HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6c. Adoption of SLO Transit's Short-Range Transit Plan Item 6c
Department: Public Works
Cost Center: 5201
For Agenda of: 4/15/2025
Placement: Consent
Estimated Time: N/A
FROM: Matt Horn, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Alex Fuchs, Mobility Services Business Manager
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF SLO TRANSIT’S SHORT-RANGE TRANSIT PLAN
RECOMMENDATION
1. Adopt a Draft Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San
Luis Obispo, California, adopting San Luis Obispo (SLO) Transit’s FY 2026-30 Short-
Range Transit Plan”; and
2. Adopt a Draft Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San
Luis Obispo, California, approving Fare Rates for San Luis Obispo (SLO) Transit.”
POLICY CONTEXT
The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) requires each transit agency
receiving federal funding through the Federal Transportation Improvement Plan (FTIP) to
prepare and adopt a Short-Range Transit Plan (SRTP) every five years.
Adoption of a Short-Range Transit Plan is consistent with the City’s General Plan
Circulation Element; the Climate Action, Open Space, and Sustainable Transportation
Major City Goal of the 2023-25 Financial Plan; the Climate Action Plan; and
recommendations of the Transit Innovation Study.
DISCUSSION
On February 25, 2025, staff presented to Council a review of the administrative draft of
SLO Transit’s Short-Range Transit Plan1. The presentation included a summary of work
completed since the July 2024 Study Session including additional service alternatives
analysis, capital improvement plans, operating revenue and expenditures forecast, fare
alternatives, joint coordination opportunities, and recommended service, fare, and
program changes.
After discussion and public comment, Council directed staff to advance the new direct
service to the Avila Ranch development from FY 2027-28 to FY 2026-27, to delay
providing year-round academic service from FY 2026-27 to FY 2028-29 to align with Cal
Poly’s planned schedule for year-round semester system, and to return at the April 15,
2025, meeting with a final Short-Range Transit Plan (Attachment A) for adoption.
1 Item 6a. Review the Administrative Draft of SLO Transit's Short-Range Transit Plan
Page 19 of 987
Item 6c
Service Changes
FY 2025-26
Reinstate services to pre-pandemic levels
Increase Routes 4A/B service frequency2
Revise Routes 2A/B to serve San Luis Ranch and to reduce headways3 to 45-
minutes
FY 2026-27
Modify academic service to align with Cal Poly’s transition to a semester system
Operate B Routes on weekends
New direct route to serve Avila Ranch development
FY 2027-28
Microtransit pilot program to supplement evening service
FY 2028-29
Provide academic service year-round to align with Cal Poly’s planned schedule for
year-round semester system
Fares and Programs
Maintain existing fare and pass rates
Eliminate 5-Day and 7-Day pass options
Expand the Downtown Access Pass program ’s geographic boundaries
Staff is recommending Council adopt a Draft Resolution (Attachment B) adopting SLO
Transit’s FY 2026-30 Short-Range Transit Plan. Once the plan is adopted, staff can begin
work on the implementation of the FY 2025-26 service changes including coordination
with the City’s contracted transit operations and maintenance provider, produc tion of
updated schedules and maps, and public noticing and engagement.
At the same February 2025 meeting, Council also discussed the status of a pilot program
approved in January 20244 which created a discounted 15-Ride pass option for K-12
students. From February through December of 2024, nearly 120 of the new discounted
passes were sold. The program has demonstrated an ongoing need for a discounted
student multi-ride pass option. SLO Transit continues to maintain its 20% minimum
farebox recovery ratio as required by the Transportation Development Act.
Staff is recommending Council adopt a Draft Resolution (Attachment C) approving fare
rates for SLO Transit including formalizing the K-12 discounted 15-Ride pass and
eliminating the 5-Day and 7-Day passes as recommended by the Short-Range Transit
Plan. If approved, the rates would be come effective June 1, 2025.
2 Route A - Add two runs in the morning. Route B – Add two runs in the afternoon
3 The amount of time between buses traveling in the same direction on a given route
4 Resolution No. 11473 (2024 Series)
Page 20 of 987
Item 6c
Previous Council and Advisory Body Action
1. March 12, 2025 - The Mass Transportation Committee (MTC) voted in favor of
recommending to Council the adoption of a Resolution formalizing the discounted
K-12 student 15-Ride pass program.
2. February 25, 2025 – Council received a presentation on the administrative draft of
SLO Transit’s Short-Range Transit Plan. Council provided feedback on the draft
plan and directed staff to make any necessary changes and return on April 15,
2025, with a final draft of the plan for adoption.
