Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - August 19, 1992 (92)• ��il Jl i r J' C r� AGENDA TITLE: Receive City of Lodi Transit Needs Assessment and System Plan MEETING DATE: August 19. 1992 PREPARED BY: Assistant City Manager RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City Council receive the City of Lodi Transit Needs Assessment and System Plan. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: For the past number of years the City of Lodi has heard at its Unmet Transit Needs hearings the statement, "The City needs a fixed route bus system." After the 1991-92 hearing the City of Lodi, in conjunction with San Joaquin County Council cf Governments (COG), hired the transportation pl.,nning firm of Arthur Bauer &Associates, Inc. to evaluate the long-term transit needs in the City of Lodi. The bottom line of the study is a recommendation that the City develop fixed route service as an adjunct to the present demand response service. The report gives a set of short and long-term steps to fully implement their recocmendations. The final chapter of the report outlines a financial and capital plan utilizing Urban Mass Transportation Administration (WrA) funds as well as Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds. It is suggested this plan be presented to the City Council at a 'Shirtsleeve Session." Before that date, copies should be forwarded to the Ad Hoc Transportation Committee and to the Chamber of Commerce Government and Transportation Review Coumnittee so those organizations can provide input and comment as the Council considers these recommendations. A copy of the report is on file in the office of the City Clerk. FUNDING: None required Respectfully submitted, "Serry L. Glenn Assistant City Manager JLG:br CCCCMS?2 /TXTA.07A dQ APPROVED: ..,�•� THOMAS A. PETERSON racyc*d pepw CHy !Manager CC -1 CITY OF LODI TRANSIT NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND SYSTEM PLAN Volume i Prepared for City of Lodi and San Joaquin County CoUnci1 of Governments Prepared by Arthur Bauer & Associates, Inc. in assoclatlon vvith Meta Information Services The preparation of this reportlras been financed, In part; through Technical Studios Grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation, Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA), under Section 8 of tho Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, as amended. August 3,1992 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1- Introduction, Summary of Findings and Recommendations Transit System Issue P =t Organization Findings Recommendations SECTION 2 - Current SeMin Characteristics Lodi Pubic Transit Lodi 7is& SECTION 3 - System Goals and Objectives Planning Lssues Service Demand issues Funding Issues Iastlduat Issues Transit System Goals and Objectives Elements of the Strategic Focus SECTION 4 - Evaluation of the service Program Performance Data Operations Analysis SECTION 5 - AnalysEs of the On -Board and Community Survey Results On -Board Survey Comparison cf Survey Results Conclusions PAGE 1-1 12 1-3 t-4 1-6 2-1 2-1 2-6 3-1 3-1 3-3 3-5 3-8 3-9 3-13 4-1 4-1 4-1 5-1 5-1 5-8 5-12 + Antwx Bt & Assoalales. Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 6 - Fiw Year Service Plan and Implementation Schedule Phase I - Develop/implement Transition Strategy Phase II -Prepare Operational Plan Phase III - Implement Fixed Route/Denad-Response Service Implementation Schedule Linking Improvements to Sysban Objectives SECTION 7 - Recommended Financial and Capital Plan Financial Plan Operating Revenues Capital Program Monitoring CaphVOpemting Requirements PAGE 6-1 6-2 6-7 6-S 6-16 6-16 7-1 7-1 7-7 7-9 7-13 Arthur Bauer blAssccines, Im TABLES PAGE 2-1 Growth and Development in the City of Lodi, iii Arthvr Raver e� Associates, Inc, Actual and Projected: 1970- 2010 2-3 2-2 Lodi Public Transit Ridership Characteristics During FY 90-91 2-5 2-3 Orio of Trips Made Edi Lodi Public Transit During FY 90-91 2-6 2-4 Lodi. Public Transit Operating Characteristics: FY 82-83 Through FY 91-92 2-7 3-1 I D A Allocations for the City of Lodi: FY 82-83 - FY 90-91 3-6 3-2 Fare -box Revenues for Ioch Public Transit: FY 834B - FY 90-91 3-7 3-3 Lodi Public Transit Goals and Objectives 3-10 4-1 lndkators for Lodi Public Transit 4-2 4-2 Transit System Performance Statistics for FY 90-91 4-7 4-3 Financial Summary for Iodi Public Transit: FY 82-83 - FY 90-91 4-10 44 Performance Evaluation Matrix 4.11 5-1 D a y and Time cd= Travel for On -Board Respondents 5-2 5-2 Suggestions for Improving Lodi Public Transit Service 5-6 5-3 Comparison of On-Board/Telephone Survey Results 5-9 5-4 Reasons People Don't Lbe Ladj's Transit System On A Frequent Basis 5-10 5-5 Suggestions for Improving Lodi Public Transit Service 5-11 6-1 Projected Ridership for Lodi Public Transit 6-13 7-1 Demand-ResNrssc Five Year Financial Plan: FY 92 - FY 96 7-2 7-2 Demand -Response Capital Budget 7-3 7-3 Ebted Route Five Yea; Financial Plan: FY 92 - FY 96 7-4 7-4 Fixed Route Capital Budget 7-5 7-5 Avaflabiliry cf Section 9 Rrds: FY 92- FY 96 7-10 7-6 Lodi Public Transit Five Year Financial Summary: FY 92 - FY 96 7-14 iii Arthvr Raver e� Associates, Inc, FIGURES PAGE 2-1 study Area 2-2 4-1 Lodi Public Transit Organization Chart 4-4 61 Potential Fixed -Route Transit Routes 6-9 iv Arthur Bauer & Associates, trw- SECTION 1 0 Arthur Bauer & Associates, Inc. Consultants in Transportations Public Finance SECTION 1 Intro -duction, Summary cif Rndings, and Recommendations 'Ile Sari Joaquin County Council cf Governme,ts (COG). workingin conjunction with the Cityof Lodii. has retained Arthur Bauer & Associates, Iry and Meta Information S e ry ki _-s to prepare a transit needs assessment for the City cC Lodi. 'Me purpose of the assessment is to: • Conduct an assessment of the Cifs existing and near -tern transit needs; ■ Evaluate the City's ability to respond to th= needs; and based on #is analysis. • Frcpxare a Tina] report with spocific recommendations and sn imp Le.mentadon schedule for system Lmprovements. Tasks m performing this study induded gathering data desrnbing the cdstirig transit syAmA conducting both community and on -board transit Sys, developing a W cf system Pah and objec&vm, evaluating short-term capital and operating costs, and preparing a set of recommendations and an implmtentation schedule for transit system improvements Material m 1Fis assessment draws upon land use. population, employment, ind !rousing data obtaL"d from city and county planning documents and from conversations with staff from Lodi Public rAasit_, the City Managers Of% and the city Planning department. Information on existing tr_cr�t service was obtained from a review cf the city of Lodi's Five Year Transit Pian: 1985-1989, the COG's annuai.#ttafp& and DefwnCnation of Unmet Tmnsit Needs (FY 1941-1992), and frnn other documentation provided by the City cf t.odi and the COG. 1-1 Arlt o Baueri8 Aw4daw. MG TRANSIT SYSTEM ISSUES By providing convenient. reliable. and affordable transit service. Lodi Public Transit, a demand - V type has been successful in meeting the transit needs of Lodi residents, particularly the elderly and handicapped, It is dear. however. that with population growth and economic development, the existing system sometimes has difficulty in meeting its service objectives. In addition. based on testimony presented through the annual transit needs hearing process conducted by the city and the COG. it is evident that a change is also occurring in the transit needs of people using the system. Increased service hours. transit service to the county hospital and courthouse in Stockton. the establishment of fixed mute service, and the provision cf intercity s- r- between Lodi and Stockton have been suggested. Sq*x t for Wreased transit service n Lodi may reflect the general level of public support towards transit found at the county, state, and federal lcveL This support has been demonstrated several different prays. Measure K, adopted by San Joaquin County voters in November of 1990, raise -d the county sales tax one-half cent to finance transit and other transportation improvements in the county over the noel 20 years On the state level, voter approval of Propositions 108.111, and 116 in June cf 1994 also provided substantial increases in funding available for transit and highway ftnpro ements, local road and street repairs, and congestion relief projects. Finally, recent aoag. al passage cf the Intermodal Surface Transportation ETx iatcy Act provides for a significant increase in federal funding for transit over the next six years. Passage of Propositions 108 and 111 also triggered new state requirements for rdducing automobile congestion in urban tineas. San Joaquin County and other counties with urbanized areas with greater than 50,000 people were required to prepare congestion management programs that rely, in part, on the use of transit for improving overall mobility. F'= -Uy, requirements under the1(�;fryrr,;a Cltan Air At and the federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 encourage the development of transit as a method for reducing regulated air pollutants. These requirements also have the effect of helping decrease traffic congestion and improving transportation system efficiency. 1-2 Anhur Bau4r b Assoct9w, Inc. TRANSIT SYSTEM ESS'.' =S By providing convenient. reliable. and affordable transit service. Lodi Public trdnsit, a demand- resgonsc type service, has been suo:esscul in meeting the transit needs of Lodi residents, particularly the elderly and handicapped. It is dear. 'However, that with population growth and economic development. the existing systern sornetimes has difficulty in meeting its service cbjecdvw. In addition. based on testimony presented through the annual transit needs hearing process conducted by the city and the CCG, it is evident tha: a change is also occurring in the transit need -s of people using the system. Increased service hours, transit service to the county hospital and courthouse in Stockton, the establishment of fixed route scrrice, and the provision of intercity scrvica bctwetn Lodi and Stock -ton have been suggested. Support for increased transit service in Lodi mayreQect the general level of public support towards transit found at the county. state, and federal lcwl Uh; s support has been demonstrated several different ways. Measure K, adopted by San Joaquin County voters in November of 1990, raised the county sales talc ors -e -half cent to £mance transit and other transportation improvements in the munry over the next 20 years. On the state level, voter approval of Propositions 108, 111. and 116 m June of 1998 also provided substantial israa in funding available for transit and highway improvements, local road and strett repairs, and congestion relief projects. Finally, recent congressional passage cf the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act provides for a significant increase in federal funding for transit over the nu! s;x years, Passage of Propositions 108 and 1 I 1 also triggered new state requirements for reducing automobile cxnigestion in urban areas. San Joaquin County and other counties with urbanized areas with gmter than 50,000 pegAe were required to prepare congestion management programs that rely, in part, on the use of transit for improving avtrall mobUlty. F'nally, requirements under the California Clean Air Act and the federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 encourage the development of transit as a method for reducing regulate air pollutants. These requirements also have the effect of helping decrease traffic congestion and improving transportation system efficiency. These circumstances establish a framework for transit planning that includes the following themes: ■ Actions mist be taken that wit! contribute to the improvement of transit service in the City of Lodi; ■ On a local and regional level actions must be taken that will contribute to the improvement of regional air quality; ■ Land use planning must be UnW to transportation. e.g., the de rn a n d for travel generated by new development must be consistent with the supply of tran-�tion facltics and xTvices; and • Management of traffic must be done to ensure that there is no further degradation cf operating levels of service on the Street and road system during peak travel hours. Although responding to these themes is not solely the responsibility of the transit sector and docs require the development of a mor�r=tcd transpostatiion system response, the purpose of this ame-nt and plan is to evaluate Lodi Public Transit and its future role in providing transit service in Lodi. REPORT ORGANIZATION The report is ongmi.aed into seven sections. The remainder of this fust section provides a summary of study findings and re�mrn mdations for implementation of transit system improvements over the nezt f"" years. Section Two describes the casting system, its organizational structure and operating history. Information is also included that provides the reader with some summary geographic and demographic characteristics of the Lodi area. Section Three desan'bes the system's goals and objectives and performance standards. Where appropriate, reference is made to the section of the Plan that discusses the particular performance standards. 1-3 Arthur Ba* a Associates, Inc. The fourth section contains an evaluation cf the service program and opetations. Specific operational areas discussed include transit system management and organization, service planning. personnel management and training financial planning and control, and marketing and public relations. S,tction Five descr bes the results of the on -board and community surveys conducted as part of the transit ass -c rnent. A oarparisai of the two data sets is provided along with some conclusions about public attitudes towards transit in the City cf Lodi. Section Six contains the rccornmended five-year operating plan and implementation schedule for the system. Also discussed are federal statutory and regulatory requireanents for transit system cornpliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act. 7ht ]ast section, Section Seven, contains the recammmded financial and capital plan for the five- year planning period, Included is ayear-by•year capital program listing the purchases and projects needed for operation of the system. A discussion and jus Lamtion for each project listed is included. Revenue sources including income f=nthe farebox and other sources are described and pr o j ect ed for the planning peri ad . Induded in the Appendix is detailed iauom-ation on the two surveys undertaken as peri of the transit assessment r I T -19 E, ■ Between 1970 and 1990 the citys population grew by 81 percent and is expected to grow by another 47.5 percent between 1990 and the year 2010. Housing and employmentwiil also increase sipirontly during the next twenty years. • Lodi Public Transit ridemhip has increased from nearly 56,400 to 86,600 between 1982 and 1991. Average ridership is approximately 1-4 M h u r Bauer & Associates. Inc. 250 people per day, with 80 percent of the passengers either elderly cr handicapped. ■ Lodi Tama operates 24 hours a day seven days a week. Between July 1990 and June 30, 1991, the taxi company carried 18,500 people. Specific transit sysiem goals and objectives include (I) meeting the transit needs of all city residents; (2) providing for efficient and cost- effective transit s -e r ; (3) maximize management and operational resources (4) secure stable sources cf funding; (5) increase ridership by fostering community support for the transit system; and (6) ensure that the servita operates with the highest level of reliability and customer appal. • Between FY 82-83 and FY 90-91, the transit system achieved an average farcbm recwery rate of 17B per=t, a rate well above the ten percent minimum required by state law. ■ The cityhas a goal of havingpasscngers picked up within 45 minutes r after they call the dr_spatchex. However. when there is heavy demand for transit service (i.e., when c s exceed 300 a *, it can become difficult for the system to meet this goal. ■ Due to concern about overburdening the transit system, neither the city nor the operator has publicized availability cf the service. Even with the absence cf a marketing program, passenger ridership continua to increase. ■ In comparing the onboard and community sun ey results, on -board respondents rated Lodi's tr-ansit system much higher than telephone respondents. It is not surprising that people who ride the transit 1-5 Arthur Bauer 6Associates. Inc. system are more favorable than the general }public, many of whom do not use transit. ■ Both groups expressed strong support for establishing Sundayservice. In addition, there as greater community support for fixed route service than found among existing transit users. RECOMMENDATIONS Lodi Public Transit should begin a three phase gradual program for implementing both dcmand- response and fixed route transit service forLodi residents. Implemented over a five year period. the phased program will consist of the follow ng elements: ■ Phase I - Develop/impletut Tr2nsition Strategy, July 1992 through June 1994_ This phase will consist of acquiring larger vehicles, improving the existing dispatch system hiring additional persanncl, initiating Sunday and passenger reservation/subscription ser*r, purchasing an automated data reporting system, securing FTA Stction 9 funding, and preparing a transit system marketing plan. The principal service goat is to reduce passenger wait time from 45 to no longer than 30 minutes. • Phase H - Prepare An Operational Plan, July 1993 through June 1994. The plan will .ir�dude detarls on proposed faced routes, scheduling and equipment requirements, fareboxstrvcture, estimates of capital and operating marketing and promotion. and how fixed route service will operate. The pin should also discuss how best to integrate the fixed route and demand -response transit SCfY IGCS, ■ Phase III - Implement 7 sexed Route and Dem a n d - R es pa cl s a Service, July 1994. The fixed route service will consist of six vehicles 1-6 Arthur Bauer & Associates. Inc. operating on three routes. Lodi Public Transit will need to closely monitor both fued route and demand -response ridership and system costs. 