Claire Youngblood

29 February 2024

It is no secret that public transit in America desperately needs improvement. In many places, cars are a necessity for those who need to make a reliable daily commute. 45% of Americans are not able to access public transit, and the systems that are in place are often aging and unreliable. According to data from 2017 to 2019, bus ridership “averaged about 4.7 billion trips annually” and was the most used form of public transit in the U.S. (1). Because of the already existing investment in road and highway infrastructure, expanding and improving public transit via bus networks provides an economical path to revamping public transit without having to build and maintain new and expensive rail lines (2). However, these expansions must be coupled with capital investments for maintaining such systems to avoid the kinds of delays and service interruptions that are common in the U.S. due to a lack of investment in maintenance costs (3). For many cities, including Philadelphia, improving the bus system is a cost-effective way to increase the availability and consistency of public transit so that residents can have reliable transportation without needing access to a car. 

SEPTA, which stands for Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, is the transit system servicing Philadelphia and its surrounding counties. The system includes buses, regional rails, subways, and other forms of transportation (4). In order to combat complaints of slow and unreliable bus transit, SEPTA introduced their plan for the first-ever redesign of their bus network, titled “Bus Revolution” (5). 

Overall, SEPTA hopes to provide more reliable and expedient bus transit with the goal of encouraging riders to return to public transit. Between 2013 and 2019, ridership decreased by 20%, despite operating costs increasing by 10%. Additionally, though riders are slowly coming back since the COVID-19 pandemic, SEPTA reports that it is still below 2019 ridership by about 30% to 40% (6). This lower ridership means less income from fares, leaving less money to invest back into transit for maintenance and improvements. By investing in the bus system, SEPTA aims to increase the amount of people who can credibly count on using public transit for their daily commute without having to construct or maintain rail lines.  

According to SEPTA General Manager and CEO Leslie S. Richards, these changes are necessary, as “SEPTA’s bus routes are largely the same as they were when we inherited the system almost 60 years ago.” He continues that the intended updates to the route network were designed to provide more effective, frequent, and reliable transport for riders in the region (7). The proposed route updates would provide more frequent bus service (once every 15 minutes between 6 a.m. and 9 p.m.) on major lines. This comes at the expense of less used suburban routes, whose lines are either being decreased or cut. 

This investment in the system is needed because some of SEPTA’s routes with the highest ridership are also currently some of the least reliable and efficient (8). The changes are not without controversy, as the redrawing of routes has left some suburban areas with fewer routes or increased the number of transfers required to reach center city (9). To continue providing necessary service to the suburbs, I propose that SEPTA continues its plans for the “Bus Revolution” restructuring while simultaneously reallocating additional funding to the bus system over other ancillary projects. 

The initial “Bus Revolution” plan was proposed in fall of 2022. The proposed draft did not increase or decrease the amount of bus services available, but instead reduced the number of overall routes in an effort to increase bus frequency for the most widely used routes. The draft decreased the number of routes from 125 to 99 but increased the number of routes that were designated as having “frequent” services from 33 to 44 (10). Dan Nemiroff, Manager of Planning Programs at SEPTA, spoke about how “Even though the number of routes goes down, the number of frequent routes…is going up” (11). 

After the original draft of the plan was proposed, SEPTA began an intense public input process which revealed many concerns with the initial plan. One area of concern came from Lower Merion Township. Because the plan is to move towards more streamlined routes away from smaller localized lines, many people in this area might be required to walk farther or transfer buses. Though some are willing to make this change in exchange for more reliable and frequent transit options, many raised concerns about how this would affect local communities, including issues regarding how new routes could pose difficulties for older adults or people with disabilities (12).  SEPTA responded to these concerns with a revised plan in March of 2023. The updated draft now only cuts the number of routes down to 106 (as opposed to the previous 99). Additionally, the amount of suburban on-demand zones was decreased to six. (13). Currently, following another round of public hearings in September of 2023, SEPTA’s board is ready to vote on a final draft of the proposed route changes. Considering the scheduled vote on these changes continues to be delayed, the rollout will likely not be implemented until late 2024 or 2025 (14).

Nemiroff highlighted that these changes come in response to complaints and feedback from riders who generally stated bus frequency as a key priority (15). As far as costs go, in addition to the route changes, SEPTA is hoping to further revamp the bus system with a $150 million infrastructure investment intended to build safer stations for riders to wait for the bus (16). This infrastructure investment is imperative; however, if SEPTA were to receive additional funding, it would allow for the new route redesign to increase reliability and efficiency without having to decrease suburban routes.  

The majority of SEPTA’s funding for 2024, around 75%, comes from state and federal funding. This funding to SEPTA includes funding from PennDOT and grants from the Federal Transit Administration (17). Increasing this funding is a much more significant undertaking and involves complex and lengthy processes. Considering the importance of implementing aspects of the route redesign to increase efficiency, I recommend allocating funding from SEPTA’s preexisting budget to the “Bus Revolution” budget. There are two primary project areas that I recommend drawing funding from to gain the financing for increased bus routes. One option is reallocating a portion of funds dedicated to trolley line modernization in favor of bus routes, if necessary. Secondly, I propose scrapping plans for on-demand microtransit zones in favor of regularly scheduled small-scale bus service. 