3. January 8, 2025 – The MTC voted in favor of recommending to Council the
inclusion of the recommended changes as presented in the draft plan with two
adjustments.
4. July 16, 2024 – Council received a presentation on the progress of SLO Transit’s
Short-Range Transit Plan update and provided direction regarding which service
alternatives to incorporate into the plan update.
Public Engagement
Thorough public engagement was conducted as part of the Short-Range Transit Plan
update process including rider surveys, online community surveys, stakeholder meetings,
three joint committee meetings, three public workshops, directed outreach to community
partner organizations, and two study session presentations to Council. A detailed list of
the public engagement activities can be found in the February 25, 2025, Council Agenda
Report which is linked on a previous page.
CONCURRENCE
The Mass Transportation Committee (MTC) concurs with the adoption of the FY 2026-30
Short-Range Transit Plan which includes a recommendation to eliminate the 5-Day and
7-Day passes. The MTC also concurs with the recommendation to formalize the
discounted K-12 student 15-Ride pass program.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply to the recommended
actions in this report, because the actions do not constitute a “Project” under CEQA
Guidelines Sec. 15378. Projects carried out as part of the final adopted Short -Range
Transit Plan must comply with state and local laws including environmental review or
finding of exemption.
FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: N/A Budget Year: N/A
Funding Identified: N/A
Page 21 of 987
Item 6c
Fiscal Analysis:
Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
Transit Fund $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
State
Federal
Fees
Other:
Total $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
Adoption of Short-Range Transit Plan
The SRTP will inform the development of five-years of fiscally constrained operating and
capital budgets for FY 2025-26 through FY 2029-30. The operating and capital budgets
provided by the plan will inform the 2025-27 Financial Plan as well as future financial
planning processes. Council is not required or committed to implement recommendations
contained within the plan if the commendation is determined to jeopardize the long-term
health of the Transit Fund.
Approval of Fare Rates
The implementation of the discounted K-12 student pass pilot program has not negatively
impacted the Transit Fund. Staff anticipates the adoption of the recommended fare rates
will not substantially change the revenue received from cash fares.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Council could choose not to adopt a draft Resolution adopting SLO Transit’s
Short-Range Transit Plan. Without an adopted Short-Range Transit Plan, the City
will not be eligible to apply for and receive federal funding.
2. Council could choose not to adopt a draft Resolution approving fare rates for
SLO Transit. The K-12 student pass pilot program has proven successful, and the
elimination of the 5-Day and 7-Day passes are recommended by the Short-Range
Transit Plan.
ATTACHMENTS
A - FY 2026-30 Short-Range Transit Plan
B - Draft Resolution adopting SLO Transit’s Short-Range Transit Plan
C - Draft Resolution approving fare rates for SLO Transit
Page 22 of 987
ʹͷǦʹ ͵ͳǦ͵ʹ
WƌĞƉĂƌĞĚĚĨŽƌƌƚŚĞĞ
ŝƚLJLJŽĨĨ^ĂŶŶ>ƵŝƐƐKďŝƐƉŽ
DĂƌĐŚŚϭϴ͕͕ϮϬϮϱ
WƌĞƉĂƌĞĚďLJ>^dƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶŽŶƐƵůƚĂŶƚƐ
Page 23 of 987
Page 24 of 987
San Luis Obispo Transit
Short Range Transit Plan
Plan
Prepared for
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Prepared by
LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
2690 Lake Forest Road, Ste. C
Tahoe City, CA 96145
March 18, 2025
Page 25 of 987
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 26 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARYǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǦͳ
Chapter 1: Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 1
Chapter 2: Overview of City of San Luis Obispo Transit Services ...................................................... 5
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 5
History, Governance, and Organizational Structure .................................................................................... 5
SLO Transit Services ...................................................................................................................................... 5
SLO Transit Fare Structure .......................................................................................................................... 11
SLO Transit Capital Assets ........................................................................................................................... 12
Chapter 3: Overview of Other Regional Public Transit Services ......................................................15
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 15
Public Transportation .................................................................................................................................. 15
Nonprofit Transportation Providers ........................................................................................................... 17
Private For-Profit Regional Providers.......................................................................................................... 18
Chapter 4: Current Policies and Standards ...............................................................................................21
Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 21
City of San Luis Obispo Existing Policies and Recommendations ............................................................... 2 2
SLO Transit Peer Comparison...................................................................................................................... 31
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) .................................................................................. 34
Existing Monitoring and Ongoing Service Improvement Processes ........................................................... 34
Goals and Policies Discussion and Recommendations ............................................................................... 36
City of San Luis Obispo ................................................................................................................................ 36
Chapter 5: Study Area Characteristics ........................................................................................................39
Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 39
Demographics ............................................................................................................................................. 39
Commuting Patterns ................................................................................................................................... 47
Chapter 6: Evaluation of San Luis Obispo Transit ..................................................................................51
Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 51
SLO Transit Ten-Year Trends ....................................................................................................................... 51