1-7 Arthur Bauer & Associate:, Inc. SECTION 2 I* Arthur Bauer & Associates, Inc. Consultants in Transportation & Public Finance SECTION 2 Current Service Characteristics This section describes public transit service provided in the City of Lodi. Specific issues discussed indude the operation of Lodi Public Tkasik its major transit destinations and ridership. fare structure. and system maintenance requirements. In addition. the City of Lodi is served by Lodi %KL which is also desarbed in this section. I 11DO1 C, 10-= r _ .i -illi Lodi Public Mansit a demand -responsive type service sometimes referred to as Dial -A -Ride. currently awsists cf five full-sizewagons, three ucdasys, and two wheelchair -accessible vans that are owme-d bythe city andoperated by Lodi Cab Company. Eachvehicle can comfortably accommodate four to free passengers. The transit system service area consists of the City of Lodi, plus the unincorporated areas of Woodln-i-dge, the Arbor Mobile Home Park in Acampo, and the Freeway Mobile Home Park located south cE the Lodi City limits. Ser, --ice to this unincorporated area is provided under a contractual arrangement between Lodi and San Joaquin County. Added together. the service area is appateiy 18.5 square miles in size. As shown in Figure 2-1, the city is served by a grid pattern street system. Major north -south roadways irdude Lower Sacramento Road, Ham Lane. Hutchins Street, Church Street, Stockton Street; Central Avenge, Chcroket Lane/B-99, and Slate Route 99. Major east -west facilities indude Turner Road, Lockefard Street, Elm Street, Pine Strc --t, Lodi Avenue, Kettleman Lane (State Route 12). and Harney Lane. Kettleman Lane provides regional access to and from the west, 2-1 Anhur Bauer & Associates, Inc. CITY OF LODI TRANSIT ASSESSMENT Figure 2-1 Study Area Iq,cos ..C4ti Sq. Cor+sr . Carl 14, (D 0 n7 14 nR :A �n ^ w, F :NMR r' N 1. 80awdan Parts S. h4Uw." SCrvka Cl.trrr 4. Kr*o Paws S tkfrvynl% Orrwrlmmd Scorn S. Lad Monwnlal Hmnpilwl 7. SedM Sftwly Adr *k- Corker •. 14U9rf*A StrOot SepKrr Comwmnnycodow 0- C.wet►kw"4Pok* Statkor► a Cir tM W Chww6w a1 Cormnwe 11. Lod "aft sdwmi 12. Teti pepot 13. l'.momwW Bos Dogxa 14. W" 15.00 If. WOoduldpo Cann- Pw.k 17. woo4wWps Mob% E defts Ilk Gwood mm W. L" Slod'M A Lawftnce Pwrk nn 20. ('rtrpO F090m Cmp*x �-m FT_it3*3 0 T) t 7n O = 0 n7 14 nR :A �n ^ w, F :NMR r' N 1. 80awdan Parts S. h4Uw." SCrvka Cl.trrr 4. Kr*o Paws S tkfrvynl% Orrwrlmmd Scorn S. Lad Monwnlal Hmnpilwl 7. SedM Sftwly Adr *k- Corker •. 14U9rf*A StrOot SepKrr Comwmnnycodow 0- C.wet►kw"4Pok* Statkor► a Cir tM W Chww6w a1 Cormnwe 11. Lod "aft sdwmi 12. Teti pepot 13. l'.momwW Bos Dogxa 14. W" 15.00 If. WOoduldpo Cann- Pw.k 17. woo4wWps Mob% E defts Ilk Gwood mm W. L" Slod'M A Lawftnce Pwrk nn 20. ('rtrpO F090m Cmp*x �-m FT_it3*3 0 T) t 7n Between 1970 and 1994 the city's population grew nearly 81 percent and is extwed to grow by another 47.5 percent between 1990 and 2010. Significant increases in housing and the number of jobs in Lodi are also anticipated during the nett 20 years. Table 2-1 below illustrates actual and pmjeabed growth and development between 1970 and 2010 for the city. Table 2-1 Growth and Development In the City of Lodi, Actual and Projected: 1970- 2010 Year Population Housing Units Employment 1970 28.ML 10,333 Unavailable 1980 35,221 14.811 15,096 1990 51.874 19,261 19.136 2000 62789 23,479 24.258 2010 76,539 28,621 30.747 Source: City cf Lodi General Plan and the Sart Joaquin County Council of Govaranmi% 1992. principal industries in the study area irwJude agricWture, food processing, health kervices, and retail. Nkjor employers in,- ude General NlMs (900 employees), Lodi Unified School MAI- (2,200); Paafic Coast Producers (300 full-time and 150Q seasonal); and Lodi Memorial Hospital (650). Major Transit Destinations Lodi Public Transit currently operates Monday through Friday from 7 am. to 7 p.m. and on Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Based on discussions with city staff and a review of ridership logs indications are that major travel destinations in the city indude Hutchins Street Square. downtown Lodi, Lodi Memorial HcyspitaL several are -a grocery stores (Raieys, Frys, and Safeway). the Vineyard shopping center on Kettleman Lane, Mervyn's Department Store. and Loci Center. 2-3 Anhw Bauer a Associm". Enc. Organizational Stnmbme Lodi Public Transit is operated under a contract between the Chy of Lodi and Lodi Cab Company. a private transportation provider. located at 510 East Lodi Avenue in Lodi. Overall management of the contract is the responsibility of the Assistant City Manager while day-to-day operation of the transit scrvit is providedby the taxi company. The city sets policy, conducts planning, and handles financial matters. The operator is responsible for hiring and training all operating personnel and for supervision of daiiy operations, The city owns and maintains the vehicles. The contract between the city and the twd company requires that all normal operating expenses. including fuel, insurance, and maintenance costs be borne by the taxi company. System Ridership As shown in Table 2-2, 90 percent of the people who use the system arc elderly or handicapped. n addition aver 95 perccnt cC the pe -ogle who ride Lodi Public Transit are people travelling to and from destinations within the city limits as illustrated in Table 2-3. Transit system ridership has iUca e=4 from 56,389 to 85,343 during a nine year period between Fiscal Xser (FY) 82-83 and FY 90-91, a 513 percent i=ease. Average daily ridership is 264 passenger (Saturday included in this union). Vehicle service hours, the number of hours the system has operated avex a 12 -month period, has increased by 71.5 percent, from 9,448 to 16.200 ojr the Same tisneframe- There was also growth in the total number of revenue szrv-ice miles, or the total number of miles traveled by a vehide used for public transportation for which a fare is caUected. B-erween FY K- 83 and FY 91-92, revenue service miles increased from 97,529 to 189,200 per year. a 93.9 percent incase over the ten year period. Table 2-4 shows the changes in these three transit system parameters. 2-4 Arthur Baue( & Associates, int. Table 2 4 Lodi Public Transit Operating Characteristics FY 82-83 Through FY 91-92 Fiscal Number cf Vehicle Service Revenue Service Year • Passengers Hours Miles 82-83 56.389 Unavailable 97,529 83-84 62.812 9.448 106.140 8445 60,238 9,342 1(77.0619 85-86 71.599 9.042 1(77.971 86-87 74,771 11 136.490 87-88 76.207 12,000 140.069 8$-89 70.842 12.639 141.767 89-90 74538 13,580 156,104 90-91 81,130 14.99D 178,488 91-92 86,600 16.200 189.200 • FY 82 through 90 are actual; FY 91-92 is projected by the city. Source_ City of Lodi Transit System Pedormance Audits. June 1986 and June 1989. and the April 1992 COG draft publication entitled Anis tots and Delamination of Unmet Transit Net& for Fiscal Y,ear'1992-93. 2.7 Arillut BM4 & Associates, Inc- SECTION3 0 A►ibur Bauer & Associates. Inc. Consultants in Transportation& Public Finance SECTION 3 System Goals and Objeetives A number c£ program issues ultimately will innuewe the provision cf transit service in the city. Tjwse issues include planning service demand, fmAirg. and institutional issues; This portion of the report describes these issues and creates the framework for the development cf transit system goals and objativm Planning issues in a doping area arc critical to the performance of transit service over time bxaus.e the factors underlying growthwsil determine whether transit service in Lodi should evolve from a demand•responsr type service to a fxed route transit ser,,im The growth factors are population and landuse, e,g., mix and ]omni of housing and employment Other planningrelated facb=indudc air gouty and congestion management which ].ink both land use planning and Demographics As de='bed in the last cation, the city's population is erpected to grow 475 percent between 1990 and 2010. The city also anticipates significant irrcxcases in housing and empkryment, with the number cf housing units increasing by 48.6 percent and the number cf jabs 4=easing by 617 percent over the next 2fl ,•yrs. Local Land Use In April cf 1987 the City of Lodi began its process for updating the city's general plan. During the following year the city council. planning commission, and the general public considered three different planning optionswhich were evaJuated fortheir impacts on landust, housing population. 3-1 Anrwr B a w 3 Associates, Inc. employment. public s-_rvkxs, and transportation. As a result of this analysis the city council in March of I9Q9 selected a land useplan calling for a 2.4 percent (compounded) limit on growth which is to be implemented through the approval cf a 3imited number of resit t6tiaf (both single and multi -family) building permits each year. Air Qualcty While air quality has emerged as a significant issue. :he response to the co" provides both opportunities and comstma n s, The constraints in the extreme may involve curtailment of development in non -attainment areas. On the other hand. responding to the problem cf substandard air quality presents the City of Lodi with an opportunity to maximize the benefit cf public transit. lRespons7ity for implementingan air quality program, which is required by law, ruts with the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District. The District includes all cf the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin and represents nearly 28 million residents living in San Joaquin, Stani.slaus, Mercrcl, Ma&r-a., Tultaee, Kings, Fresno, and Kern Counties. Under federal and state law, the air pollution control district must adopt a program that has a heavy transportation component, including the following: ■ Implement reasonably available transportation control measures; ■ Establish an irdinect source control program; Develop public education programs to promote actions to reduce emissions from transportation and areawide sources; v • Develop agreements with implementing agencies; and • Establish monitoring and compliance procedures. 3-2 Anhtx Ba,et &jAssoci*m. lrw— Compliance with air quality requirements may present the opportunity to Link long range transit development with land developrnent, Corxjestion Management In November of 1491, the San Joaquin County Oarx:i1 of Governments adopted a Congestion Management Program (CMP) for San Joaquin County. The CIMT is designed to reduce automobUe congestion by (a) caordinating land use, air quality, and transportation planning within the county, and (b) integrating local. regional. and state planning policies. One way of reducing congestion is by encouraging the use of transit as a transportation alternative. As a result, the CMP descnliea specific transit standards and sets minimum performance requirements :hat are to be implemented by transit operators in the county. SERVICE DEMAND ISSUES There are several service demand issues which should be considered: compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, future establishment of fixed -route transit service, and the &welopment of inter -city transit service betwe-en Lodi and the City of Stockton. Each of these issues s discussed below. Compliance With ADA In 1990 congress enacted the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) 41 d is designed to provide equal2cem for pasonswithdisabtiities to transportation, publicaoxmmo&tions, publics�nnccs, and telecommunications, The US. department of Transportation has issued regulations to implement the transportation element of the ADA. These regulations affect Ml transportation providers, whether or not the -f receive federal funding. Briefly. the regulations require the following: ■ Demand responsive transit systems must ire physically accessible; 3-3 Ant" Baued & Associates. Inc_ ■ Accessible features of vehicles must be maintained in woricing order and wheelchair lifts must be tested on a regular basis; ■ All employees who are in contact with disabled individuals must be trained to operate vehicle equipment safely; ■ All information services must be aoxssible to vision and hearing impaired individuals; and ■ Public trw%9)c .ation programs utilizing existing facilities must be able when viewed in their entirety. Similar requirements grist for fixed route transit service. As mentioned earlier. anly two of Lodi Public Transit's vehicles are wheelchair equipped at the present time. However. ala contractor staff regularly receive training for use cf wheelchair ramps and other vehkie equipment. Due to the importance of t1ms new law. Lodi Public Transit wM need to continue monitoring the implementation of ADA requirements. Fixed Route SeMce During the last several years a number of people living and working in Lodi have suggested the rated for tstabilshing fared route transit s^rvsc'- for the city. In 1994 a group of social scr4ce organizations and the city dcvelcpcd and circulated a Lransit survey. The survey was designed to determine the transit nem of Lodi residents. According to the COD's Anal 4 and D ttems>r»udM of Unmet Transit Needs fir FY 91-92. the preliminary survey results i.nd ica t ed that a majority of respondents who use Lodi Public Transit were sa t isfi ed with transit sera ices but that 55 percent cf the respondents would use a fixed route bus system if it were available. City staff and members of the city council are concerned, however, that insufficient funds exist to support a fund route 3-4Arthur Baur & Assooves. Inc. later -city Transit Service Currently. San Joaquin County provides demand -response inter -city transit service through its County Area Transit (CAT) system. CAT is primarily used by transport at ion -disadvantaged people for travel between cities to obtain essential goods and services such as government services or access to medical facilities. During the last several years, a number of Lodi residents have (tcpressed interest in having inter- city transit service established for travel to Stockton and Sacramento. With adoption CC the Measure K Program (seediscussion below), the COC has inititated an eFfi,rt to prepare a county- wide transit plan that evaluates intercity and inter -regional transit needs.. Should this type of service be organized lurking Lodi with neighboring cities Lodi Public Transit riders could potentially travel from the city to Stockton, Sacramento. and other area communities. ww D I N GISSUES Funding is a complex arena of activity with certain sources as a given and bthtrs problematic Each source cif revenue --TDA, sta6e funds, and local sales tax—has its own terms and conditions governing how it is aztr� and used.. The issue ultimately becomes how to position the City of Lodi to maidmize the use of its revenues, Two principal revenge sounns are discussed below TDA and farebox revenges, Funds for Lodi Public Transit may also be available under the Federal Transit Administration's Scrtion 9 Program. Funds could also be available under San Joaquin County's Measure K program Each cE these funding saaroes is also