One of SEPTA’s current most expensive “projects of significance” is the plan to modernize the trolley system (18). Overall, SEPTA has committed over $1.63 billion to update the trolley system through new, longer, and more accessible vehicles, line extensions, and new stations. The proposed budget for 2024 includes $157.17 million for trolley modernization and $15.25 million for bus route redesigns (19). For the time being, if SETPA does not have enough funding to keep some suburban lines running or the necessary funds for infrastructure improvements originally mentioned as part of the “bus revolution,” using some of the funding intended for trolley improvement to supplement bus route improvement could be worthwhile. This can be on a smaller scale, reallocating around $10 million, for example. This small financial increase could allow SEPTA to purchase more buses or provide funds to suburban routes while delaying but not completely derailing the trolley updates. The trolley improvements are still essential and should continue; however, prioritizing the completion of the bus redesign and route improvements is likely a more efficient way to increase overall transit ridership on a faster timeline. 

The current proposed “Bus Revolution” plan includes the addition of new “mobility on-demand zones,” where riders within these areas can call a smaller shuttle to drive them anywhere within the zone for a fixed fare. These zones are located in the suburbs, where regular bus services might be less consistent. They also serve as a bit of a compromise for suburban areas with low ridership. In many suburbs, the route redesign prioritizes creating “frequent service” for major lines, meaning that some suburban routes may not see the same improvement in reliability. Thus, these “mobility zones” are intended to give riders a dependable option for transit within their zone. According to SEPTA, the chartered bus should arrive to the rider who called it within 30 minutes (20). In my opinion, maintaining or creating reliable, regular bus transit routes would be the more effective way to ensure suburban residents have mobility via public transit. This new innovation has potential to provide an effective extension of the public bus system; however, it also raises a few potential issues. I am skeptical about the reliability and efficiency of the bus picking up riders. Without a consistent route, wait times could be very different, and SEPTA documents detailing the plan do not detail the oversight methods that will be in place to ensure that riders really only have a maximum wait time of 30 minutes. I do not recommend this plan, since it has consistently been proven that microtransit routes have less ridership. Despite some attempts, there has not been a single North American transit agency that has increased ridership due to microtransit (21). Given these considerations, I recommend that SEPTA does not move forward with microtransit and instead uses the smaller shuttle-like buses intended for microtransit to run on fixed routes. This would allow them to use the same equipment and still run transit services in a way that is proven to increase ridership (22). 

While it is unfortunate that some projects must be prioritized over others, I believe that bus route improvements are worthwhile. As mentioned above, improving bus routes has smaller infrastructure overhead costs when compared to improving or creating new rail lines, since road infrastructure is already in place. In other cities, undergoing bus network improvement has proven to be an effective way to increase local bus ridership after years of a consistently downward trend. One example comes from Houston. With so many cities showing decreased bus ridership in the past ten years, Houston stands out (23). The city went about a project similar to SEPTA’s to redesign its bus network. After a few months of implementation, “local bus ridership had increased 4.3%” (24), with weekend ridership showing a significant increase, as local buses saw a “13% increase in ridership on Saturdays and a 34% increase on Sundays” (25). SEPTA’s bus revolution should be a funding priority, as it is important for updating Philadelphia routes and increasing ridership. At the same time, an increased amount of funds directed to the project will help alleviate concerns about route reductions.   

Given the importance of a reliable and widely accessible bus system to a city’s public transit, it is important to reevaluate further ways to improve SEPTA’s proposal, as well as other methods of improving Philly’s bus system. One of the main aspects of the current plan is that it does not change the overall amount of services available and thus does not require an increased allocation of funds. Thus, in order to increase frequency of some routes, others had to be streamlined or cut. These cuts are generally the key area of public criticism and concern for new bus routes. SEPTA does not have sufficient funding for the overall amount of bus services to have more frequent trips without having to cut routes to make room for the increased frequency. Further funding should be allocated to increase the number of buses providing service at any given time. Investment in infrastructure maintenance will help ensure that the transit runs smoothly without technical delays. This funding for increased services to the suburbs can come in place of the planned “microtransit zones,” since regular suburban routes are more likely to increase ridership. If necessary, funding can also be reallocated from the trolley modernization project in order to ensure the bus redesign and improvement has necessary finances. This increase in funding would provide more buses running in the system, meaning that SEPTA could increase the benefits of their “Bus Revolution” and make buses a more popular and trustworthy way to commute in Philadelphia. I would especially recommend this reallocation because it would not require an immediate increase in municipal budget, and investing in public transit by bus is an economically efficient way for cities to increase transit ridership. Overall, SEPTA’s drafted “Bus Revolution,” though not without its concerns, can increase the reliability of the city’s public transit. However, I believe that this new route system should be coupled with a more consistent consideration of bus public transit as a priority and increased funding in order to facilitate further improvements. 