SLO Transit FY 22-23 Operations and Performance.................................................................................... 55
Findings .............................................................................................................................................. 61
Chapter 7: SLO Transit Service Alternatives ............................................................................................63
Page 27 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page ii
Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 63
Service Frequency Alternatives ................................................................................................................... 64
Span of Service Alternatives ....................................................................................................................... 68
Routing and Microtransit Alternatives ....................................................................................................... 70
Additional Service Alternatives Analysis – New Development ................................................................... 77
Performance Analysis of SLO Transit Service Alternatives ......................................................................... 85
Chapter 8: SLO Transit Capital Improvements ........................................................................................93
Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 93
Fleet Replacement Plan .............................................................................................................................. 93
Capital Improvement Program ................................................................................................................... 94
Transit Facilities .......................................................................................................................................... 97
Other Planned Capital Improvements ...................................................................................................... 100
Chapter 9: SLO Transit Financial Conditions ........................................................................................ 101
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 101
Projected Operating Expenditures and Revenues .................................................................................... 101
Capital Revenues ....................................................................................................................................... 101
Other Funding Sources .............................................................................................................................. 102
Chapter 10: Fare Alternatives ..................................................................................................................... 105
SLO Transit Fare Structure Overview ........................................................................................................ 105
Fare Strategies .......................................................................................................................................... 106
New Fare Technology................................................................................................................................ 109
Chapter 11: Transit Plan Recommendations ........................................................................................ 111
Plan Assumptions ...................................................................................................................................... 111
Service Plan ............................................................................................................................................ 111
Capital Improvements ............................................................................................................................... 119
Fare Changes ............................................................................................................................................ 121
Financial Plan ............................................................................................................................................ 122
APPENDIX A: REVIEW OF RECENT PLANNING STUDIES
APPENDIX B: DEMOGRAPHIC DATA
APPENDIX C: ROUTE PROFILES
APPENDIX D: SUMMARY OF SLO TRANSIT ONBOARD PASSENGER AND COMMUNITY SURVEY
RESULTS, AND STAKEHOLDER INPUT
APPENDIX E: JOINT COORDINATION OPPORTUNITIES
APPENDIX F: MARKETING STRATEGIES
Page 28 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page iii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLES PAGE
Table 1: Summary of SLO Transit Services and Frequency ........................................................................... 7
Table 2: SLO Transit Fare Structure ............................................................................................................ 11
Table 3: SLO Transit Revenue Vehicle Fleet ................................................................................................ 12
Table 4: SLO Transit Service Standards (1-2) .............................................................................................. 29
Table 5: SLO Transit Peer Group Data and Performance Indicators ........................................................... 33
Table 6: San Luis Obispo County Population Projections by Age Category ................................................ 39
Table 7: San Luis Obispo County Transit Needs Index (1-2) ....................................................................... 43
Table 8: City of San Luis Obispo Transit Needs Index ................................................................................. 45
Table 9: San Luis Obispo County Commute Patterns.................................................................................. 47
Table 10: SLO Transit Operations – FY 2013-14 – FY 2022-23 .................................................................... 52
Table 11: SLO Transit Performance – FY 2013-14 – FY 2022-23 ................................................................. 5 5
Table 12: SLO Transit Operations by Service – FY 2022-23 ........................................................................ 56
Table 13: SLO Transit Performance by Service – FY 2022-23...................................................................... 58
Table 14: SLO Transit Average Cash Fare per Boarding by Route ............................................................... 6 4
Table 15: SLO Transit – Service Frequency and Span Alternatives ............................................................. 6 5
Table 16: SLO Transit – Routing and Microtransit Alternatives .................................................................. 75
Table 17. SLO Transit – Route Alternatives to Improve On-time Performance and Serve New
Developments ............................................................................................................................................. 80
Table 18: SLO Transit – Service Alternatives Performance Analysis ........................................................... 86
Table 19: SLO Vehicle Replacement/Refurbishment Schedule - By Year of Purchase Order ..................... 95