discussed. Transportation Development A d The Transportation Development Act (TDA) is a local transportation funding source based upon a onequarter percent local sakes t a r 7his is one of the most stable sources of transportation funding for the City of Lodi. The first priority for these funds is to support public transit. The 3-5 Ant" 83466 d Aswcwes, Inc. funds may also be used to plan. construct, and maintain local streets and roads. These expenditures are allowed only if the regional transportation planning agency, the San Joaquin County Council of Governments. finds that there are no unmet transit needs that are reasonable to meet. Late; amendments to the law established a farebox recovery requirement as the principal eligibility requirement for receiving TDA funds. Historically, the City of Lodi was requ;red to maintain a minimum recovery ratio cf ten percent f; orn fares paid on the Lodi Public Transit system. This ratio has recently increased to 20 percent with the city being designated as an urban area following the 1990 Census (i.e., the city's population now exceeds 50,000 residents). Based on the census, the city has five years to achieve Ws 20 percent farebox recovery requirement. Since FY 1983, the city has received approximately $7.1 million in TDA funds, approximately 18 percent of the total has been allocated for transit. Table 3-1 depicts this recent growth. Table 3-1 TDA Allocations for the City of Lodi FY 82-83 Through FY 90-91 M-Crml 31ie� Streets and Roads Percent Transit Percent metal 82-83 5743,433 94 $ 44,000 6 $787,433 83-84 521,485 92 44,000 8 565.485 84-85 664,793 91 68,080 9 732,873 85-86 676,565 88 90,425 12 766,930 86-87 543.929 79 143,000 21 686.929 87-88 557,701 76 179.805 24 737,06 88-89 687.966 77 201.260 23 889,226 89-90 717,599 74 248,813 26 966,472 90-91 788,988 75 262965 25 1.051,853 Totals $5,902,459 82 $1.252.308 18 $7,154,767 Source: State Controllers Office 3-6 Arthur Ra+w &/Associates, Inc_ Farebox Revanues As shown in Table 3-Z, farebox revenues for Loci Public Transit has steadily increased over time. For the nine year period between FY 82-83 and FY 90-91, annual farebox reti,enues have ranged from 531.029 to 543.750. Available Federal Funding The Federal Transit Administration makes available several formula grant programs for transit systems. Under the Section 9 program, the federal government makes available funds on a formula basis to all urbanized areas in the country. While the city has only recently become eligible for these funds. Lodi should work with the COG to apply for needed capital and operating assistance under this program 'T'nese funds could constitute a significant long-term source of funding for the transit systern. A more detailed description of federal and other funding opportunities is provided in Sxtion 7 of this document. Table 3-2 Farebox Revenues for Lodi Public Transit FY 82-83 Through FY 94-91 Fiscal Farebox Fiscal Farebox Yaw Revenues Year Revemies 82-83 531.029 87-88 S44,000 83-84 37.052 95-89 41,255 84-85 34,8' 89-90 40,500 85-86 44,405 90-91 43,750 86-81 46.467 Source: State Controllers Office. 3-7 ArRrur Sauer & Associates, Inc, Measure K In November of 1990. San Joaquin County voters approved an increase in the local sales tax to fund transportation improvements. The Local Transportation Improvement Program.r"mmonly referred to as Measure K requires the Local Transportation Authority (the COG) to prepare and annually update a seven ye-ar Transit Plan for use in allocating sales tax revenues. Measure K also requires that the priority order for inter -city and elderly and handicapped transit funds will be as follows: ■ Inter -city bus service between Stockton, Lodi, Manteca, Lath4op. Tb9cy,Esealon, and Ripon for all trip purposes; ■ Capital purchases such as vehicles for providing transit service in all communities to the elderly, the handicapped, and the transportation disadvantaged; and Operating expenses for transit services to the elderly and the handicapped, and the transportation disadvantaged. INSTn'LMONAL ISSUES Two institutional issues have been identified: Lodi Public Transit's relationship with the COG for coordinating and improving transit planning for the city, and developing and implementing a marketing progran. Relationship Wdh the COG Since the COG series as the primary transportation planning agency in San Joaquin County and plays a central role in the allocation of transportation funding. Lodi will want to continue working closely with COG staff in planning for future improvements to the city's transit system. COG staff can assist the city by identifying sources of transit funding and evaluating service delivery issues. 3-8 Arthur Bailer 8 Associates, Inc. Transit System Marketing To increase ridership and improve public acceptance of the transit system, Lodi Public Transit should prepare and implement a detailed marketing and promotion plan. The pi hou:. issues including the design and distribution cf marketing materials and the implementation of advertising strategies and service improvements. Advertising may also provide an additional source of revenue for transit system activities. TRANSIT SYSTEM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Based on the information reviewed and the analysis presented above, a set cf s b transit system goals and oij«xives have been developed. As shown in Table 3-3, the six goals include the following: = Meet the transit needs of ail city residents; ■ Provide for efficient and cost-effective transit service; = Maximize resources available for the management and operation cf Lodi Public Transit: = Secure stable sources of funding; ■ Foster community awareness and supportforthe Lodi PdblieTraiisk with emphasis on increasing system ridership; and ■ Ensure that the transit service operates as scheduled. and that all transit equipment has the highest level of reliability and customer 3-9 Anther Bauliw & Associaras. Inc- Z661 Ain 'soluloossy T ieneg mt4lly knedwoo qeo fpol Joi amp JoleolpW eoueuuojjod loelloo pine doleno0 '0 slenel puv Dints elenbepe enelt43y 'C) note usuvji oiignd 1pol of 8ululwi oplwoJd of enulwo0 •» Jep)O 13L4"M Popo y selolt OA lit uleluIslN 'y veld uollsuodsuen leuoltie► pue/seousup)o/sueld luewoBeuvw u011se8u03 t111M seowes usueJl oleulpJo0o •0 sJepinoJd 1lsueJl vale Jocllo i4 Im sluoweeJBe e/ylBJod000 dolene0 'o (VOV) toy sallllgeSiQ 4XM sm:Mjewy eul jepun slueweJlnbei tium mqudwoo sl luowdlnbe einsul •g popeou so eoWes widwl puv Jouuoyy 'V to qo+ � y ti tis......Y........,..i..s....ci:....�.�-ir.uc.: "NOS UStJSJI 8MI00110—WOO pUe luelotlie Jot ePIA0Jd 'Z sluvplseJ 40 llB 10 Speen PSUeJl eyl IGGH ' I 6enl3oefgo pue sluo+[) welsAs ileUsil !Po -1 E-£ 31OV1 s �u Occ a� c p r 5 p c� C -- gr a 0) .2 .. <.: CL o Et c d C N C 2 q Z. l9 ;» aa M` Y CDea a Rf x �� a © c' �t o C s its: '"a JD c � '� � a 9 1n � � IOD> `` c ra g p c O o lu 0 0.o. U C� k �:� •, � m ci a c m ti a Cl) W w U N a U y rt 0 g;: a 3-11 Arthur Bauer & Assoc i El aces, i n — . G A TABLE 3— 3 (Continued) Lodi Transit System Goals and Obioctives 5. Fostor communily awareness and support for Lodi PublicTranslt, with emphasis on Increasing ridership 6. Ensure that tho transit service operates as scheduled and that all transit equipment hasthe highestievel of reliability and customer appeal Arthur Bauer & Assoclates, July 1992 �� .,,x 7,' " 41t .!, voS b J y r t% A. Continuo to improve tho schoduling and doWering of transit service B. Implomont transit system marketing program C. Encourage transit system/community Interaction A. ContInuo to take stops to minimize wait limos B. Provide wockend transit service If cost-effective and ridership exists L. rovide fixed route transit service K Cost—effOMW and ridership exists D. Maintain and strengthen working relationship with the COG for transit and financial planning ELEMENTS OF THE STRATEGIC FOCUS In implementing the recommended set of transit stis.ern goals and objectives., Lodi Public Transit should incorporate the following elements into its planning process. Planning and Service Demand Issues • Expanding Lodi Public Transit's level of seryice should be linked to land use development. population growth., and the need to reduce automobile congestion and imprwe lacmi air quality. Spade short. medium. and long-term activities should be identified to enable the caty to adequately respond to rapid growth and development. ■ As the population and the employment base grovus, Lodi Public Transit should expand its service as needed. Funding Lem" • As Lodi Public Transit develops an expanded program, its share of TDA funds will ",ely irr aa9e. ■ Lodi Public Transit should initiate efforts to obtain Section 9 federal funding for capital improvements and operating assistance, • Lodi Public Transit should continue its efforts to maximize farebox revenues. 2-13 Aid" Ba4w d Associates, Inc. Institutional issues The transit system should maintain and strengthen its working relationship with the COG for transit system and financial planning. Lodi Public Transit should develop and implement a marketing plan designed to increase ridership and public acceptance of the transit system. 3-14 Anhur Bauer & Associates, Inc. SECTION 4 0 Arthur Bauer & Associates. Inc Consultants in Transportation& Public Finance SECTION 4 Evaluation of the Service Program This section descr il-x s the operation of Lodi Public Transit and Lodi Taxi. discusses service improvement options. and evaluates the existing sysccm against the system goals and objectives described in Section 3 PERFORMANCE DATA Se, tion 99246(d) of the California Public Utilities Code requires transit operators receiving state funding to monitor, at a minimum, five transit system performance indicators. These indicators include operating cost per passenger, operating cost per service hour, passengers per vehicle service hour, passengers per vehicle service mile. and vehicle services hours per employee. In addition. Section 99268 et seq_ re -quires that the farebox recovery ratio be calculated annually so that an operator's eligibility for state funding can be determined. To remain eligible, Lodi Public Transit has until reccrttiy been required to achieve a farebox recovery rate of at least fen percent. Table 4-1 shows the values calculated for the five performance measures and faro -box recovery rate for Lodi Public Transit. Over a nine year period between FY 82-83 and FY 90-91. the transit system achieved an average farebox recovery rate of 17.8percent. a rate well above the ten percent minimum required by state law. The Lodi Twd service. implemented in July cf 1990, has an operating cost per passenger objective ratio of S2.17. The actual operating cost per passenger is not determinable as of June 30, 1991. Actual operating costs of the transit company was not available. OPERATIONS ANALYSIS In evaluating the operation of Lodi Public Transit. this section of the report discusses five operational areas. These areas include: 4-1 Arthur Bauer & Associates. Inc. Performance .Measures Operaring Cast Per Passenger Operating Cost Per Vehicle Service Hour Passengers Por Vehicle Service Mllo Passengers Per Vehicle Service Hour Vonlcie Service Houn Per Employee Farebox Recovery Ratio $330 NA 0.50 NA NA 16.4% TABLE 4- 1 Porformance Indicators for Lodi Public Transit FISCAL `EAR w� $3.50 1960 0.48 5.6 1,234 18.9% I NA = Information not available Sources: Lodi PubllC Transit performance audits; data for FY 88-89through FY 90-91 prodded by Giry of Lodi and State Controllers Office. Arthur Bauer 6 Associates, July 1992 $3.40 18.90 0.47 5.6 1.059 15.4% $3.40 $3 30 $330 $3 50 13.40 $3 40 22.60 21.50 25.80 2290 21.80 1890 0.59 050 0.70 0.50 0.60 050 6.6 64 7.9 6.6 6.4 56 1,575 1,334 1,292 1,412 1.488 1,149 17.4% 17.3% 19.0% 18.0% 18.6% 19.6% w� $3.50 1960 0.48 5.6 1,234 18.9% I NA = Information not available Sources: Lodi PubllC Transit performance audits; data for FY 88-89through FY 90-91 prodded by Giry of Lodi and State Controllers Office. Arthur Bauer 6 Associates, July 1992 $3.40 18.90 0.47 5.6 1.059 15.4% `3ana�,,emmt and orpmzation. Service planning. Personnel m a n,i g e m e n t and training; f ■ Financial planning and control, and Marketing and public relations Each of these operational areas are described below Management and Organ, ration As described earlier. Lodi Public Transit is operated under a contract betwcen tie City of Lodi and Lodi Cao Company. Overall management cf the contract is the responsibility of the Assistant City Manager while day -today operation of the transit service is provided by the taxi company. In addition, a 12 -member citizen advisory transportation committee acts in an advitory capacity to the City Manager and City Council. The organizational structure of Lodi Public Transit is shown in Figure 4-1. The operation cf the transit system presently depends on 13 full-time and part-time employees whose titles and duties are as follows: Transit Manager is responsible for the overall administration of Dodi Public Transit and acts as the main liaison with the City of Lodi. The Transit Manager also supervises and coordinates the driver training program, inciuding certifications of General Public Paratransit Vehicle (GPPV) operators. and the daily responsibilities and activities of the drivers. 4-3 Arthur Bauer & Associates. Inc. Scheduling and Personnel Manager City of Lodi City Manager's Office Transit k4anager Dispatcher (4 full-time staff) Figure 4-1 Transit Drivers f8 full-time and 1 art time staff Lodi Public Transit Organization Chart 4.4 Arthut BaU61 a Associates, Inc. Scheduling and Personnel Manager is responsible for scheduling of drivers and other staff along with handling personnel matters. • Transit Dispatcher is responsible for dispatching vehicles and taking passenger calls. The Dispatcher works from TM a,m. to 7:N p.m. Monday through Friday and from 9.00 to 5:00 on Saturdays. The Dispatcher reports directly to the Transit Manager. ■ Transit Drivers are responsible for driving the vehicles and picking up and delivering passengers to their final destinations. Se vice Planning As described in Section 2, Lodi's population is expected to increase47.5 percent between 1994 and the year 2010. The number of jobs are also erperted to grow by as much as 61 percent over the next two decades. With rapid population growth and economic development, people will increasingly rely on Lodi's transit system for travel around the city. A sampling of handwritten daily transit syslsn log sheets (between July 1, 1991 and April 13.1992) revealed that most people (78 percent) use the system between 900 am. and 3:40 p.m. five days a week. Fifteen percent of the ridership occurs between 7.00 and 9:00 in the morning. Finally, ridership falls off ignificantly after 5:60 in the afternoon. A similar use pattern occurs during Saturday service as Well. Currently, the city has a goal of having passengers picked up within 45 rn nutds after they call the dispatcher. However in instances when there is heavy demand for transit seivkce it can become difficult for the system to meet this goal. For example, when passenger calls exceed 300 or more per day, or one call every 2.4 minutes, the dispatcher can become overloaded. This can adversely effect the transit system's level of service, slowing the response time and diminishing the public's opinion of the transit system. 