---

Image by GK tramrunner RU via Wikimedia Commons under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SEPTA_8146_1200px.jpg 

Works Cited

1. “2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD.” ASCE’s 2021 Infrastructure Report Card, 2021. https://infrastructurereportcard.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Transit-2021.pdf . 
2. Bloom, Nicholas. “Why the City Bus Is Key to Improving U.S. Public Transit.” Governing, March 5, 2023. https://www.governing.com/community/why-the-city-bus-is-key-to-improving-u-s-public-transit#:~:text=Rapidly%20extending%20bus%20networks%20would,and%20maintain%20expensive%20rail%20lines. 
3.  “2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD.” ASCE’s 2021 Infrastructure Report Card, 2021. https://infrastructurereportcard.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Transit-2021.pdf . 
4. “About: SEPTA.” Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority. Accessed February 15, 2024. https://wwww.septa.org/about/. 
5. Lynch, Cherise. “SEPTA Bus Revolution Public Hearings to Begin: Here’s What You Need to Know.” NBC10 Philadelphia, September 12, 2023. https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/transportation-and-transit/septa-bus-revolution-public-hearings-to-begin-heres-what-you-need-to-know/3643618/. 
6. Ibid
7. Ibid
8. SEPTA Bus Revolution: Public Hearings, September 2023. https://www.septabusrevolution.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Bus-Rev-Hearing-Presentation-083023.pdf. 
9. Fitzgerald, Thomas. “SEPTA Bus Riders Want Faster Service, but Many Hate How Their Routes Could Change.” https://www.inquirer.com, January 5, 2023. https://www.inquirer.com/transportation/septa-bus-revolution-route-changes-complaints-20230105.html.
10. Tomczuk, Jack. “SEPTA’s Bus Revolution Network Redesign Poised for Final Approval.” Metro Philadelphia, December 12, 2023. https://metrophiladelphia.com/septa-bus-revolution-redesign/. 
11.   MacDonald, Tom. “SEPTA Is Considering Cutting 26 Routes to Improve On-Time Service.” WHYY, October 8, 2022. https://whyy.org/articles/septa-considering-cutting-26-bus-routes-improve-time-service/.
12. Rizzo, Emily. “A Look into SEPTA’s New Transit Systems Proposed for the Philadelphia Suburbs.” WHYY, December 2022. https://whyy.org/articles/septa-suburbs-transit-systems-proposal/.  
13. Lynch, Cherise. “SEPTA Releases Final Version of Its Bus Network Redesign.” NBC10 Philadelphia, December 12, 2023. https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/transportation-and-transit/septa-releases-final-version-of-its-bus-network-redesign/3719987/. 
14. Costu, Safak. “SEPTA’s Bus Revolution Faces Delays: Balancing Improvements and Concerns.” BNN, February 8, 2024.  
15. MacDonald, Tom. “SEPTA Is Considering Cutting 26 Routes to Improve On-Time Service.” WHYY, October 8, 2022. https://whyy.org/articles/septa-considering-cutting-26-bus-routes-improve-time-service/. 
16. Lynch, Cherise. “SEPTA Bus Revolution Public Hearings to Begin: Here’s What You Need to Know.” NBC10 Philadelphia, September 12, 2023. https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/transportation-and-transit/septa-bus-revolution-public-hearings-to-begin-heres-what-you-need-to-know/3643618/. 
17. SEPTA Bus Revolution: Public Hearings, September 2023. https://www.septabusrevolution.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Bus-Rev-Hearing-Presentation-083023.pdf. 
18. Ibid.
19. Ibid. 
20. SEPTA Forward, Bus Revolution: Draft Bus Network. Accessed February 2024. https://www.septabusrevolution.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/SEPTA_FactSheet_DraftNetwork_RD1.pd. 
21. Garraud, Patrick. “Opinion: ‘on-Demand’ Bus Service Won’t Do the Job in the Suburbs.” WHYY, May 15, 2022. https://whyy.org/articles/opinion-on-demand-bus-service-wont-do-the-job-in-the-suburbs/. 
22. Ibid
23. Olin, Andy. “How Metro Made Bus Service a Priority and Became a Transit Trendsetter.” Kinder Institute for Urban Research | Rice University, January 2020. https://kinder.rice.edu/urbanedge/how-metro-made-bus-service-priority-and-became-transit-trendsetter. 
24. “Metro Bus Network Redesign, Houston.” National Association of City Transportation Officials. Accessed February 2024. https://nacto.org/case-study/metro-bus-network-redesign-houston/.
25. Binkovitz, Leah. “Houston Bus Ridership Increases after Its Simplified Redesign.” Government Technology, April 23, 2021. https://www.govtech.com/fs/houston-bus-ridership-increases-after-its-simplified-redesign.html.