Table 20: SLO Transit Capital Projects – By Year of Contract Aware or Purchase Order ............................ 96
Table 21: SLO Transit Stop Amenity Concerns ............................................................................................ 99
Table 22: SLO Transit Operating Costs ...................................................................................................... 102
Table 23: SLO Transit Revenues vs Expenditures ..................................................................................... 103
Table 24: SLO Transit Fare Structure Peer Analysis .................................................................................. 106
Table 25: SLO Transit Short Range Transit Development Plan Operating Costs ...................................... 112
Table 26: SLO Transit Short Range Transit Plan Ridership and Fare Revenue .......................................... 113
Table 27: SLO Transit Financial Plan ......................................................................................................... 123
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURES PAGE
Figure 1: SLO Transit Organizational Chart ................................................................................................... 6
Figure 2: SLO Transit Services ....................................................................................................................... 8
Figure 3: San Luis Obispo County Transit Needs Index ............................................................................... 44
Figure 4: North County Transit Needs Index ............................................................................................... 45
Figure 5: South County Transit Needs Index ............................................................................................... 46
Page 29 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page iv
Figure 6: Morro Bay Area Transit Needs Index ........................................................................................... 47
Figure 7: City of San Luis Obispo Transit Needs Index ................................................................................ 46
Figure 8: Cal Poly Fall Quarter Enrollment by Year – Full-Time Equivalent Students ................................. 49
Figure 9: SLO Transit Historical Ridership ................................................................................................... 53
Figure 10: SLO Transit Ridership by Service ................................................................................................ 53
Figure 11: SLO Transit Ridership by Month ................................................................................................ 57
Figure 12: SLO Transit Passenger-Trips per Service Hour ........................................................................... 58
Figure 13: SLO Transit Marginal Operating Cost per Passenger-Trip .......................................................... 59
Figure 14: SLO Transit Marginal Operating Cost per Service Hour ............................................................. 59
Figure 15: SLO Transit On-Time Performance by Route ............................................................................. 59
Figure 16: Southeast SLO Evening Microtransit .......................................................................................... 72
Figure 17: SLO Full City Microtransit ........................................................................................................... 74
Figure 18: Route Options to Serve San Luis Ranch and Avila Ranch........................................................... 81
Figure 19: New Route Options to Serve Avila Ranch .................................................................................. 84
Figure 20: SLO Transit Service Alternatives – Impact on Annual Ridership ................................................ 87
Figure 21: SLO Transit Service Alternatives – Impact on Annual Marginal Operating Cost ....................... 88
Figure 22: SLO Transit Service Alternatives – Passenger-Trips per Vehicle Service Hour .......................... 89
Figure 23: SLO Transit Service Alternatives – Marginal Operating Cost per Passenger-Trip ...................... 90
Figure 24: Downtown Access Pass Expansion ........................................................................................... 108
Figure 25: SLO Transit Plan Graphic .......................................................................................................... 115
Page 30 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
Executive Summary Page E -1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
This document presents a seven-year Short-Range Transit Plan (SRTP) developed for SLO Transit: the City
of San Luis Obispo’s public transit program. An SRTP is intended to provide a detailed business plan to
guide the transit organization over the coming five years. It includes a review of demographics and its
transit needs, a series of surveys and ridership counts conducted for all SLO Transit services, a review of
the effectiveness and efficiency of existing services, a review of similar systems, analysis of a wide range
of options, and the results of public input processes. The resulting SRTP provides operational, capital and
institutional plans, including an implementation plan. This SRTP plan has been prepared jointly with the
development of a parallel SRTP for the San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (RTA) program, in order
to identify means to best coordinate the two services.
The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan sets the objectives for a 7 percent mode split (the proportion of
all trips made by transit) by 2030 and a 12 percent transit mode split by 2035. The Transit Innovation
Study reaffirmed these objectives and recommended 17 transit innovations that are categorized into the
following five themes:
- Critical Upgrades that Support Ongoing Operations
- Technologies that Improve Rider’s User Experience
- Fare Program Updates to Increase Transit Accessibility
- Enhanced Service and Alternative Transit Options
- Bus Shelter and Street Improvements for Rider Safety and Comfort
This Short-Range Transit Plan used the recommendations from the Transit Innovations Study to guide
service alternatives development.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH
The SRTP Update process involved a robust outreach effort including the following:
x On-board/On-line surveys (discussed below)
x In-person and virtual stakeholder workshops
x Community workshops
x Directed outreach to community organizations
x Involvement of the MTC & RTAC (RTA advisory committee) in the review of working papers
EXISTING DEMOGRAPHICS
The population of the San Luis Obispo area (including portions of census tracts extending beyond City
boundaries), per the 2022 US Census estimates is 57,875. Roughly 7 percent of households in the city or
1,360 households do not have a vehicle available. Youth (persons under 18 years of age) total 5,279, or 9
percent of total population. Elderly persons age over 60 total 6,921 (12 percent). There are a total of
14,451 persons living in households below the federal poverty level (25 percent of total population).