4-5 Arthus Bauer S Associates. Inc. When an overload situation o=xs, the dispatcher informs people calling for transit service that thw may erect a delay in being picked up. As shown in Table 4-2, on a monthly average basis during FY 90-91, the transit system exceeded this threshold every month except during July, August. and Septemher for its Monday through Friday service. The daily log sheets also reveal that. on average, the system carries more than 300 people per day at least twice a week. This always occurs on a weekday when travel demand is highest. Based on the log sheets and from conversations with Lodi Public Transit staff. the amount of time needed for the system to return to normal (i.e., pick up passengers within 45 minutes) varies depending on the number aP incoming telephone calls and the number of vehicles in service, Even with this high demand, the transit service currently does a good job in responding to calls in a timely manner. A survey conducted by city staff during a ttmo week period in November 1990 showed that only 145 people. or less than 5 percent out of a total cf 3.126 people. using Lodi Public Transit were required to wait 45 minutes or longer for transit service. Of the 145, only 31 people waited longer than an hour. While the existing transit service can be augmented with additional vehicles. drivers. and other staff, anticipated population growth and economic development requires that the City of Lodi should begin planning for the transition from just demand -response service to a combination of demand -response and fc�cd route service. During this transition period, the transit system should adopt a goal of reducing wait time to no longer than 30 minutes. Personnel Management and Training To comply with all California Highway Patrol and company requirements, Lbdi Public Transit drivers receive a minimum of 40 hours of classroom and 20 hours of vehicle driving instruction before they are allowed to drive passengers. Training topics include vehicle operation and safety, use of vehicle equipment (e.g., wheelchair ramps/lifts and tiedowns); scheduling and dispatch, and first aid. In addition, each driver receives an additional 24 hours of training annually which t-ypicaBy covers new driving and licensing requirements, a review of first aid procedures. and new company procedures Finally. drivers are required to renew their state driving licenses every three rR 4-6 Arthur Bauer & ASsociases, tne. X1 TABLE 4- 2 Transit System Performance Statistics Fiscal Yoar 90-91 Category/Month Jul Aug Bop Oct Nov Doc Jan F8b Mat Apr May Jun Total TOTAL MILES DRIVEN 13,541 15,160 13,644 16,108 13,087 14,996 18.476 13,077 15,40E 18,252 14,000 15,023 178,488 FUEL USED 1,267 1.366 1.374 1,446 1.308 1.325 1.239 1,231 1,196 1.039 1.308 1.266 15.461 SERVICE HOURS 1,109 1,258 1,149 1,374 1,201 1,204 1,240 1,141 1,205 1.309 1,541 1,401 14,930 SERVICE DAYS 25 27 24 27 25 25 25 23 26 26 26 25 304 MILES17AIPS 2.11 2.11 2.16 2.13 1.95 2.14 2.20 2.00 2.15 1.98 2.07 2.24 2.04 MPO 10.52 11.11 9.93 11.12 10.83 11.32 13.10 10.82 12.86 15.64 10,89 11.09 11.54 TRIPS/SERVICE HAS 5.70 5.71 5.51 5.50 5,90 5.83 6.04 5.72 5,95 8.60 5.37 4.70 5.72 TRIPS/SERVICE; DAY 250,68 266.11 263.75 279.93 263.W 280,60 299.64 263.78 275,77 332.38 277.12 268.W 260,00 TRI17S/OAY SAT 116,25 120,50 127.84 120.50 122,00 135,00 12675 138,50 126,64 129.25 130,75 108.40 123.38 TRIPS/DAY NON -SAT 283.43 291.43 299.58 307.65 314.33 314.40 332.57 314.37 310.81 344.32 303.73 506.60 312.79 HRS/DAY 44.36 46.57 47.88 50.67 48.04 48.14 49.58 40.59 46.36 60.35 31,59 50.05 49.11 MILES PER SERVICE HOUR 12.21 12.07 11.87 11.73 11,56 12.48 13.29 11.47 12.78 12.42 11.11 10.72 11.05 MILES PER SERVICE DAY 541.64 562.P 566.50 596.52 555.48 599.04 659.04 568.57 692,54 625.08 575.W 600,92 5x713 PERCENT ELDERLY PASS. 00,45% 49.47% 90.02% 90.20% 91.76% 01.05% 90.47% 69.63% 97.20% 69.31% 68.74% 69,14% 69.64% PERCENT NON -ELDEFLY PASS 9.55% 10.33% 9.98% 9.110% 8.24% 5.95% 9.53% 10,37% 12.80% 10.68% 11.241A 10.86% 10.20% PERCENT CCrY TFUPS 05.84% 95.49% 95.53% 94,72% 95.54% 95.05% 05.51% 95,10% 94.88% 95.51% 05.84% 06.11% 05.42% PERCENT COUNTY TF',2P8 4.34% 4.51% 4.45% 5.26% 4.46% 4.05% 4.40% 4.61% 5.12% 4.49% 4,16% 3.89% 4,58% Soutoo: City of Lod Arthur Ssusr t Assodatas. July 1992 years. Lodi Public Transit regularly participates in driving aRarenes and other training programs sponsored by the Lodi Police Department. Financial Planning and Control The Transit Manager for Lodi Public Transit has responsibility for the financial planning and control €unetioris of the transit system. Inns includes estimating and monitoring capital and operating costs. collecting passenger ridership data, and complying with all city reporting requirements. The increase in Lodi AblieTransit's ridership and overall growth as a transit provider is reflected through the data obtained from its financial records. For instance. for the nine year period from FY 82-83 through FY 90-91, Lodi Public Transit's operating expenditures increased from $189,063 to 5372,557, or 97 percent. Over the same period, TDA revenues it eased from $44,000 to 5267,930, and fare revenue from $31.029 to 543,576, respectively. Table 4-3 provides a financial summary for Lodi Public Transit between FY 82-83 and FY 90-91. Tfte City of Lodi received approximately $1 million in TDA assistance in FY 90-91. Of this total, 27p e m t or nearly 526$,000 was allocated to Lodi Public Transit. Understate law, use of TDA funds for transit assistance has first priority over transportation planning and street and road projects. Consequently. as Lodi Public Transit develops an expanded program of transit facilities, equipment, and services, its share of TDA will in all likelihood grow. Nbst of the money received by the city is funding provided under Article 4 of the Transportation Development Act The law requires that a performance audit be conducted for activities using these funds. A smaller amount of money is provided under Article 8. These funds are used to subsidizeLodi %KL and are not subject to the auditing requirements. However. to better evaluate the performance of the taxi service, the city should require the contractor to collect and publish annual performance data. In the past Lodi Public Transit was eligible but never applied for either Section 16(b)(2) or Section 18 transit assistance from the federal government. With a pol.ulation of over 50.000. the city is no 4.8 Ar,Rui Sager & Associates. Inc. TABLE 4 - 2 Transit System Performance Statistics Fiscal Year 90-J1 CMegorylMonth Jul Aug Bop 001 Nov Doc Jan Fob Mar Apr Al ay Jun Tota( TOTAL MILES DRIVEN 13.541 15,180 13,644 18,108 13,687 14,996 16,476 13,077 15,40E 16.252 14,900 15.023 176,488 FUEL U 3 E O 1.207 1,366 1,374 1,446 1.306 1,325 1.239 1,231 1,198 1.039 1,308 1.208 15.467 SERVICE HOURS 1,109 1.256 1,149 1,374 1,201 1,204 11240 1,141 1,205 11309 1.341 1,401 14,030 SERVICE DAYS 25 27 24 27 25 25 25 23 26 26 26 25 304 MILESITRIPS 2.11 2.11 2.18 2.13 1.96 2.14 2.20 2.00 2.15 1,88 207 2.24 2.09 MPO 10.52 11.11 9.93 11.12 10.63 11.32 13.30 10.62 12.85 15.84 10,89 11.69 11.54 TRIPS/SERVICE HRS 5.79 5.71 5.51 5.50 5.90 5.83 6.04 5.72 s.95 6.60 5.37 4.79 5.72 TRIPS/SERVICE DAY 250.68 260.11 263,75 279,93 263,56 280,60 249.64 283.76 274,77 332.35 277,12 260.58 280.196 TRIPS/DAY SAT 115.25 120,50 127.60 120.50 122.00 135.90 126.75 136.50 128.60 129.25 130.75 108.40 125.38 TRIPS/DAY NON -SAT 283,43 291.43 299.58 307.65 314.33 310.80 332.57 314.37 310,81 369,32 303.73 308.60 312.79 H RS/DAY 44.36 46.57 47.88 50.87 48.04 46.14 49.58 49.59 46.36 50.35 51.59 $4.05 49.11 MILES PER SERVICE HOUR 12.21 12.07 11.87 11.73 11,56 12.45 13.29 11.47 12.78 12.42 11.11 10.72 11.95 M I L E $ PER SERVICE DAY 541,61 542.22 688.50 590.52 553.48 509.54 554.04 566.57 582.54 625.06 673,00 600.02 647.13 PERCENT ELDERLY PASS. 90.45% 80.07% 90.02% 90.20% 91.78% 91.05% 90.47% 69.63% 87.20% 69.32% 68.74% 89.14% 89.80% PEnCENT NON-ELOEFILY PASS 0.85% 10.53% 9,98% 9.801A 8.24% 8.95% 9.55% 10.37% 12.60% 10,08% 11.26% 10.86% 10,2157E PERCENTCn TRIPS 95.64% 05.49% 95.55% 94.72% 95.54% 95,05% 93.31% 95.19% 94.88% 95.51% 95,64% 95,11% 95,121E PERCENTCOUNTY TRIPS 4.36% 4.51% 4.45% 5.28% 4.46% 4,95% 4.49% 4.81% 5.12% 4.49% 4,10% 3,89% 4.54% Source: City of Lod Arthur Bauer & Associates, July 1992 longer eiig ble for Section 18 funds but may apply for Section 9 monies for needed capital and operating assistance. Marketing and Public Retations Since Loth Public Transit is now operating at close to capacity, neither the city nor :he operator has publicized availability of the service. Even with the absence of a marketing program, ridership has continued to increase over time, from 56.400 in FY 1982-83 to 79,500 In FY 90-91. An evaluation matrix summarizing Lodi Public Transit performance is shown in Table 4-4. 4-9 Arthur Bau* & Associates. Inc. A 0 TAOLE 4- 3 Financial Summary for Lodi Public Transit FY 1982-83 Through FY 90-91 Clea&$ OCAD CatogorIgs ,!; �y,1 IY,fZ i Revenues Farebox PA elpts 831,029 $37,082 $34,823 $44,40: $46,467 $.48,25( $41,265 t39.313 $43.576 TDA Fundn9 44,000 65,519 54,66 40,00( 197,4&' 202,1211 201,260 242.518 267,930 State TrarLsll Assistance 99,427 $7,641 88,534 161,90: 20,724 w 0 0 5,221 Other 0 607 0 271 22C 2,198 0 12,121 25,833 TOTALS $174,456 $170,649 $177,896 x246,581 $264,80 $253,137 5242525 $293,952 $34ZSW ExpencMures Operations $189,063 x213,450 $201,202 $233,336 $258,723 $259,185 $283,278 $234,163 $284831 Vehicle Malntenance NA NA NA NA NA 'A NA 11,264 20,200 General Admli tlstralon NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 46,49$ 33,528 Depredation NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 24,957 29,997 TOTALS $189.063 $713`450 $201,202 $233,336 $258,723 $259,185 6285,278 $318,909 $372557 Net Trartall tnoorrw . or Lova ($14,60 ($42,601 ($23, $13,249 $6,123 ($6,048 ($42,7 ($24, 85 (x29, Reovwry Rath 18.4% 17.4% 17.3% 19.0% 18.0% 186% 19.5% 18.9% 15.4% NA a InkxTnallon not avaltable $ourow LocX Pubic T("I performance aud4s; data for FY 88-89 through FY 90-91 from Oty of Loco Dial-A-Rde Anandal audk 1992 Arthur Bauer 8 Associates, ," 1992 Management and ObjootN*s Organization 1. Moet the Needs of Residents Survey data confirms that sidad" transit serAce Is rsspons" Io communiy needs 2. Provide EMdant Tran4h S•Mce Staff consists of 13 full and part—ffine staff J. Maxlmlxe Resources for Management and OperarUons 4, Secure Stsbie SOUN06 of Funding b. Foster Community Awwanoss 6. EMure that the Tronelt System Operates as Scheduled Arthur Bauer 6 Associates, July 1892 City and transit system Stan constw* monitor o iclency of Lodi Public Transit system ourrenty roll$$ on lusbox revenues, STA, and TDA funds for financing opetstfons WA Ctty and trsnef( ►system staff oonslamy monitor efficlency of Lod Pubflc Tranah TABLE 4-4 Performance EyWuation Matrix SorMce Planning Survoy data con6rma Thal a isrge segment of he communityfavars Sunday transit seMce. UsVng sonic$ hsi difficulty Inmeotng goal :f picking up passongors vlthln 45 minutos when tsrvice is 4zt»mefy bury $ e M c e pl annl n g cutrantly prodded byohy and COO stsft; transit eyslom should ►egutatiy survey transft users to Idontly means lorlmprovtng ssrYca City, transit system. and 000 Stan work together to project future trAnue n•edOestimates nformodon on public aanot concerns obtained fxough unmet needs searing process end ;Itirens ad sory comm. Improvements to dspetch y atom would help reduce tranolt delays; new -town sysiern objective should ba to reduce waft—fine to no longer than 30m1nu1e4 Personnel Management Ftnanclaf Planning and Training I and Control WA Currant Ltodning program meat$ at oxaseds state trafnfn9 requirements; participates Inddver traWng programs offered by Lod Police Department Traneft system contractor provides for oomtnuing odueatton of drivers srtd other staff WA WA provide updated driver training as epool4d by low WA rdatingtransit system nests miNmum ton wosm Iarebax recovery equlromsnts Trsnslf system currently r•Rsis on larebox and TDA revsnu•s for funding Nty should sppty Ior sdsrW (Sac. 9) funds to tnsncs future system mprovements WA • nnanoo n audits conducted tsgul" A monitor efficlency of ransit system operations Marketing and Pwbllo Rotations ffn WA WA System promoWn eouid Ineroa.se rider— ship thereby Incr$saln; lWabox revenue Jo o4$ing marketing rrogram Inpface dur o concem about overloading' system 6 SECTION 5 Anhtu Bauer 8 Associates, Inc. Consultantsin Transportation& Public Finance SECTION 5 Analysis of the On -Board and Community Survey Resutts Th is section describes the results cf on -board and community surveys concerning the use of transit in the City cC Lodi. Each survey had the same set of chjeetives: determining the public's (1) ability and wirSngness to use transit; (2) its perception of the existing transit system; (3) its preference for the type of service it would support; (4) frequency of use; (5) its concern about any unmet transit needs that exist within the community, and (6) potential transit destinations. Each survey and its results are summarized below. Full cross -tabulations and frequencies of responses, in total. are included in the Appendix. ON -BOARD SURVEY In consultation with city and COG staff, an on -board survey was prepared consisting of 31 questions. with 23 structured as multiple choice and the remaining 8 requiring written answers. Dtpcnding on language preference. both English and Spanish versions of the questionnaire were available for distribution to respondents, Copies cf the questionnaire can be found in the appendix. 'lite survey was administered on Wednesday March 18 and Saturday March 21. 1992 Two ABA staff members distributed and collected questionnaires on different Lodi Public Transit vehicles between 830 a.m. and 6.00 p.m. One -hundred six surveys were calkcted from a total Cf 445 people. or 26.2 percent of the people who used the transit system over the two day period. Scveral factors influenced the data collection process. First, some respondents felt the survey was too long and consequently did not have sufficient time to complete the survey prior to reaching their travel destination. Second, a few respondents objected to participating ih the survey due to health reasons (e.g., poor eye sight) or because they felt some of the questions requested personal information. 5-1 Arthur Badw & Associates. Inc. With this information as background. the remaining sections describe sample characteristics. the survey results. a comparison of on -board results with the previously conducted telephone survey. and the survey conclusions. Unless otherwise noted, figures cited in this section reflect adjusted frequencies (excluding those refusing to answer.) In addition, re_T"onses may not total 100 percent due to multiple responses. rounding. and other factors. Absolute frequencies showing all percentages can be found in the frequency tables included in the full statistical report. To better interpret the results of some questions, we developed an index value fx certain items. First, response categories to the question were identified as"positive,. "negative,* or *neutral.' The actual calculation cf the index involved subtracting the negative percentage from the positive percentage, then adding 100. Responses considered to be neutral were not scored when calculating index values. Following this formula, the index would yield a potential range from 0 (all negative) to 200 (all positive). The theoretical middle of the index is 100. Sample Characteristics Passengers who rode Lodi Public Transit on March 18 and March 21 comprised the surrey sample. Tabk 5-1 shows the percentage distnbution of respondents who participated in the survey over the two day period of time. TABLE 5-1 Day and Time of Travel for On -Board Lodi Public Transit Respondents Day/Time Wednesday, March 18 Saturday, March 21 Before 11.00 a.m. IH -0 a.m, to 1;00 p.m, After 1:00 p.m. Percent 50.0 50.0 32.1 27.4 40.6 5-2 Ann r Bauer & Associates, Inc. Of those who responded. women comprised 83 percent of the respondents with men representing the remaining 17 percent. The age ofreVondents was closely divided. with 3 percent of the respondents 24 years of age or younger, 13 percent between 25 and 44, and 18 percent of the group between 45 and 64. Another 66 percent said they were over 65 years of age. Survey Results The survey results presented below are categorized by topic. 'rncse categoiies include public attitudes concerning: Ability and willingness to use transit: • Perception of the existing transit system; ■ Preference for the type of service it would support; Frequency of use; ■ Public concern about unmet transit needs, and Potential travel destinations. AbOty and Willingness to Use Transit During the two day survey period, over 60 percent of the respondents had Lodi Public Transit pick them up at home. Smaller groups c£ respondents were picked up from downtown Lodi (live pacent). Mervyn's (four percent), Loel Center (two percent). and other points of origin (18 perctnt). As to their travel destinations, the respondents used the system to travel home (45 percent). to downtown Lodi (eight percent). Lodi Memorial Hospital (six percent), or to other places (21 percent). In addition to Lodi Public Transit, the City of Lodi relies on local taxi service td serve local transit needs. Respondents were asked how often they use the taxi service. A large majority, 70 percent. said that they do not use the taxi service. Twenty percent said they use the taxi service on a 'less than weekY basis and another 4 percent indicated they use the taxi at least once a week. In addition, 52percent rated the response time as either good or excellent while 19percent said it was 5-3 Arthur Bauer & Associates. Inc. fair. In contrast. 7percent said the response time was poor. More than one out of five said they had no opinion. Public Perceptions AN respondents were asked to rate Lodi's transit service as ewdle t- good. fair.lcr poor. A large majority (86 percent) considered sexvim to be either good or excellent. Eleven percent cf the respondents rated service as fair while just two percent said service was poor. Rc!