HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - December 8, 1982 (47)MTM By
SM? Rr6
Maunty BY
DR. allaaW
0
DEC. 8, -1982
Comamity Development Director Schroeder presented,, for
the perusal of the Council, information pertaining to the
Rosa Vulmice (A-81-7) j, 305 West lockeford Street, Lodi,
Which had previously been requested following an inquiry
by Dr. "mmas Carlton. Dr. Carlton was not present
although he was apprised by the City Clerk that the
matter was on the agenda for this meeting.
No faaml action was taken by the Cwncil on the ratter.
Kf
7r,
VV_
IV.
V,
_10t
MY
B 'ty,'
Z
VIM#
41 -,!ii a!,
X
Y.
`�• - C ( ` .PUBLIC WORKS ITEM #2.. - 8/31/82_M
,k•�, w �%/��,:� .. �ti2 .Q. I ..��G•j /� .sem A� ' _
hAd
WILLIAM J. WARD !� JACK L. NAVONt
/a1tCftN1 � � ;. � / OtwrT a�Tcrow -
`'►�* NtNR1/ ". $1/RATA
et►UTV aR[cr010
Board of Supervisors
Courthouse
Stockton, CA 95202
COUNTY OF SAN -JOAQUIN
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
R O. 90X 1110 — 1010 t. NAztLTON AVLNUZ
9TOCKTON. CALNPORNIA 99201
tt091 944-2201
August 25, 1982
WILLIAN L. CYPHER
et►VTV omtcrow
Reviewed and Approved:
Cel"
C. E. Dixon
County Administrator
PROPOSAL FOR MEETING TRANSIT NEEDS IDENTIFIED
IN THE UNINOORPORATED WOODBRIDGE AREA
Dear Board Members:
As you are aware, under the Transportation Development Act (TDA) before'
Local Transportation Funds (LTF) may be allocated.for street and road purposes,
it is mandated by the Transportation Development Act that all "reasonable unmet
transit needs" identified in the unincorporated areas must be met by the County.
Early. this' year, at the Board's direction, hearings were held by the County in
each supervisorial district to determine the transit needs of the outlying
communities. As a result of those hearings the Woodbridge area vocalized.a
transportation need and community members submitted a petition signed by local
residents to that effect. (See attached.)
In accordance with the State's mandate relative to ."reasonable transit.: -
needs", the San Joaquin County Council of Governments (COG) developed •a proposal.,
for meeting those transit needs identified in the Woodbridge area:.. As back-
ground. the ptoposah explained that Woodbridge is situated in the Iodic Planning
area, outside the city limits. In the recent past, transit service was,`available:
t
from the Community Action Council. It was removed about 1� years•,ago during'.'a
change in the agency's role in the County. The residents still have needs to :.
travel to Lodi for various reasons. Therefore,.it appeared reasonable that'thc'
City of Lodi's Dial-A-P.ide service might be explored as a potential alternat.ive.`
to serving Woodbridge residents. This proposal is only an option for the Bo'ard's
consideration.
The responsibility for duining "unmet transit needs" and "reasonable to
meet" rest with the local COG as the Regional Transportation. Planning Agency
(RTPA) for the area. While a need may be identified by the.COG:in.an-.;..
unincorporated area,. the County may not view that need as "reasonable to,:meet"
If.this becomes the case, then the County has two options: first, to -develop
.
an alternative proposal for meeting those "needs" which the County does feel -,is,
"reasonable" or if no reasonable alternative is apparent; second, to appeal': to
AUG 3 1 IW .
Board of Supervisors -2- �rAugust25, 1982
the local COG Executive Board recommending they reverse their finding based on
the County's conclusions.
The Council of Covernments proposal estimated the population for the
Woodbridge area based on the census tract that represents Woodbridge, and
included an estimate of elderly and low income persons. Based on this
information, the COG projected 2,924 one-way trips or passengers would exist
per year. The proposal included cost figures using the City of Lodi's present
operation format. At present, Lodi reimburses the cab company $3.00 for every
one-way trip carried with a City ticket. This is assumed to be the full cost
to the cab company of providing one trip. Assume the service is available
250 days a year (Monday through Friday for SO weeks) and 12 hours a day (7 a.m.
to 7 p.m.). Although Woodbridge is about 2 miles from central Lodi, the COG
estimated the cost per trip to the cab company•might increase above the
currently reimbursed level. Based on this assumption, they estimated the
following costs would prevail.
System Farebox Net Fare/ Cost/ Trip/
Cost Year Return (1O%) Cost Trip TrHour
$10,234 $1,023 $9,211 $.35 $3.50 .975
It was also assumed that the City's service with their six new vehicles
has the capacity to fill the need of approximately one trip per hour.
Pursuant to this proposal, a meeting was held with the Assistant City
Manager of_Lodi and verbal communication with the Lodi City Council resulted
in the initiation of direction to explore potential use of the existing Lodi
Dial:A-Ride taxi service by Woodbridge area residents.