Persons who indicate they have a disability total 4,728, or 8 percent of total population. Population is
forecast to increase by 1 percent from 2020 to 2030.
Page 31 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
Executive Summary Page E -2
OVERVIEW OF SLO TRANSIT
SLO Transit is a service provided through the City of San Luis Obispo’s Mobility Services Division of the
Department of Public Works, providing fixed route services throughout the city as well as the adjacent Cal
Poly campus. Management, marketing and planning are provided by a small two-person staff of City
employees, while service operations and vehicle maintenance is provided by a private contractor
(Transdev). The City Council is the decision-making body, with input from the Mass Transportation
Committee.
SLO Transit operates a total of four bus routes which operate as bi-directional loops, school tripper
services, an express route from Cal Poly to downtown and the Old SLO Trolley. Transit service levels vary
depending on weekdays, weekends and the academic year. On weekdays during the academic year,
service extends generally from 6:15 AM to 11:00 PM. Weekend service runs from 8:00 AM to 8:00 PM
and the “B” Routes are not available on weekends. The Old SLO Trolley operates one day a week during
the summer and fall. Levels of service were reduced during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The service requires 11 vehicles in operation at peak times. It operates 343,000 vehicle-miles per year
over 30,870 vehicle-hours of service.
Financials
The SLO Transit program has an annual operating cost of approximately $5.7 million (FY 2025-26).
The base cash fare is $1.50, or $0.75 for senior citizens age 65-79, passengers with disabilities, students K
– 12 (new program) and Medicare card holders. Free boarding is provided for Cal Poly students, faculty
and staff (through an agreement with Cal Poly), seniors age 80 and above, and children age 4 or below.
Passes are available at discounted rates. Operating revenues consist of Federal sources (particularly the
Federal Transit Administrations 5307 program), state/regional sources (particularly Local Transportation
Funds), and local fares and revenues.
Ridership
In total, approximately 515,000 passenger-trips are served annually (FY 2022-23 data). Routes 3 and 4
carry the most passenger-trips, as these routes serve the Cal Poly campus. Overall, 16.7 passengers board
per vehicle-hour of service, or 1.5 per vehicle-mile of service. Over the past ten years, ridership has
decreased by 55 percent. Much of this decline can be attributed to travel pattern changes resulting from
the pandemic.
Fleet
The SLO Transit fleet consists of a total of 17 fixed route revenue vehicles, one cutaway, one double
decker bus, a trolley replica vehicle. Vehicles use clean diesel technology, except for the cutaway and
trolley vehicle which are gasoline powered. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has set forth
regulations for public transit fleets to begin transitioning to zero-emission vehicles in 2026. SLO Transit
has started this process with the order of 8 battery-electric buses.
Page 32 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
Executive Summary Page E -3
Facilities
The SLO Transit operations and maintenance facility is located at 29 Prado Road. The primary passenger
facility is the Downtown Transit Center adjacent to City Hall. SLO Transit serves 166 bus stops, of which 50
have shelters/benches and an additional 111 have benches.
ONBOARD SURVEYS
Fixed Route Onboard Survey
An onboard passenger survey indicated that respondents were primarily coming and going for the
purpose of university/college (47 percent), work (19 percent), or shopping (18 percent). Passengers were
asked to rank transit service characteristics of SLO Transit on a scale of “Very Poor” to “Excellent.”
Categories receiving the highest marks were, “Value Received for Fare” and “Driver Courtesy”. The
categories with the lowest marks were, “Service Frequency” and “On-time Performance”. The most
common requests for service improvements were for “Later Evening Service” and “More Frequent
Service”.
Online Survey
In addition to the onboard surveys, an online survey was conducted for both SLO Transit and RTA. Around
60 percent of these respondents had not used public transit in the past 6 months. Asked to rate the
service, the lowest rated service among SLO Transit riders was “Hours of Service” followed by “Service
Frequency.” Top reasons for not using public transit were, “Have own personal transportation” , “Service
is Infrequent” and “Long Travel Times”. The most popular way to improve public transit in San Luis
Obispo County was expanded services.
