, especially the leisure and hospitality industry, are expected to grow faster than the national average. Valley Metro and the City of Dekalb noted the rapid pace of industrial development within their service areas. RTC observed an increase in shift workers starting in early morning hours due to earlier operating hour time frames put in place during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Surveyed agencies have implemented a mix of fixed-route and flexible nighttime transit solutions, with many agencies showing interest in implementing microtransit at night. There was a slight correlation between agency size and type of nighttime service, with microtransit as the most common service among small agencies and a near or complete 24-hour network as the most common service among large agencies. Blue Water Area Transit is a smaller agency that replaced its fixed-route nighttime service with microtransit service from 9:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. MTA Maryland is a medium-sized agency that has implemented a 24-hour service span on certain routes, but also runs trippers even in remote areas to connect late-shift employees to their destinations. Most agencies that operate rail services use bus bridges at night.

Smaller agencies are considering or have implemented TNC subsidies. TNC subsidies tend to provide a similar user experience as microtransit services, varying in zone areas, drop-off rules, and policies. Subsidies allow smaller agencies to provide similarly flexible service without having to plan and implement a microtransit service. Similar to many microtransit services, the three surveyed agencies that have implemented the service all set time-of-day restrictions and location restrictions to ensure users are utilizing the service similar to transit service. However, some agencies may have additional restrictions to prevent unintended use of subsidies; GRTC

only allows TNC voucher users to book trips between bus stops and PSTA restricts the subsidy to eligible low-income riders.

Though staff and resource shortages are challenges in nighttime service provision, they are not distinct challenges from daytime service for most agencies. Ten out of 25 agencies did state challenges with a workforce shortage, though respondents largely did not agree that operator shortages impact nighttime service more than daytime service.

Shift workers in downtown, entertainment districts, and industrial areas are major nighttime trip generators. Surveyed agencies cited their focus on supporting shift and service workers with their nighttime service, with 24 (96 percent) citing them as an important group to serve. All interviewed agencies further emphasized the importance of serving shift workers with their nighttime transit. Areas with a concentration of shift workers are major nighttime trip generators in the interviewed agenciesʼ service areas; SFMTA and CapMetro specifically mentioned downtown, entertainment districts as important locations to serve for shift workers, while the City of Dekalb noted the expansion of its industrial district as a major nighttime trip generator outside of the cityʼs major college campus.

Students are major nighttime trip generators in areas with a significant student population. In addition to shift workers, students serve as major nighttime trip generators among interviewed agencies. Due to combined low car ownership and demand for nightlife activities, student populations in CapMetro, Valley Metro, and the City of Dekalbʼs service area have had high nighttime transit propensity. The City of Dekalb first introduced nighttime service to serve student populations at NIU, and CapMetro bolstered its early nighttime service to provide transit between downtown and campus, specifically University of Texas at Austin. However, ridership changes due to the proliferation of TNCs and the onset of COVID-19 have suppressed the demand for fixed-route service in these two service areas, making microtransit a better service for student populations.

Nightlife patrons are not a major agency focus. While nightlife patrons are agency focuses for CapMetro and SFMTA, other interviewed agencies did not emphasize the same level of importance to serve this population. Though CapMetro used to co-operate a downtown circulator, the high cost of operating the service makes it unfeasible to reintroduce the service, even though there is some demand.

Agencies have a variety of goals when planning for nighttime service. SFMTA has a goal in providing coverage with their owl network, while CapMetro and Valley Metro operate nighttime service along the most productive segments of daytime routes. While most agencies planned nighttime service according to specific nighttime standards, RTC operates nighttime and daytime service with similar standards and goals. Across their service day, they are equally concerned with providing access to jobs in the region. The City of Dekalb and CapMetro noted the importance of providing nighttime transit from an access lens.

Interviewed agencies have mostly restored pre-pandemic nighttime offerings, earlier than some daytime services. Both CapMetro and SFMTA noted how their nighttime services were reinstated soon after agencies were able to begin reinstating transit services after March 2020. CapMetro cited the importance of reinstating the services in the spirit of equity, providing a critical service to workers relying on the service. RTC maintained their long service span through the height of the pandemic and found that ridership during “overnight hours” remained relatively stable, while daytime ridership on some routes have yet to fully recover. Because many of the agencies have restored their nighttime service early on, they believe their current service is meeting known demand and does not need expansion, with Valley Metro as an exception (due to resource restraints). However, RTC, CapMetro, and Valley Metro are in the process of conducting service evaluations or will be conducting one soon. These systems are considering nighttime service as one component of overall evaluations, and if nighttime service were to expand in

the service areas, it would likely occur among general service changes done to comply with evaluation recommendations.