�spondents were also asked to rate Lodi Public Transit's response time. Again the transit sysixm received positive carmments, with 87 percent saying that response time is either good or excellent. However, 13 percent of the resi ondents did indicate that response time was only fair and 1 percent said it was poor or did not know. Sometimes people expressed concern about the length of time they must Wa it before being picked up by the transit service. When asked. 54 percent cf the respondents said that they only needed to wait 15 minutes cr less to be picked up. Another 32 percent indicated that it took between 15 and 30 minutes for the transit service to arrive at their door. Nody 13momt indicated. however. that they had to wait betw m a half hour and 60 minutes befom being picked up. It does appear from the crosstab data that people living south of Vie Street and west cf Hutchins Street acperience the longer delays (30 minutes or longer) than people living in other parts cf the dly. Respondents felt that the existing Lodi Public Transit dispatch system works Well. Eighty- four percent rated the dispatch system either good cr excellent while 7 pe-rcx-nt felt it ;,is only fair, Rnt 5 percent rated the existing dispatch system as poor. Preferred Transit System Several questions were asked about ways to improve existing transit service. T�enty•six percent requested that the wait time be reduced. 20 percent said that service should have larger or more 5-4 Arthur Balser & Associat". Enc. vehicles, ] 5 percent asked for transit service be provided to other cities. and 6 percent asked for mended hours. Smaller groups cf respondents offered other types of suggestions. Respondents were also asked how important it is for Lodi Public Transit to operate on Sunday. Over 74 percent indicated that it was either somewhat important or very important that this type of sec, -ice be provided. However. 20 percent said that in their opinion. Sunday service was not important. A question was also posed to determine if people prefer retaining the existingi�response-demand type system or whether f;xcd route bus service should be established. Seventy-three percent of the respondents favored retaining the existing door -to- door srrvice, On the other hand, only 2 percent exprc-_, d support for fluxed -route service. However. 25 percent said that both door-to-door and fxd route service should be provided. The crosstab analysis suggests that 72 percent of respondents who cors►dercd thiemsetves frequent users and 73 percent cf occasional users of Lodi Public Transit favor retaining the door-to-door service. Wy 3 perccnt of frequent users and none ofthe occasional users of the transit service favor freed route service. Frequency of U s e Sevmq-eight percent of the respondents considered themselves frequent u, t while 18 percent said they use the system occasionally. Only 4 percent of those who responded indicated they akwt neer use the service. Respondents were also asked "4lat is the main re -anon you don't use Lodi$ transit system on a frequent basis? Over 20 percent said that they had no commute need for transit service, another 17 percent indicated that transit took too long, and 14 percent said that they like or need the use of their car. Smaller groups said that transit is inconvenient (3.4 percent), dbes not go where I need to travel (3.4 percent), it is too expensive (3.4 percent). cr indicated some other reason (24 percent). 5-5 Arttwr Bauer A Assoc atga, lnc. from a rcvi cw of the crosstab data. 78 percent of the on -board respondents who rated L.odi's transit service as excellent also use the service at least three or more times per week. Similarly, 46 percent of those who consider the transit service as good. also ride more than three times a week. Unmet Transit Needs Several questions were asked to determine what. if any, needs exist that are currently unmet by Lodi Public Transit. The first was asked as an open-ended question, probing all survey respondents for suggestions to improve Lodi Public Transit service. Table 5-2 displays the frequencies for this question. TABLE 5-2 Suggestions for Improving Lodi Public Transit Service Suggestions Percentage Pick Up On Time/Reduce Wait 26.1 MorejBigger Vehicies 19.6 Connect to Other Cities 15.2 More Hours 6.5 Advertise Services 43 Other (leathan 25% mentions) 6.6 Multiple Responses 174 The most frequently mentioned response, reducing the wait time, was mentione#i by more than two in ten (26.1 pzrcent) respondents. This was followed with suggestions for more and larger vehicles. initiate intercity transit service. extend its hours. and advertise its services. Another question was asked to determine if there was a desire for Lodi PubUt Transit to Mend its weekday hours by rating it as 'very important.' 'somewhat important.' or'not important." An index was calculated for each question by subtracting the percentage cf'not important" responses 5-6 Arthur Sauor & Associates, Inc. from the percentage of'very important' re-Tonses and adding 100. With 27 percent classifyingthis as a'very important' need and 51 percent determining it to be "not important.' the index value for offering weekend service was 76. Respondents were also asked if there was any other place theywould likely use a fixed route to go. A large number of people, 34 percent. said they would like a fixed route atm between Lodi and Stockton. This was followed by 7 percent to Gait, and 3 percent to both Woodbridge and Sacramento. Fifty-two percent either expressed no opinion or q>eci ied another destination. Potential Destinations Transit riders were asked how likely they would be to use Lodi Public Transit it it were to provide cmmutcr service to destinations outside Lodi An index value ranging from 0 to 200 was again cakuWtd for each response. Possible responses irdudcd "very likely: 'somewhat li*,' and 'not Hw'. With 2.8 percent classifying this as "very Blely' and 22 percent determining it to be "not likely: the in d a valve for providing commuter service outside Lodi was 106. Be _ - Iaxtswere also asked the following question: I there any other plac-e VM would be likely to use a fixed route system to go? (If yes, where?) Of this group 45 percent said no, while the remainder, 48 percent. indicated they would use a fixed route system to trayel to nearby cities (Galt, Stockton. Sacramento, and Woodbridge). Finally. 7percent expresseda preference forother destinations. Transit riders were also asked their opinion about the need for extending Lodi Public Transit to pcovi&_ service to Stockton. Future service to Stockton earned an index vakid of 120. Over half of the sample favor extended service to Stockton. while 44 percent did not feel it was important or expressed no opinion. 5-7 Arttwt Bat4r 3 Associates. Inc. COMPARISON WiTH COMMUNITY SURVEY RESULTS A random telephone survey cf Lodi residents was also completed as part ofthis transit assessment. The survey consisted of 43 questions, 39 of which were asked (the remaining four were coded by observation or were calculated). A total of 400 telephone interviews were completed. using a random digit dialing method. with a sampling error of +/- 4.9 percent (at the 95 percent c nfidcrtce level). Although structured and conducted differently. the on -board and telephone surveys shared a number of questions enabling a comparison of results. This section highlights some of the most important comparisons of these two data sets. Public Perceptions Thirty -free percent cf the telephone respondents said they were unwilling cr unable to use public transit in Lodi. The remaining 65 percent claimed to be willing to take public transit, and of that number, just 7 percent said they were unable to take advantage of i t In addition, when asked to rate the transit system. a large majority of the telephone respondents, 74 percent, rated the system negatively. with more than 44 percent conferring a poor rating cf Lath's system. When asked to rate M i ` s transit services, on -board respondents rated the system much higher than telephone respondents by a margin greater than 6to 1, While thediffererce between the M0 groups is significant, it is not surprising that people who ride Lodi Public Transit are more favorable towards the systems than the general public, many of whom do not use transit. People from both survey groups felt that Lodi Public Transit's response time is' goad or excellent. Eighty-three percent of the on -board groupgave a good or excellent rating, while 55percent of the general public also agreed. HowEe,a larger percentage of the public rated the response time as poor (19 percent) than those who use the system (l percent). Table 5-3 shows the differences in opinion between the two groups. 5-8 Art tff Baur & ^ssodatm, Ire Preferred Transit System Both groups expressed differing levels of support for extending Lodi Public T'rabsit's service on weekdays. Forty-four percent cf the on -board and 53 p-erccnt cf the public said extended weekday service was somewhat cr very important. However, 51 percent cf the on -board and 38 percent of the telephone respondents said extended service was not important. E When asked about the importance of Sunday service. there was strong suppo�t, Seventy-four percent cf the on --board and 80 percent cf the telephone respondents would like Sunday service. H3mwRr. there app< -ars to be far greater public support forfnted route service than found among existing on -board users (57 percent to 2 percent). In contrast, on -board respondents favor the existing door-to-door service in larger numbers than the general public (73 percent to 24 percent). It is likely that the level of support for these different service alternatives by the two groups are due, in part, to their gens about transit service or based on their existing use of Lodi Public Transit TABLE 5-3 Comparison of On-Board/Telephone Results of Transit Service in Lodi Percentage Qu est i on E=ellent Good Fair Poor How Would You Rate Lodi's Transit Service? On -Board 37 49 11 2 Telephone 3 11 15 '22 How Would You Rate Response T i e for Lodi Public Transit? On -Board 32 51 12 1 Telephone 23 32 23 19 Note: Figures do not total 100 percent due to people. responding "undecided" or who gave multiple responses. 5.9 Arfto Bauer f, Associates. ine. Frequency of Use In comparing the two surveys on how often Lodi Public Transit k used. only 19 percent aE the public rides the system frequently in contrast to 78 percent of the on -board respondents. On the other hand, 18 percent of the on -board respondents said they mly on the service occasionally while 65 percent of the public answcrcd similarly. Table 5-4 shows responses from the two groups concerning why people do not 6e Lodi's transit system on a frequent basis. From the information coUected, on -board respondents felt that they have no comrnute need. For telephone respondents, many said that they need or like the corrvcnience of using their automobiles for travel. F Finally. in comparing how often people from both groups ride Lod i Public Transit during a typical month, 29 percent cf the pdalie in contrast to 30 percent of the on -board passengers use Lodi PublicTransit I cr 2 times per week. On the. other hand, 57 percent eE the on -board said they use TABLE 5-4 f Reasons People DMI Use Lod'rs Transit System On A Frequent Basis Reasons On -Board Percentages Telephone Inconvenient 3 6 Takes Too Long 17 5 Need/Like NV Car 14 64 No Commuting Need 21 6 Doesn't Go Where I Want it To 3 5 Other 42 14 Total 100 100 the service at least three or more times per week, while only 7 percent of the genera[ public said it rides Lodi Public Transit this frequently. 5-10 Ant" Bauer K Aseo6ates, inc. Unmet Transit Needs As for improving existing transit service. both the on -board and telephone respondents favored Lodi AU Transit reducing the wait time. As shown in Table 5-5, the public suggested that the TABLE 5-5 Suggestions for Improving Lodl Public Transit Service Percentage Suggestions On -Board Telephone Pick Up On Time/Reduce Wait 26 20 Short/More Diroet Trip 2 1 A "mlisa Se vkcm 4 7 More/Bigger Vehides 20 7 Connect to Other Cities is 1 Other 33 64 Total 100 100 transit system advertise more while on -board respondents faYo-red having more, larget transit vehicles. Potential Destinations Fdq%sevm percent of telephone and 67 percent of on -board respondents favor transit service between Lodi and Stockton. However, 37 percent of telephone and 26 peVmt of on -board respondents said such service was not important. 5-11 An" satin{ S Assoaaaes, Inc. CONCLUSIONS During two days in March of 1992. a non-random onboard survey was conducted of passengers using Lodi Public Transit. Based on the sample. 86percent consider the transit service to be either good or excellent while just 2 percent rated service as poor. Other conclusions from the survey include the following: • Four out of five of the respondents felt the transit system's response time is good cr excellent. Aver half cfthe respondents said that they only needed to writ 15 minutes or less to be picked up. Another 30percent indicated that it took between 15 and 30 minutes for the transit scrvice to arrive at their door. • Eighty-four percent rated the Lodi Pdolk Transit's dispatch sjrstem as either good cr exce0"t whDe 7 percent said it was o* fair. • As for future improvements to the system. over 74 percent indicated that it was either somewhat or very important that Sunday service be initiated. • When asked if they had a preference for dcor•to-door or fixed route service. well over half of the respondents favored retaining the existing door-to-door service. Only IS percent cxpresscd support for f1xe7d route service. ■ Suggestions for improving existing Lodi Public Transit's service included reducing the wait time (26 percent). having more/bigger vehicles (20 percent). and providing transit connections to other cities (IS percent). 5-12 Arthur Bauer & Associates. Inc. I • Qvcr two-thirde of the sample s.ild they would favor extended service to Stockton. while a third did not feel it was important or did not express an opinion The on -board residtt, which were collected through a random. stritktically-significant process, were also compared with results from an earlier tclephrine survey. Same of the more significant comparisons are highlighted below, ■ Thirty-five percent of the respondents said they were unwilling or unable to use puhlic transit in Mi. The remaining 65 percent claimed to he willing to take puhlic transit. and ofthat number, jolt 7 percent raid they were unahle to take advantage of it. ■ In addition. when asked to rate the transit system, a large majority of the respondents. 74 percent, rated the system negatively. with more than 44 percent conferring a poor rating of Mi's system. ■ On -board respondents rated Lodi's transit system much higher than telephone respondents by a margin greater than 3 to 1. While the difference hetween the two groups is significant. it is not surprising that people who ride Lodi Puhiic Transit are more favorable towards the system than the general puhlic. many of whom do not use transit. 9 Both groups expressed strong support for establishing Sunday -Ire ry ic�, 9 There is far greater puhlic support for fixed route service than found among existing transit users. 9 Fifty-seven percent of telephone and 67 percent of on -hoard respondents favor transit service hetween Lodi and Stockton. 5.13 Arthur Bauer 8 Associates. Inc. SECTION 6 I* Arthur Bauer & Associates, Inc. Consultantsin Transportation& Public Finance SECTION 6 Five Year Service Plan and Implementation Schedule As the city's population grows, system ridership vM also likely increase. Howevr, without major changes, the existing transit system ma find it increasingly diff cult to meet public transit needs. For this reason, the city should begin planning for the expansion of its existing transit service to include both demand -response and fixed route bus service. A two-tier level of service would enable Lodi Public Transit to continue to meet the needs of elderly and handicapped residents, but also allow the system to se rve other potential transit markets including school students and the general public In addition, the availability of reliable and convenient fixe -d mute service could provide transit access to all parts of the city on a regularly scheduled basis, provide a means cf transportation for those individuals who do not drive or possess an automobile, reduce the potential for localized traffic congestion, and help improve local air quality. Whie it is exboanely important that wdsting and future transit service be both cost-effective and responsive to community needs, there is no widely -accepted method for determihing when to shift from a demand -response type syrstem to an expanded system of demand -response and flxed route service. A number of factors must be considered including response time, the frequency of service, speed and travel time, user cost, and system reliability. Community-based isshes include social objectives, environmental concerns, economic efficiency. and the role transit can play in improving local travel mobility. Given these different issues and their varying impact on transit service in Lodi, it is recommended that Lodi Public Transit initiate a phased program of transit system i nprovcmehts that will result in the development of fixed route service and the continued provision of demand -response service. Each phase is described below. 