PEER COMPARISON AND PERFORMANCE STANDARD DEVELOPMENT
Comparing SLO Transit with eight peer systems, SLO Transit was found to have the third highest
productivity, as measured in passenger-trips per vehicle-hour and second in terms of passenger-trips per
vehicle-mile. SLO Transit also had the third highest trip per capita rate. Operating cost per vehicle
revenue hour was above the peer average but the cost per passenger-trip is lower than the peer average
(the third lowest of the peer group). The SLO Transit average fare is above the peer average.
This peer analysis, combined with SLO Transit actual performance was used to update performance
standards for SLO Transit services. Potential service changes were evaluated using these performance
standards.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
A wide range of potential service improvements to SLO Transit service were analyzed in Chapter 7.
Options considered included increasing frequency, reinstating routes suspended during the pandemic,
expanding weekend service, providing academic service levels year-round, revising routes to improve on-
Page 33 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
Executive Summary Page E -4
time performance, microtransit, and serving new developments. Operating cost and ridership estimates
were developed. For each alternative, the performance of the net impact to status quo was evaluated
and compared to the adopted performance standards in Chapter 4.
SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN ELEMENTS
The service plan elements recommended in this short-range transit plan will increase ridership by 33
percent over base case scenario, bringing the city closer to the transit mode split objectives. The
implementation of all plan elements will increase SLO Transit’s operating budget by 31 percent or $2
million by the end of the planning period. This short-range transit plan assumes the availability of
temporary federal revenue sources such as American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) or carryover from Federal
Transit Administration (FTA) 5307 funds.
Figure 25 graphically presents the SLO Transit SRTP. Recommendations are as follows:
FY 2025-26
Reinstate Pre-COVID Routes (6X, Highland Tripper, and SLO Tripper)
The first step to increasing ridership and improving service for SLO City residents and students is to
reinstate routes suspended during the pandemic. Route 6X was recently reintroduced. It is also
recommended that the Highland Tripper and SLO Tripper are reinstated in FY 2025-26. These services
provide additional runs during peak periods for SLO High School and Cal Poly students. It is estimated that
reinstating these pre-COVID Routes (including Route 6X) will increase ridership by around 15,900 annually
(FY 2025-26) for an increase in operating costs over base case of $45,100 annually (FY 2025-26). This
service plan element meets both productivity and cost-effectiveness performance standards. Two
additional vehicles will be required for maximum service with the implementation of this alternative.
Increase Route 4A/4B Frequency During the Academic Year
The Transit Innovation Study identified increasing frequency on fixed routes as a high priority. Route 4 is
the most popular SLO Transit service, particularly with Cal Poly students. Route 4A is projected to
provide upwards of 152,000 passenger-trips in FY 2025-26, and Route 4B is projected to provide 70,000
passenger-trips. Increasing service frequency during peak travel periods on Route 4 would likely further
benefit ridership and improve connectivity between downtown and Cal Poly.
As part of this service plan element, SLO Transit should increase service frequency on weekdays during
the academic year by adding two new runs on Route 4A departing the Government Center at 8:30 AM
and 9:15 AM. In the afternoons, two additional runs on Route 4B, which operates in the
counterclockwise direction, should be implemented which depart the Government Center at 4:15 PM
and 5:00 PM. The alternatives performance analysis showed that this plan element will cost around
$5.00 per additional trip served and will improve overall productivity in terms of passenger-trips per
vehicle hour.
Increasing the frequency of Route 4A/4B is anticipated to increase ridership by 8,100 passenger-trips
over base case while increasing operating costs by $39,900 annually. Implementation is recommended
for the next fiscal year (FY 2025-26). One additional vehicle will be required for maximum service.
Page 34 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
Executive Summary Page E -5
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch – 45 Minute Headways
At full buildout, the San Luis Ranch development along Madonna Road will include a total of 604 dwelling
units. This includes 299 high-density housing units, 34 affordable housing units, and 83 medium-density
units, all of which have a higher potential to generate transit ridership. The higher-density residential
development is concentrated along Madonna Road and is already served by SLO Transit. Under an
agreement with Cal Poly, up to 300 students will soon be living in this area. The nearest existing stops to
the high-density area are located along Madonna Road within a reasonable 5-minute walk distance.
To better serve the San Luis Ranch development, SLO Transit should revise Routes 2A and 2B by traveling
along Froom Ranch Way between Dalido Drive and Los Osos Valley Road, rather than Madonna Road.