Barriers and Challenges

Resources are of large concern to most agencies and appear to be the ubiquitous hurdle to nighttime service expansion. All agencies, except for the City of Dekalb, expressed that nighttime service expansion in their service area is limited by resources, often competing with the goal of improving daytime service. For Valley Metro, resource limitations prevent the agency from serving industrial sites where there is known demand for nighttime transit. The agency noted that COVID-19 disruptions caused the City of Phoenix, which operates nighttime bus service within its service area, to eliminate some nighttime service that has not been reinstated due to other daytime resource needs. SFMTA noted that though there was room to expand nighttime owl service, the inability to secure stable funding for expanded service (in addition to difficulty around stable funding for daytime service) would prevent expansions for the foreseeable future.

Safety is also a challenge that agencies discussed. SFMTA noted safety concerns for operators and riders. The agency adjusts layover locations and methods to ensure operators feel safe at night and tracks lighting at bus stops to ensure riders are seen. Valley Metro also noted safety concerns in their service. While light rail service has safety officers onboard during operating hours, operators are the primary safety officers on bus service. The nighttime bus network spans different land uses, and lighting and bus shelters are less common further out from the downtown Phoenix core. Further, the hot climate of Maricopa County can pose safety concerns for riders walking to and waiting at bus stops.

Notable Practices and Lessons Learned

Most agencies find it more important to track safety-related metrics at night. Fourteen (56 percent) of surveyed agencies believed that it was more important to track safety at night compared to during the day, with 13 (52 percent) and 11 (44 percent) agencies stating it was more important to track timed transfers and stop infrastructure at night, respectively. Monitoring lighting was the most common nighttime safety initiative that agencies employ.

Partnerships with colleges and universities were the most common among surveyed agencies. Seven out of 25 agencies maintain planning partnerships with colleges and universities, while five out of 24 had funding partnerships. Both CapMetro and the City of Dekalb have historically worked closely with universities in their service areas to plan and fund nighttime service. Some agencies also partner with government or development agencies to plan and fund nighttime service; five out of 25 agencies have such planning partnerships. Because Valley Metro is a member-city organization, it maintains partnerships with multiple municipalities to plan nighttime service. It partners with local police departments to provide backup for nighttime safety incidents, if necessary. Few agencies partner with employers or business associations to fund nighttime services. CapMetro noted the high cost of operating services can be difficult for businesses to contribute to.

Interviewed agencies believe that it is important to seize upon areas with nighttime ridership potential. Agencies found it important to capture ridership in areas with a high density of late-shift workers, who are likely to have lower levels of car ownership and lower-income. Both the City of Dekalb and Valley Metro (although it has yet to implement the service) specifically noted the importance of serving industrial areas due to the high ridership potential from low car ownership.

Some agencies have created standalone restrooms due to decreased nighttime restroom access. Many businesses reduced operating hours and closed businesses earlier in the day due to COVID-19 and have not returned to pre-pandemic hours. Many have upheld COVID-19 policies in restricting public use of bathrooms, which prevents operators from accessing restrooms at layovers. In light of this issue, both SFMTA and RTC have built restrooms at bus layover locations.

Further Research Needs

While the literature and case examples provide some insight, more research can be done to understand the customer experience using nighttime services. Because the case example interviews were done with agencies, the synthesis focuses on provision of service.

• Nighttime transit needs among agencies without existing service. The scope of this synthesis included agencies that currently operate or recently operated nighttime services. Further research that includes agencies without existing nighttime service may provide more insight into the challenges that prevent provision of service.
• Provision of microtransit services at night. While the City of Dekalb and RTC, among other survey respondents, operate microtransit services at night, the uses are relatively limited and case example interviews largely focused on fixed-route transit services.
• The relationship between gender and perception of safety using nighttime transit. The literature review revealed that women report feeling lower levels of safety while traveling at night. SFMTA has launched a systemwide gender-based safety initiative and Valley Metro is considering one, but it is yet to be seen what recommendations will be proposed and its applicability to nighttime travel. Beyond perception of safety, further insight can be made into how gender differences in travel patterns seen during the daytime translate to nighttime travel patterns. Gender comprises an important dimension of nighttime transit, as in the case of Belleville, Canada, in which the increase of nighttime ridership on a new microtransit service was driven by women who had not previously used the fixed-route system it replaced.
• Additional mileage without fleet and spare ratio increases. Increasing nighttime service does not contribute to peak vehicle operations but significantly impacts overall mileage and maintenance requirements. Unlike peak hours, which necessitate a large number of vehicles operating simultaneously to accommodate high passenger volumes, nighttime services typically run fewer vehicles. However, extending service hours into the night means that the existing fleet accumulates more miles, leading to increased wear and tear. This heightened usage requires more frequent maintenance and potentially shorter lifespans for vehicles. Consequently, transit agencies must account for higher operational costs associated with vehicle upkeep, even though the immediate demand for additional vehicles during peak times remains unchanged.