6-1 Arshur Bs r i Associates. Inc. PHASE I - DEVELOP/IMPLEMENT TRANSITION STRATEGY Because of the ADA which requires the continuation of paratransit service for disabled individuals, it would be useful for the City of Lodi to establish a transition strategy. Tht transition strategy would include the following elements: = the acquisition of larger vans for demand -response service; ■ identification of enhancements that will improve the existing dispatch system and help reduce system wait time; = hire additicnaI dispatchers and other staff as required; • initiate Sunday and passenger subscription service to inctease ridership and improve system productivity; ■ purchase an automated data reporting system; ■ secure FTA Section 9 funding; and ■ develop a marketing plan to promote transit use. Each of these elements are described below. Acquire larger Vans For Demand -Response Service The city has already begun implementing this transition element by ordering two new nine passengermi idles for Lodi Ptab]ieTransit. Each veh ide will be equipped with hydraulicwheelchair lifts for handicap access and are intended to replace smaller vehicles now in use, Similarly, the city intends to replace two additional vehicles with new equipment during FY 93-94. To comply mUh the ADA, all new vehicles will be quipped with hydraulic wheelchair lifts for handicap use. Each vehicle now operated by Lodi Pialie Transit travels. on average. nearly 18,004 miles each year. With this heavy travel use, the need to maintain reliable equipment, and the anticipated increase in system ridership, it is recommended that the transit system continue its vehicle replacement program Over the next five years. From an operational standpdint, the use CC these larger vehicles will provide transit system management more flexibility in meeting peak hour travel demand and allow the system to meet future growth in system ridership. 6-2 Arthur Oum 6 Asiaatea,Inc, Improve the Existing Dispatch System Steps should be taken to improve the existing dispatch system. Currently. otie person answers incoming telephone calls,records the origin and destination information on a k sheet. contacts a driver and routes the vehicle, and then monitors the pickup and delivery of individual passengers by referring to the trip sheet. To simplify this process and to reduce the amount of work needed for tracking passengers, the dispatcher could monitor the location CC vehicles using a city map mounted on the office wall. As vehicles are directed around the city, the dispatcher could move a colored marker on the map showing the location of the vehicle. This would enable the dispatcher to easily identify a vehide in close proximity to a passenger, tell the passenger how scan they would be picked up, and permit the dispatcher to monitor the location of each ve-hicle in the field. As telephone calls are received. the dispatcher would time -punch a ticket (consiMing o: an original copy and carbon back-up) recording when the call was received and note the passenger's origin and cbs;t:ftWdm. The ticket would then be placed on the wall map in the order the call was received. When the pa-sscnger is picked up, the ticket would then again be punched showing the pickup time. Rna11y, when the passenger is dropped cFf at his or her destination, the dispatcher would Umepunc-h the ticket a thud time showing the destination time. The ticket would then be removed from the bWrd. with the original submitted to the city for reimbursement and the copy I -_ing kept by the contract operator. Another important improvement would be to add a second individual to the dispatch system responsible for answering incoming telephone calls and for irritiaUyfiMng out the trip ticket. With a 'receptionist" answering calls, the dispatcher would have fewer interruptions and enable her to concentrate on the city map directing vehicles and maintaining radio contact with the drivers. From a cost standpoint. it may also be desirable to have the re eptionist work part-time and only during peak travel periods during the day. say from 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., %e days a week. The basic goal in implementing these two improvements would be to reduce the wait time. As mentioned earlier, one of Lodi Public Transit's service standards is to pick wpl riders and deliver them to their destination within 45 minutes of their can for service. While the 45 minute response window is not considered excessive when compared with other demand -response systems, the principal goal in implementing improvements to the dispatch system should be to reduce the response window to no longer than 30 minutes. 6-3 Arthur +au•i & Associates. tnc. Hire Additional Staff To implement improvements to the dispatch system Lodi Public Transit wig need to reassign existing staff or hue an additional individual to answer incoming telephone alis. To minimize additional costs, the receptionist could be used during the day when incoming I ; are heaviest. Initiate Sunday and Reservation/Passenger Subscription Service Based on the results of the on -board and communitysurveys completed as part oaf this assessment. there is public support for Lodi Public Transit to provide Sundayservice. Should fundingbecome available. Sunday service should be provided on a trial basis to determine whether suffient ridership exists to support the expanded weekend service. Lodi Public Transit should also consider offering a reservation service for ptople who want to make their travel plans m advance. As part of the reservation system, the transit system should also make available a 24-hour telephone answering service for people to use for either reserving crcaxelirygtransit rescrratiorm Another way to improve transit system efficiency would be to initiate Anger subscription service. This type cf service would be used by individuals whose travel scheduics are predictable and who require transit service at least several times each week. For example, a person in need of Visiting their doctor twig or three days a week over a period cf time may find this strrice useful. Other subscription users would include students attending city schools and people commuting to and fkm work. The implementation of this service could help reduce the number of people Offing Lodi Public Transit thereby relieving pressure on the dispatch system In addition, availability of subscription servicz would help expand transit use throughout the community (particularly among students), increase system ridership. increase farebox revenues, and improve public visibility of the transit system. It is likely, however, that once fixed route service begins in FY 9495. many of the people using subscription service Will shift Over to using the rxed route system. 6-4 Arthur 13auer 6 Associates, Inc. It is important. however. that subscription service not diminish the service performance for the rest of the transit system. To avoid this potential problem, the transit system, for example. may choose to use its larger vehicles for subscription service and then "pre -position' them for demand - response service once the majority cfsubscribers have been picked up and debvtretd. This would coincide with the fact that most of demand -response ridership occurs later in the morning and in the early afternoon. The improvements to the dispatch system and the use of the transit systems operations map descn`be� above ta]1 also help the dispatcher minimize problems with the integration of the subscription and demand -response service. It should be noted that under the ADA, subscription service is not prohibited fdr complementary paratransit Barri e, but, it may not absorb more than 50 percent of the complementaryparatransit trips available at a given time. unless there is excess non -subscription service. Purchase Automated Data Reporting System c=wdy, Lodi Public Transit records all passenger trip information using handwfitten daffy transit system logs. These log sheets show the total number of trips made during the day, the total number of paswgers carried, and o-ther basic information. The sheets are then collected, bundled, and submitted to the city each week Once received, City staff then take this information and compile a summary of operational data for the transit system. MAS data include figures, for exr r ple, on total rdJes driven, total fuel used, total service hours, number of service days, average mfles per trip, and average vehicle fuel economy. Since no system operating colt data is reported on a monthly basis, it is difficult to use the other data to effectively evaluate monthly system performance. With the eventual operation of both demand -response and fixed route service. Monitoring system performance and aostswill become increasingly important. Consequently. it is recommended that during the transition phase Lod i Public Transit assume responsibility for preparing detailed transit systemptrforrnance reports. To aid in this effort. the transit system should purchase, install, and maintain an automated data reporting system capable of producing reports on state -mandated performance indicators, on-time performance, ridership, operating costs, and other system data of interest to the city. This system could. for example. simply consist of a personal computer using spreadsheet and graphics software and a printer. Reports generated by the sytem should be 6-5 Arthur Bauer & Associates, file. submitted to city staffon a monthly basis and be used to evaluate the management and operation of the transit system. A simdar data reporting system is followed for Lodi Taxi; however. even Itss information is currently available about taxdservice performance. For example, insufficient data casts to calcwate such standard performance indicators such as the cost per hour. cost per vehicle mile, the cost per passenger hour, and the cost per passenger mile. Although many of the taxa cabs are privately owned and may be used for non -taxi transportation (Le, private use) matting it difficult to track taxi hours and mileage, it is recommended that each taxa driver record this information on a log sheet so the data can be used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the taxi service. The automated reporting system used for Lodi Public Transit could also be used for generating reports for the taxi Secure FTA Section 9 Funding During this period the city staff should also work with the COG to obtain Section 9 funding fin the Fe6v-,d Transit Admhtis>tstion. Based on information provided by the QOC, Lodi's annual gVmbcx meat for FY 1991-92 was 5490,772. While state guidelines limit the pc rate tags cf nrmW that can be spent on operating and capital costs, the securing of these funds will significantly enhance the dkis ability to suaonsfuily implement this transit plan. Fe-deral guidelines do allow for Section 9 operating funds to be used for capital expenditures; however, Section 9 monies can not be used for operating costs. Develop A Transit System Marketing Plan With implementation of the service improvements de=ibecd above, Lodi P�biic Transit should also develop and implement a transit system marketing and promotion plan. The plan should evaluate issues influencing transit use in Lodi, identify s -e_ � iic steps for increasing system ridership. discuss the design and distribution of marketing materials. and include an action plan, implementation schedule. and marketing budget, An effort should also be made to identify companies, service organizations, and other community groups who would be Wing to distribute Lodi Public Transit marketing materials to residents. 6-6 Atthur US~ 6 Associates, Inc. One way to offsetmarketing costs would be for the transit system to allow fod local companies and groups to purchase advertising space on transit buses. The marketing plan bould provide size and design guidelines, cost information. and other advertising details. PHASE 0 - PREPARE AN OPERATIONAL PLAN During this phase the City cf L Kh wili need to prepare an operational plan fot implementation of fixed mute scrvim The. pian will reflect the information collected during this assessment but also provide additional detail on key components of the new service including the following: • Routes in Be Ser~red. Survey f;rdings and DAR logs suggest that fixed mute service should in -chide service to the Vineyard Shopping Center and downtown Lodi. Otherlikely transit destinations include area high schools., large employer sites (General Mills, Pacific Coast Producers), area hospitals. and community centers. ■ Scheduling. The operational plan will need to identify rodte tri andtransferp*ft. Schedulingdecisions should consider weekday service. night service, and weekend service. ■ Equipment Requirmx ents. The operationalplan will need to identify the number and type of vehides to be purchased, their seating capacity, and other vehicle specifications. • Farchox Structure. Using ridership projections, estimated systdm costs, and state farebox recovery requirements, the operational plan W11 need to desmbe a farebox structure that ensures that the OZed route service is cost-effective to operate and complies with state law. ■ Capital and Operating Costs. The operational plan will need to identify capital and operating costs for the fixed route system, asskss the availability of system funding. including FTA Section 9 money. and recommend a funding plan. 6-7 Ac:.-eur 132ulw 6 Associates, Inc. Marketing and Promotion. To encourage ridership for the fixed route service, the operational plan will need to identify how existing as well as new transit marketing materials and promotional activities can be used to increase the W►:eUhood for sua,es ful implementation of the new service. ■ How the Semi ae Should Be Org a n i zed. Fixed route service ca M be organized several differentways For example. the city could (1) rely on acontractor to operate and maintain the service, (2) purchase the vehicles but have a contractor operate the system, or (3) operate and maintain the servica itself S i csch option will differ in terms of cost and system 0mbdity, the operational plan should recommend an organizational structure that best meets the city's transit needs. PHASAI - IMPLEMENT FDO=D ROUTE ANDDEMAND-RESPONSE SERVICE This phase. ba.xd on the work completed during the two previous phases. is de4igned to implement both fired mute and demand -response service. With this in mind, a conceptual plan has been prep -aced that consists of the following elements, Route and Scheduling Requirements several routes have been identified and are suggested for servingmajor resideriti al and commercial area of the city. TWO shuttle buses, for example, could travel each route operating on 20 or 30 minute headways andwould use the Hutchins Street Square CommunityCenter asa major transfer station for the system. MAS assumes an average vehicle speed of 14 miles per hour (a planning factor used by the Stockton Metropotitan Transit District) with sufficienttime for layover. RsEdhle transit routes, as shown in Figure 6-1, might include the following: 6-8A+ihurA AesaciAes. k�w_ rkKfts � r tele Harry Lyme l Do+esdnwa Lower Sat Rd t DowMgwn f Ctwunkee t6 WoMtAAgstDowr nvm Wood wifte nomo CITY OF LODI TRANSIT ASSESSMENT Figure 6-1 Potential Fixed -Route Transit Routes y x� f I MAd** 9troef Std Cpm+. Car 0 N 0 0� 04 0e 0E 10 rCN F rM W ES � t. Bocirrevr Park 2. Trkay ltlQll ?. luurswom Somm Callas !. Kotu Park S, Morgn's Deped"W l Store G. Lots k6wnatirl H*'W'd 7. Sndat Securty Adm. C4 -Mer Z. I kAthka Strret Square corrrrn" c«*w 9. cow "OldwpoMce Station a chs t0, ckvr*w of ca"WW ce t I. Codi Ho Scrrod tx, Tarr CkWt 13. Gff owr;I Bus Depot W Data IS. EDD is. wondllr, Comm- Park 17. Weodbrldpe L4obUe EjL t,,% t8- G rmw IAds Tumor FAWWW IS iod! SWxkm a tnwrwrce P.w. . 