The Assistant City Manager contacted the local cab company with whom: they
contract for services. The cab company indicated they can provide the service
at a cost of $3.50 to $4.00 per ride which could be determined as a=result of
negotiations through the City of Lodi with the cab company.
The City's service operates under the following format. The City prints
cab tickets and distributes those tickets to several key points within the city.
Lodi area residents purchase the tickets. The fare structure is;
elderly .50 - per one-way ride
general 2.00 - per one-way ride
The cab company turns the tickets into the City biweekly and the City
reimburses the cab company $3.00 per ticket. The cab company in turn purchases
their gas and maintenance from the City. The cab company pays for their insurance
out of the $3.00. The Assistant City Manager suggests that the County submit a
proposal to the City Council based on this same plan with the exception';tb t the
County could charge whatever they deemed necessary for a one-way trip, as long
as�they did not charge less than the City's current fare structure. County
August 25,.1982
tickets would be sold at a location predesignated in Woodbridge (probably the
nutrition site), and would be color coded to easily distinguish them from City
tickets. (Attached is a map of the generally proposed Woodbridge service area).
The County has two funding alternatives for the project. The first option
is to claim LTF funds "off the top" of the County's apportionment. This
alternative results in the County having less money available for streets and
roads. The second option is to request State Transit Assistance (STA) funds
to offset the cost of this activity. This funding source is currently utilized
by the County to fund both the Department of Aging's/Community Council elderly/
handicapped Countywide medical escort and the Public Works Department's South
County Area Transit, a fixed route general ridership service in the Manteca,
Lathrop and French Camp areas. STA funding appears the most viable alternative
for the 82-83 program. Under this option the County would submit a claim for
STA funds and then pay the City of Lodi through an agreement on a per ride, per
month basis. This would be a demonstration project to determine the level of
service necessary to meet the needs of the area. "Expenditures to Meet COG
Identified Reasonable Un -Met Transit Needs" is one of the proposed funding
priorities for 82-83 STA funds set forth by the COG in committee.
The COG's demographics projected 2,924 one-way trips annually. Based on
these estimates and because of the potentially higher cost of serving the '!Iuod-
bridge area (projected at $3.50 per trip), it is proposed that 3f the County
is to provide this service, it should be based on a slightly higher fare
structure than that of the City of Lodi.
Pr22osed Fares
Elderly $1.00 per one-way ride
General $2.50 per one-way ride
The City of Lodi has indicated that most of its ridership: is elderly.
Therefore, if it is projectedthat 10% of the Woodbrid8e ridership.would be
general and 90% elderly, then the cost and revenue breakdown is as follows:
Costs
2,924 riders X $3.50 per one-way trip = $10,234
10% fare -box return = $ 1,023
Revenues
292 ('10X) X $2.50 $ 730
2,632 (90X) X $1.00 2,632
2,924 TOTALS $3,362
The above projections would result in a fare -box return of $3,362
<.- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS - 4 - August 25, 1982
Since.it would cost considerably more for the County to put out to bid
the contract for a complete transit service, or to expand any of the existing
County services (eg. SCAT b CCIDOA) for the small area of Woodbridge, the COG's
proposal appears the most coat effective option presently available. This
option would require the County to negotiate an agreement with the City of
Lodi for expansion of its Dial -A -Ride service based on Lodi's exidting service
and subsequently, to prepare and submit an STA claim to fund the County's
portion of the service. Since it is mandated by the Transportation Development
Act that all "reasonable unmet.transit needs" identified in the unincorporated
areas be met by the County, therefore, if the Board wants to provide transpor-
tation services to the community of Woodbridge, then,
IT IS RECOMENDED:
That the Board of Supervisors:
I. Direct the Department of Public Works to negotiate an agreement
with the City of Lodi for expansion of the City's Dial -A -Ride
service to the Woodbridge area, and
2. Direct the Department of Public Works to prepare an STA claim
-based on the terms of a negotiated agreement with the City of
Lodi, and
..3. Direct that the Department of Public Works at the•conclusiou of
negotiations With the City of Lcdi.present to the Board for its.
review and approval, a negotiated agreement and an STA claim for.,;
the proposed expansion of transit services in the Woodbridge area: -`
Very truly yours,
e
1 M*.DB:dk '4q. -Wiliam J. Wa d.
Director of public Works `
Attltch*dnt
cc: County Administrator's Office
County Counsel's Office..
Auditor --Controller
Council of Coveyc{ments °
City of Lodi ✓✓ A,
Board. Clerk Agenda date 8-31-82
f
C
pI 'M �Qornr courry
do
(/ q
o •
e
�ILG
ell�
i s•
r . t b
1 i �
.l
a
IP
3
4
to
W
10
OC
2
h