While Route 2 service to the stops near Madonna/Oceanaire would be eliminated, these stops would still
be served by Route 3 (which currently generates 88 percent of the ridership at these stops). This would
increase the length of Route 2A by 0.8 miles while cutting 0.1 miles from Route 2B, respectively. Route 2
also has a significant on-time performance issue, with 40 percent of Route 2A runs operating more than
15 minutes late and 11 percent of Route 2B runs operating more than 15 minutes late (during a survey
conducted in October 2023). To address the on-time performance issue and the longer route mileage, the
revised Route 2A and 2B should operate on a 90-minute cycle length (time for one bus to make a round
trip) instead of 60 minutes. In order to maintain semi-frequent headways reasonable for an urbanized
area, a second bus should be added to both 2A and 2B so as to provide 45-minute headways.
An additional 66,300 one-way passenger-trips are estimated with the implementation of this plan
element in FY2025-26. Operating costs will increase by approximately $500,000 annually. Two more
vehicles will be required.
FY ʹͲ26-27
Operate B Routes on Weekends Year-Round – 7:45 AM to 8:00 PM
The four counterclockwise B routes do not operate on weekends. As a result, service is limited to the
large one-way A routes. While the fact that some key corridors are served by more than one A route
(such as DTC – Foothill Boulevard or DTC – Madonna Road) still provides some direct bi-directional
service, other trips can require a long travel time around the majority of the one-way A loop. Operating all
four B routes on Saturdays and Sundays (as well as holidays on which weekend service is provided) would
incur an annual operating cost of $424,200 and increase ridership by 40,400. This cost estimate takes into
account the additional costs associated with revising Route 2 to serve San Luis Ranch.
New Avila Ranch Direct Route – 60 Minute Headway
Avila Ranch is a mixed-use residential/neighborhood commercial development under development along
the north side of Buckley Road in southern San Luis Obispo. At buildout, it will include a total of 720 units,
consisting of 125 higher-density units (24 units to the acre), 494 medium-density units (up to 20 units to
the acre), and 101 lower-density units (7 units to the acre) as well as a small 15,000 square foot
neighborhood commercial center.
Page 35 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
Executive Summary Page E -6
Page 36 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
Executive Summary Page E -7
As development is constructed for Avila Ranch, a new route should be implemented specifically to serve
the development. This route would use the existing Route 2 alignment south from downtown along South
Higuera Street and make a clockwise loop around Suburban Road, Eastwood Lane, the extension of
Ventura Drive, the extension of Horizon Lane, Buckley Road, and Vachelli Lane before returning north on
South Higuera Street.
In addition to providing service to Avila Ranch, this option has the benefit of doubling service along the
South Higuera Street corridor which has substantial ridership (roughly 2.5 times the ridership along the
Broad Street corridor along Routes 1A/1B). This route also could serve the Elks Lane/Prado Road loop off
of S. Higuera Street currently served by Route 2A, thereby reducing running time and improving the on-
time performance of Route 2A. Note that serving this loop in the northbound direction would require a
traffic signal at Elks Lane / S. Higuera Street to allow buses to reliably turn onto S. Higuera Street
northbound.
As this route is not a one-way loop, only one additional bus would be needed to serve Avila Ranch with
hourly headways. Assuming service is provided over the same span as the existing Route 2A span, annual
operating costs would be increased by $435,900, while ridership would be increased by 36,200. This plan
element should not be implemented until warranted by development of Avila Ranch.
FY ʹͲ27-28
Late Night Microtransit Pilot – 10 PM to Midnight, 7 days/week, Academic Year
Microtransit was also identified in the Transit Innovation Study as a long-term priority for the City of San
Luis Obispo. Through the use of microtransit technology and phone apps, it is possible for a passenger to
request a ride “on-demand” within certain areas and certain times. The benefit of microtransit is that it is
not limited to a set route with set stops, but rather passengers can be picked up at their curb and
dropped off at the curb of their destination. This allows homes on the outlying edges of neighborhoods to
be served more directly or for passengers to make cross-town trips without transferring. The
disadvantage of microtransit is that if there is high demand for service, there could be a 30-minute or
longer wait for a ride. Passengers who depend on public transit to travel to work or appointments at
specific times may find microtransit less convenient, as a ride may not be available at the time they need
it.
Microtransit has been successful in areas that are not easily served by a fixed route, low productive fixed
routes, or during the evenings and weekends, when there is less demand. Generally, SLO Transit Routes
are very productive and therefore, it is not cost-effective to replace the fixed routes with on-demand
microtransit. However, the option of microtransit in the evening, when demand is typically lower, is
recommended for consideration in FY 2027-28. Later evening service was the top requested service
improvement during the SLO Transit onboard survey effort.