20. G mw Fesw4w Corev l x t9� SPTC Ekn St. .t •r {IMairyA Lod Ave. 12 Tak" SL "a Ut to K Sim" i sa. s CarA.r r: 7 I I I ■ South Ham Lane/Downtown (total one way length, 3J milts). This route would begin at the intersection of South Hari and Harney Lane. The bus would travel north to Tokay, turn east to Crescent Avenue, and then proceed north to ELM. At Elm and Church Street, the vehicle would then head south. turn right on Walnut to the Community Center. the end of the line. After boarding and off - boarding passengers, the bus would then return along the same route. This would operate on a 20 minute headway. D -e: i a ti ons along the route might include B --c k -m a n Park, Tokay High School, the Municipal Service Center, Kofu Park, Lodi Memorial Hospital, the Social Security Administration office, City HRU and the Chamber of Commerce located downtown. LowerSaamwanio IRm-ad/Downtown/Cherokee (totall one way length, 3 miks). This route would originate at the intersection of Lower Sacramento Road and Lodi Avenue. Heading east on Lodi Avenue, the bus would travel north on Cres=t, and head east on Walnut to the Community Center, At Church the bus would turn east on Elm Street to Chi-erokee and then to the Department cf Motor Vehicles and the Califomia Employment Development Department offi on Oak Street, After boarding and off -boarding passengers, the bus would return along the same route. Destinations along this route might include Lodi High School, the Social Security Administration off, the Chamber of Commerce, the train and bus depot, the California Department of Motor Vehicles, and the California Employment Development Department office. Th is route would operate on a 20 minute headway. ■ WoodbridgvTowntownfLawrence Park (total one way length, 5A miles). This route originates at Woodbridge Community Park and follows Woodbridge Road south to Turner Road. Travelling east on Turner, the bus would turn south at California until it reached the 6-10 Arthur Bruer 6 es, nc. Community Center. After stopping at the Center. the bus would head north to Uckeford Street, turn east and stop at Lawrence Park before returning along the same route. Destinations along this route include Woodbridge Mobile Estates, the General Mills food processing plant, City Hall and the Court House, Lodi Stadium (Lawrence Park), and the Grape Festival Complex near Cherokee Due to its length, this route would operate on a 30 minute headway. As mentioned earlier, the operational plan to be developed during Phase II wM describe in more detail specific routes. the number of vehicles to be purchased, and the frequency in which the f'Lxed route system should operate, Lodi Public Transit should continue its demand -response service but limit its use to (a) people with physical or mental disabr7.ities that predude them from using the fixed route system. or (b) individuals who are not within walking distance c£ a shuttle stop and want to use the shuttle bus. PotOnW Ridership Determining potential ridership for any transit system is diWwWt to estimate. Gwen that ridership can fluctuate from year to year depending on fare increases. changes in routes and schedules, and other factors. many transit system look at historic growth and use this data to estimate future ridership. Yet, aomra tet forecasting future ridership is important because of its relationship to fatebox revenues and achieving the state's 20 percent farebox recovery requirement. In d s instanoa, however. projecting future ridership for Lodi Public Transit Is somewhat more complicated with the desire to maintain demand-responseser,,ke, initiate sub5ctiption service. and ultimately implement fixed route transit service. In addition, it is difficult to predict the impact marketing and promotion will have on future ridership. With these factors in mind, ridership estimates were developed using the fonafring assumptions: 6-11 Arthur Bau#r A A"eciates, kw- ■ Between FY 82-83 and FY 91-92 (estimated), Lodi Public Transit ridership irncreasad an average of 5.3 percent per year. More recen t ty, the average annual rate of growth between FY 89-90 and FY 91-92 was 5.4 percent. Thus, it is assumed that the basic demand. response ridership will continue to grow at an annual rate of 5.3 percent through FY 93-94when fixed route service is started. During the remaining two years of the plan growth is forecast at 2 percent per year- • Beginning in FY 92-93. the proposed subscription service would c0eradasp wt of the demand -response service. Its success wiH liaikelt be determined, in large part, by the effectivenessof the transit system marketing plan. For estimating purposes. it is assumed that subscription service wit result in a 2 ID 3 percent inamase in annual ridership. or 1.620 to 2,430 additionalpaswiigers per year. (Projections based on estimated FY 91-92 ridership of 81,130 passengers.) • Beginning in FY 94-95 when Fixed route ridership is implemented. it is assured that Lodi Public Transit will institute a new policy that permits only non --ambulatory passengers to use the demand -response service. It is ekti,aated that this will result in approximately 70 perctnt cf the demand-response(and subscription) ridership to shift to the fined route service. Once established, it is estimated that fixed mute servicewffl grow at 5 percent for the two remaining years of the plan Table 6.1 shows estimated ridership for Lodi Public Transit. with separate est im d t ca for d em a n d response, s-ubscription, and Exed route service. The transit system and city staff win need to monitor riders -hip l eve Is, and depending on ridership demand. may need to make Sys t e m adjustments on an as -needed basis 6-12 Arthur Bauor 6 Associates, Inc. TABLE 6-1 Projected Ridership for Lodi Public Transit 90-91 (actual) 81,130 N/A N/A 91-92 (cst.} FLI-C ] Demand Subscription Fixed Year Response Service (1) Route (2) Total 90-91 (actual) 81,130 N/A N/A 91-92 (cst.} W600 N/A N/A 92-93 91,190 2,736 N/A 93-94 2,818 N/A 94-95(3) 30,334 2,902 70,778 95-96 30-941 2990 74,317 96-97 31,560 3.080 78,033 (1) Assumes average annual increase of 3 percent. (2) Ass urn es average annual inose of 5 percent. (3) Assumes 70 percent mode shift from DAR to fixed route service beginning Vehicle Design and Specifications 81.130 86,600 93,926 98,841 104.014 108248 112,673 inFY94 Vehicles which are used as part of the Lodi Public Transit frced route system Ishould meet the following design motions: • Searing capacity, 12 to 15 passenger; ■ Wheelchair equipped and meet all requirements under the ADA k • Pyr Conditioning and ■ rsmt all applicable state and federal vehicle emission requirements. If possible, the vehicles should operate using a "clean burning" alternative fuel such as compressed natural gas, methanol, propane. or electric power. 6-13 ArthurBaw s•oc ez, Inc. As disc�d in Section 2, San Joaquin County has been classified as a severe air quality no�i- attainment area by the California Air Resources Board (ARB). In 1991, the ARB began enforcement of new emission standards for nitrogen oxides (NOx) and for particulates, both combustion byproducts from the burning of diesel fuel. As a result, diesel fuel buses arc now required to use emission control technology (a particulate trap) to legally operate within the state. Even with a particulate trap, diesel fueled buses are not anticipated to be able to meet 199$ federal mission standards. It is also aely that new NOx and particulate standards to be established in 1942 (and implemented by 1996) wM preempt federal standards and thus prohibit the sale of diesel bt s in the state. Consequently, Lodi Public Transit should consider using alternative fuels for it'4 vehicle fleet. Alternative fuel options might indude methanol, natural gas. propane, and electric power. According to data compiled by the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, the additional casts associate,{ with the .u,se of these different fuels vary from approximately 560-0 to $3,000 per vehicle. It is recommended that should the transit system decide to retrofit or purchase vehides using alternative fuels, a technology and fiancial analysis fast be conducted. Compliance With the Americans With Disabtiities Act When fixed mute service is implemented, federal law requires the City of Lodi t' also provide complementary paratransit service to individuals with physical or mental disabilities unable to use a Feed mute system. This type of paratransit service is currently offered by Lodi Public Transit as part of its demand -response transit program. Under the ADA, complementary paratransit programs must provide a level of (service that is comparable to that provided on the fixed route system. Although the law is targeted at those cities with fixed route service but lacking comparable paratransit service, it does not require a city implementing (emphasis added) fixed route service to prepare a paratransit plan. It is recommend -ed, however. that Lodi recognize the needs of its disabled residents and prepare a paratransit plan. United States Department cf Transportation regulations requite that a plan include the following information: 6-14 Arthur Bauer & Associales, Inc. • A description of the existing or planned f€xed route system; ■ A description of existing and proposed paratransit services; • Information about the way in which passenger eligibility will be determined; and ■ A discussion of efforts to coordinate the provision cf service with other public entities in overlapping or contiguous areas. Once the plan is prepare4 the Lodi City Council should approve the document Orior to it being reviewed and certified by the COG, the local transportation planning agency. The document should then be submitted to the regional rfm of the Federal Transit Administration for flmal approval Marketing and Promotion Btrilchng upon the ma keting plant developed during Phase t the marketing plan should be refinc-d to incorporate fixed route service. As with the original document, an effective marketingplan must identify the issues, probk mss and opportunities associated with transit use m Lodi; establish specific and reali�tie transit system marketing objectivm describe marketing strategies and tactics to reach those obiectivm define an organizational marketing strategy and one to WO -Year action program; spedfy who is responsible for program implementation; provide a budget and schedule; and provide for periodic monitoring and review of progress under the plan and for modifications, as necessary, 6-15 Arthur Bauer & Associates, Inc. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE The phased program should be implemented over a five year period as follows: ■ Ptz &e I- Deve le p q rn p 1 ernen t Transition Strategy, July 1992 through June 1994. his phase will consist of acquiring larger vehicles, irnpraving the existing dispatch system, hiring additional personnel. initiating Sunday and passenger resenation/subscription service, purchasing an automated data reporting system, securing FTA Sation 9 funding and preparing a transit system marketing plan. The principal servkz performance goal is to reduce passenger wail time from 45 to no longer than 30 minutes. ■ Phase II ' Prepare An Operational Plan, July 1993 through June 1994. The plan will include detail on pr7posed fixed routes.! scheduling and equipment requirements. farebox structure, estimates cf capital and Operating costs, marketing and promotion, and how fixed route service will operate. The plan should also discuss how best to integrate the fled route and demand -response transit services. ■ Phase III - Implement Fixed Route and Demand-ResporLs-e Service, l July 1994, The fixed route service could initially consist of four to' six vehicles operating on two or three routes identified in Figure 6-1 1. Lad i Public Transit will need to closely monitor both fixed route and demand -response ridership and system costs. LINKING IMPROVEMENTSTO SYSTEM OBJECTIVES 6-16 Arthur Bauer & A$aaeiataa, Irtc. Objective 1: Meet the transit needs of city residents. Recommendations: Continue to provide demand-reTonse service, initiate subscription service, and Wpfement reliable and c nvenient fixed route service to city residents. AU new vehicles purchased uy Lodi Public Transit grill be handicap accessible. In addition, expand weekend service by providing Sunday service. Objective 2: Provide for efficient and cost-effective transit service. RommmendaUmm Reduce passenger wait time through improvements in the dispatch system, the introduction of passenger subscription service., and the purchase and use of an automated data �erorfing system for monitoring system performance and productivity cf both Lodi Public Transit and Lodi Taxi.. Objective 3: Maximize resources available for management and operation of Lodi Public TralInsit. Recommendations: Implement improvements to the di p i� ch system, including the use of a mcep#ionist to answer incoming telephone calls, monitor system productivity using performance measures and other data 6-17 Arthur Bauer 6 Associales. inc- made available from the automated data reporting system. increase the farebox1recovery rate from 10 to 20 percent by 1995. Objective 4.- Secure . Secure stable sources cf haring. Recommendations: Continue to make ase of TDA funds for funding'both Lodi Public Transit al d subsidizing Lodi Taxi. Work with the COG staff to apply for F7A Section 9 funding, and take steps to develop advertising as a revenue sau m. Faster ocmmunity awareness and support for Lodi Public Transit. with ernp6sis on increasing ridership. Recommendations: Implement the rewrnmendation for development of a comprehensive tramii system marketing plan to gage public awareness cf the transit system and to encourage its use. As system efficiency continues to improve and with the introduction cf &e ce improvemu�s► system ridership should increase. Objective 6: Ensure that the transit service operates as scheduled and that all transit equipment has the hioest level of reliability and customer appeal. 6-18 & Assmiafts.lac. Recommendations: Implement the recommendation frr improvements to the dispatch system. the purchase and use of the automated reporting system. and the purchase of new vehicles for both demand -response and fixed route service, I 6-19 hu •socWoe. hm SECTION 7 I* Arthur Bauer & Associates, Inc. Consultants in Transportation & Public Finance SECTION 7 Recommended Financial and Capital Plan This section presents the five-year financial and capital plan for Lodi Public ransit for FY 92-93 (beginning July 1, 1992) through FY 97-98. Both the financial and capital plan are based on the serviceplan presented in Section 6. The ftna:ryrial plan reflects the expected system operatingcosts, the revenue from the farebox, and federal and state resources necessary to meet these operating nems over the naxt five year period. FINANCIAL PLAN The financial plan irdudes the following four components: Operating Costs capital Casts Operating Revenue • Capital revenue Sources Tables 7-1 and 7-2 identifyv 7eded revenues and expenses for demand -resp Anse service over the next frve years. Actual figs -es for the ] complete fiscal year and estimated figures for the current fiscal year are includ,-d so that cornparisons can be made. Tables 7-3 and 7-4 show similar information for reeonun=(W fed route service. Assumptions for future casts are tied directly to the expectt,i intlatio,t ;ate and to increased service. Dl39 to the recent economic remission and the uncertainties in inflationary increases from year to year, a rate of five percent leas been used for planning purposes. Lodi Public Transit must continue to closely monitor the annual rate of inflation assumed in this and future transit plans. Additional assumptions are as follows: ■ For demand -response service. ridership is anticipated to increase at 8.3 percent through FY 93-94, when Fixed route service begins. 7.1 Arthur Baler 6Associates. Inc. V N TABLE 7-1 Lodi Public Tfanalt: Demand --Response Five Year Financial Plan: FY 92 - FY 96 AoWd Estimated JPfe)"Ied > FY 90-911 FY •1-92 FY 92-93 FY 93-94 FY 94-95 FY 96-M FY 06-97 TRANSIT REVENUES (f) Operating Fundr Farabox R ft 9 r u a s (3) W,578 646,764 $82,655 see,9e0 $28,644 $27,22$ $27,77 Other 25,883 1,000 0 0 0 0 LTF Funding - Oparstlnq 2-67,930 365,317 $4,253 90,Iba 0 0 Stale Tranait Assistance 5,221 6$,660 47,711 50,574 5306 56,825 64,25 r ;8nm 0 - OPeratlno 0 0 166,505 180,315 50,063 MJ66 59.85 TotalOperat Onu0s: $342,610 $469,741 $383,123 $408,027 $130,365 $138,835 $147,86; ^•*cow 0 - Capital 0 0 94,000 110,000 LTFFunftq -Capital 0 0 23,504 0 0 0 i Total Capital Rwa7uss: SO SO $117,500 $110,000 $0 $0 $i TRANSIT EXPENDITURES (4� Oparatlons 286,531 383,273 322,985 343,979 109,901 117,045 124,65: GeneraJ Adrnlnistraborl 33,529 35,205 37,494 39,931 12.750 13.507 14.471 VshWo MaJnlenvee 20,250 21,263 22,845 24,117 7,706 5,206 5,741 Subtoials $342,$10 $359,741 6363,124 $408,027 $130,365 $130,839 $147,68; Fsrsbox Return Rate (5): 130/6 130/6 229E 21% 20% 20% 1" Told CapKal Cullay; SO $110,000 $117,500 .$110,000 SO SO $C V 6 TABLE 7— 2 Lodi Public Transit: Demand— Response Five Year Capital Budget: FY 92 — FY 96 Projected :s - FY FY 92-93 FY 93-94 FY 94-95 FY 95-96 FY 96-97 REVENUES LTF Funding — Capital State Transit Asslslanca aectlr • 9 (Capital Equipment Share) 117,500 110,000 Total Required $1 17,500 $1 10,000 $0 $0 $0 EXPENDITURES Denland--Response System Replooe Demand—Response Vehicles (1) $110,000 $110,000 $0 $0 $0 (Numberd Vehicles) 2 2 Purchase Automated DataReporting System 5,000 Install Customer Service Telephone Lines 2,500 Total Estimated Costs: 41 17,500 $1 10,000 SO $0 $0 r Arthur Bauer & Associates July 1992, TRANSIT REVENUES Operating Funds Fsrsbox Reosfpis (2) LTF Funding - Opsraling Slats Transit Assistanoe Section 9 - Operating Tota! Oporating Revenues; Section 9 - Capital LTF Fundinp - Capltel Told Capital Revenues; TRANSIT EXPENDITURES (31 Total Opsroting Costs Subtotal; Fsrsbox Return Rats; Total Capital Ovslay: -- —Total Experridilute 8: TABLE 7-3 Lodi Public Transit: Fixed Route Five Year Financial Plan: FY 92 — FY 96 Acivai EsUmatsd Pro(ected a FY 90-91 FY 91-92 FY 92-93 FY 93-94 FY 94-95 FY 05-06 FY" -97 ;0 so so so $55.260 557,90 $60.935 0 0 0 0 92,240 03,395 81,703 0 0 0 0 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 130.000 140.000 153.406 NIA NIA so SO S277.500 $291,375 i $305.944 ...r .� ,. 124,000 126.390 25, OCO 0 0 - - 30,000 78.610 0 0 0 NIA NIA $150.000 S205.000 825,000 s0 So j 0 0 0 0 277.500 29t.575 005.9441 NIA NIA $0 s0 S277.500 $291,375 $305.944 NIA NIA NIA NIA 20% 20% 20% 1$0,000 $205,000 $25,000 so s0 NIA NIA $150,000 $205.000 8302.500 $291,375 $505,044 Notes: (1) Fixed route service begins; assumes 70 percent modeshittlrom dsmand-rsaponso to (xed rout* seMce,lncludes systtm sobscribers, end assumesinl0al lntroduotion of4vehlcles (3 end spars), wlih 3vshiclss opsrsting 3,700 hours peryo or, (2) Estimate basad on projsctsd ridership multiplied by the avg• larobox rovenue par passenger of $ 75. (3) Oporating4osts based on vehicle operstingcort per hour of $25muh101od bytotal snnualVeNciohours, end adjusted forintatlon, Arthur Bauer S Associates, July 1092. M LTF Funding Total Required: EXPENDITURES Fixed Route System Purchase Vehicles for Fixed—Route Service (1) (Number of Vehicles) Construct Downtown Transfer Station Construcylnstall Bus Stops/Amenhies c 1 Note! p) YON r+o Arthur Bauer & II Total Estimated Costs: 1992 TABLE 7 — 4 Lodi Public Transit: Fixed Route Five Year Capital Budget: FY 92 — FY 96 Pro)scted > FY 92-93 FY 93-94 FY 94-95 FY 95-96 FY 96-97 30,000 120,000 $150,000 150,000 2 $150,GGO 78,610 126,390 $245.004 150.000 2 30,000 25,000 $205.000 25,000 $25.400 25,000 $28,000 $0 M.- For the remaining two years of the plan. ridership growth is forecasted at two pe-rcent per year. C rxn fied route sr ry ice begins in FY 9495. ridership will in cr ease by five percent per year through the planning period. It is also assimiedthat subscription ridership will rely on the fiedroute system for travel. ■ Operating costs are projected from current costs. The operating costs consist of thru components: vehicle operations, maintenance. and general system administration cgxmsc& Fbr dunand-response service, the vehicle operations budget is based on historical information and adjusted to reflect inflation and the implementation of service irnprovements (a total of 6.5 percent). S i it is assumed that 70 percent of the existing ridership will switch tof`txcd routeservice, futurevehicle operation costshave beta adjusted downward by 70 percent. Maintenance and administrative crus have been cakulated in similar fashion Since no historical data exists for determining fied route service costs.an average operatingcost per hour figure was developed based on data contained in the 1989 UMTA Section 15 report for similar size transit districts. Operating costs for fieri route system with less than 25 vehicllcs operated in maximum serv%ce ran,ed from $22 to as high as S75 per hour. According to the 1989 data, the City of Fairfield in S-olano County operated 7vehicles in its fied route system at an hourly rate of 523. Although this city has a somewhat larger population than Lodi, it has similar characteristics such as land Esse and its proximity to major urbanized areas. Using this as a guide, 525 per operating hour is 7-6 Anhw Bauer & Aksoc+ates, We. used for forecasting Lodi's fixed route operating costs. which includes j operations, maintenance. and administration. Operating full-time during the week and accounting for Sunday service, it is assumed that each vehicle in service will operate 3,7001. hours per year. OPERATING REVENUES The financial plan relies on three primary sources of revenue to cover both capital and operating coats. (The capital program is discussed in more detail later in this section.) The revenue sources include: ■ Farebox revenues • Transportation Development Act monies FCA Section 9 assistance Facebox Revenues The farebox revenue projection for the five year pknning period was estimated 1by multiplying expected annual passengers Iii tine average revenue per passenger wpected based on the existing transmit system fare stricture. To achie�-T the 20 percent TDA farebox recovery rate, the City of Lodi wM need to implement fare increases for its demand -response system. from 5.50 to f.65 for elderly and handicap individuals and from 51.00 to 5130 for other individuals. Based on these proposed fare inc easts, an average revenue per passenger rate of 5.83 was ws d for projecting farebox reven u -es. 03oe implemented. fixed route service will cost 5.75 per pemti. It is important to note that should the demand -response service be limited to elderl and handicap passengers. state law sets the farebox recovery rate at ten percent. This plan is based however, on the assumption that the demand -response system will continue to be used by the general public and. as a consequence. subject to the 20 percent farebox recovery requirement. 7-7 Arthur Bauer & Associates, Ins. It is recommended that during the transition period and prior to the initiation of fixed route se.rvicc, the transit syste-m rcviery its farebox structure taking into account passenger ridership, farebox revenue. and system Costs. Other Funding Sources There are two additional €'m.an4 i -W resources available for public transportation in Lodi: (1) State ofiC`�iftn-d Transportation Development Act (TDA), and (2) Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 9 funds. TDA funds include both Local Transportation Funds (LiF) and State Transit Assistance Funds (STAF). The LTF funds are derived from a quarter cent salmi tax on ail items. the funds arc apportioned at the county level according to population. The STAF funds are dtrived from the statewide sales tax on motor vehicle fuel and are available to local transportation operators once appropriated to the State Controller, based upon an allocation formula FrA Section 9 funds are dlstnbuted through a bbck grant program based upon administrative formulas LoS11_ TmhSDortOon wnd [LT -F) . As discussed earlier, LTF funds can be used to fund both demand-rand rued route service, LTF funds can also be used to subsidize the city's taxi service If all of Lodi's transit needs are met then these funds may be used to support road and wee irnprcrrcment Pte. LTF's first cant of funds if for transit however. 7his plan shows LTF going t o transit in the amount necessary to prevent operating shortfalls. State Transit ASWOM Funds (STAFI. State Transit Assistance Funds are' also important sources of transit funds. These funds are subject to annual state apportionments and, in past years, have been somewhat unpredictable. For purposes of this plan. STAF are assumed to increase by 7-8 Arthur Bauer dJ Associates, Int. 6 percent each ytar. This is consistent with revenue assumptions made in the draft "San Joaquin County Transit Systems Plan.' FTA Section 9 Funda As of the 1990 Census, the City ofLodi's population exceeded 50,000 residents thereby making the city eligible to apply for Section 9 program funds under the Federal Transit Act of 1991. Section 9 funds can be used for transit operating, capital, and planning purposes. Lodi's annual apportionment for FY 1991-92 was 5490,772. Under state guidelines, however. ortly S263,561 of this amount can be used for operating assistance. The remaining funds may be use for transit capital or planning pmjecfis. To become eligible for these funds, Lodi would need to satisfy several matching requirements: 50 percent for net operating expenses and 20 percent for the net capital cr planning expenses. Fortunately. local match requirements can be met using TDA monies. Farebox revenue, however, cannot be used for the local match. Section 9 operating funds can be also be used for capital cxpertse:s but Section 9 capital funds can not be used for operating costs. For pub of this plan, Section 9 funds are assumed to increase at a moderate annual rate of 2 percent. Shown in Table 7-5 is the anticipated amount of capital and operating funds available to the Chy of Lodz through the Section 9 Program over the next five years. CAPITAL PROGRAM Ta Ne 7-2 and Table 74 present the capital procurement plan and budget for the demand -response and fixed mube, respectively. for the five year plan. The total program is estimated to cost approximately 52.7 million, with the $607,000 attributed to replacement of demand -response vehicles. the purchase of new buses fc, Cved route service, and other capital improvements. 7-9 Arthur Bauer 6Associates. Inc- TABLE 7-5 Availability of Section 9 Funds to the City of Lodi: FY 92 - FY 96 Fiscal Capital Operating Year Funds Rmds Total FY 92-93 5231,755 $268,832 fS00.587 FY 93-94 $236,390 5274,210 $510,600 FY 94-95 5241,118 5279,693 5520.811 FY 95-96 5245,940 $285,290 5531,230 FY %97 5250,859 f290.992 5541.851 Assumes annual increase of 2 percent. Source: San Joaquin County Council of Governments. July 1992. The -apital program assumes the continued availability of federal capital funds uhder the F—IA Section 9 grant program. With the capital plan as proposed, availability of capital funds is not e-- e ted to be a problem. A summary cf the capital expenditures programmed for purchase during the five year program are as follows. FY 92-93 Capital Program Reolace Demand -Response Vehicles Lodi Public Transit has initiated a vehicle replacement program for its demand-retponse service. Due to heavy vehicle tie, anticipated increases in vehicle ridership, and the need forvehmes to be ha ndicap-accessible, it is recommended that two new vehicles be purchased during FY 92-93 and FY 93-96. Each vehicle is estimated to cost S75,000. 7-10 Arthur Bauer & Associates. Inc. Purcha5.e Automated Data Reporting System To improve transit system efficiency and productivity, it is recommended that Lod it Public Transit purchase and install an automated data reporting system. This system could consist of a personal computer. spreadsheet and graphics software, and a printer. This system will further increase transit system staffs capabilities to tabulate, analyze, and display ridership and operational information. Funds are programmed this year for the purchase of a computer, software. and technical training. In W C.U.stomer ServiceTelenhone uUn (�) With the initiation of advanced reservation and subscription service. it is recommehded that Lodi Public Transit install a 24-hour customer service telephone line. This telephone service will allow passengers to obtain prerecorded information on fares, schedules. and other service information and to also leave messages for transit system staff. Funds are programmed for the installation of the telephone lime and the purchase of a telephoc.. answering machine. Purchase Fixed Route Vehicles Funds are programmed for the purchase of one new 12 to 15 passenger bus for 1~txed route service• Additional buses are to be purchased in FY 93-94. Assuming this vehide is air conditioned and handicapped equipped vehide costs are estimated at S75,070. FY 93-94 Capital Program Reolace Demand -Response Vehicles The purchase of two more vehicles to replace existing equipment is programmed for this year. It is a continuation of the program described in the prior year's program. 7-11 Arthur Bauer a Associates, Inc. [kTRTITI The purchase of two more 12 to 15 passenger vehicles for fixe -i route use are programmed far this year. Again this is a continuation of the program described in the prior year's program. Construct Downtown Transfer Station Kiosk/Shetter Since the Hutchins Street Square Community Center will serve as the principal transfer station for the fiord route service, it is proposed that a station kiosk and shelter be built, The kiosk would have posted information on transit system operation and scheduling, fares, and dther relevant material. The shelter would likely bean enclosed structure with seating. It may also be necessary to cork-str ct a bus turnout to accommodate a vehicle boarding or off -boarding passengers. Constm ADrstall Bus Stow/Amenities Based on the operational plan to be prepared during Ebase n, Lodi Public Transh will want to construct needed bus stops and passenger shelters along the f-taced route system. These would be built over a two year period starting in FY 93-94. FY 94-95 Capital Program COn_str_ucALInstall Bus Stops/Amenities The construction and installation cfbus stops is a continuation of the program initiated in the prior year's program. 7-12 Annur Bauer Assoceatas, ine. FY 95-96 Capital Program No capital costs are to be incurred during this fiscal year. I Y 96-97 Capital Program No capital costs are to be incurred during this fiscal year. MONITORING CAPITAL/OPERATING REQUIREMENTS The availability of federal Section 9 funds will allow Lodi Public Transit to opera4e both demand - response and fixed route service. However. the transit system may have difficultly in meeting future operating and capital costs should these funds be reduced at some future date. Historically, the City of Lodi has used a large portion of its TDA funds for streets and roads improvemec m Ebr ezaanple, in FY 90-91, 5788,988 or 75 percent of the total TDA funds available (51,051,853) was claimed for street and road improvement projects. Therefore, if federal funds were reduced dramatically, cr were eliminated at some future date, it might jeopardize the provision cf fixed route service in Lodi. Of course, a reevaluation of the service being proposed would need to be undertaken to ensure that the TDA funds were being programmed to address the city's priorities. Tabk 7-6 summarizes the revenues and expenditures associated in implernentiAg a combination demand -response and fixed route transit system for the City of Lodi for FY 92-93 through FY 95- 97. 7-13 Amur BaLw4 /Associates. Inc. r MANSIT REWNUES Operating Funds Farebox Recelpts Demand -Response Fixed -Route Lodi Tad SeMce Farebox Subtotal: Over LTF Fundng - Operating StaleTranslt Assistance Section 9 - Operating Tolal Operating Revenues: Section 9 - Capital LTF Fundng - Capital notal Capital Revenues; TRANSITEXPENDI TURES Total Operating Casts: --_Subtolal�_ Farebox Return Rate: Total Capital Outlay: Total Expenditures: Arthur Bauer d. Actual Y 90-91 TABLE 7- 6 Lodi Public Transit Five Year Finenclai Summary: FY 92 - FY 96 Estmated Projected > FY 91-92 FY 92-93 M93- 94 M94 FY 95-96 96-97 $433,576 $46,764 $82,655 $86,980 $26,694 $27,228 $27,773 0 0 0 0 55,260 57,980 KM 13% $0 13% $110,000 NIX THIS ISCONTPACTURAL SMIACE ... 21% $315,000 $25,000 $0 dM $0 $342,610 $469,741 $650.624 $723.027 $432,565 $43,576 $46,764 $82,655 $86,980 $81,954 $85,206 $88,608 25,883 1,000 0 0 0 0 0 $267,930 $385,317 $84,253 $90,158 $142303 5148,180 $141,559 5,221 56,660 47,711 50.574 53,608 56.825 60,234 0 0 168,505 180,315 130,000 140,000 163,406 $342,610 $469.741 $383,124 $408,027 1407,885 $430,213 $433,807 0 0 214,000 236,390 25,000 0 0 0 0 53,5w 78.610 0 0 0 WZ610 $469,741 $267,500 $315,000 $25,000 $0 $0 fl 342,610 359,741 383,124 408,027 407.865 430,213 463,807 1342610. _ . $359,711 $38.1,124 $408,027 $407,665 $43x213 $453,807 13% $0 13% $110,000 22% $267,500 ... 21% $315,000 $25,000 $0 dM $0 $342,610 $469,741 $650.624 $723.027 $432,565 $430.213 $453,801