SLO Transit services are not available past 11 PM, and only Routes 3 and 4 operate this late during the
academic year. As part of this plan element, microtransit would be available between 10 PM and
Page 37 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
Executive Summary Page E -8
midnight during the academic year using three vans. Around 7,400 additional passenger-trips could be
expected for an annual operating cost of around $171,000 annually. It is reasonable to charge a higher
fare for microtransit than fixed route services. A general public fare of $4.00 with corresponding
discounts for qualifying passenger-trips is recommended.
Microtransit should initially be implemented as a one-to-two-year pilot program. Three vans will need to
be procured, if the current contractor is used. Alternatively, some areas have had success in procuring a
separate contractor who specializes in microtransit to operate as a “turnkey” service. Under this scenario,
the City would not have to purchase new vehicles or the microtransit software, as it would be included in
the total cost of the contract.
If microtransit proves to be a successful form of public transit in San Luis Obispo, the city could consider
expanding service to an all-day, city-wide microtransit service. A ballpark cost estimate for an expanded
microtransit program would be on the order of $1.7 million annually if operated from 6 AM to 10 PM.
Ridership generated from other similar microtransit programs operated by California transit operators
indicates a potential demand of 75,400 trips annually from an all-day city-wide microtransit program.
With this level of demand, up to five vehicles would be required to operate the service at peak times
while maintaining a wait time of around 30 minutes.
The fare agreement with Cal Poly, would not apply to microtransit. Therefore, students would be
encouraged to continue to use the more cost-efficient fixed route, as it is free to them. This leaves
microtransit available for trips which are more difficult and lengthy via fixed routes. The danger of
microtransit is that the curb-to-curb/on-demand aspect can make the service quite popular. If more
vehicles are added to meet the increased demand, costs will begin to rise significantly.
FY ʹͲ28-29
Provide Academic Year Service Levels Year-Round
Cal Poly administration has indicated plans to expand class offerings and associated student activity levels
in the summer. Additionally, Cal Poly will be switching to a semester based academic calendar in FY 2028-
29.Currently, SLO Transit operates a higher level of service during the academic year when student
ridership is greatest. Providing that higher level of service year-round not only addresses Cal Poly
schedule changes but provides the community as a whole with more frequent public transit service. This
alternative met the cost-effectiveness performance standard in the alternatives analysis.
As shown in the Plan Tables, this plan element would increase ridership by 16,600 annually with an
associated operating cost increase of $195,900. No additional fleet would be required. This option also
has the benefit of providing more consistent year-round driver schedules, which has the potential to
increase driver retention.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Transit services require ongoing capital investment in facilities and vehicles. Capital investments in both
vehicles and passenger facilities can attract additional riders while improving the quality of service and
Page 38 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
Executive Summary Page E -9
safety of existing riders. Of note, California’s Innovative Clean Transit regulation will go into effect during
the plan period, requiring SLO Transit to transition to zero-emission buses (ZEBs).
Fleet Replacement
Transit vehicles must be regularly replaced to maintain a safe and reliable fleet. The SLO Transit Asset
Management Plan sets a target to allow no more than 50% of the revenue vehicle fixed route fleet to
exceed the FTA-defined useful life. As the vehicle procurement process can take multiple years, transit
agencies must identify their vehicle needs well in advance. A detailed fleet replacement table is
presented in Chapter 8. In summary, SLO Transit has ordered eight BEB vehicles in FY 2025-26 to replace
old diesel vehicles. During this planning period, an additional two BEB vehicles will be ordered.
Additionally, SLO Transit plans to refurbish six diesel buses (including the double-decker). This is
consistent with CARB rules and the ZEV Rollout Plan. This results in a net addition of one fixed-route bus.
This will allow for the transition to battery electric buses while charging infrastructure is being developed.
It is anticipated that some buses will need to charge during the day, requiring more buses to be available
for service. Fleet replacement will cost on the order of $4.5 million during the seven-year planning period.
Fleet Additions
The plan elements described above will require six more fixed-route vehicles for maximum service.
Currently, 11 vehicles are required for maximum service. The SLO Transit fleet consists of 17 vehicles
presently, not including the trolley and double-decker bus. SLO Transit has already purchased 8 new BEB
vehicles which will arrive sometime next year. Instead of replacing older vehicles with the new BEB’s, five
of the existing vehicles will be kept in the active fleet and refurbished during the planning period. This will
bring the fleet up to a total of 22 vehicles. In order to maintain an appropriate spare ratio of 25 percent
for the fixed route fleet, SLO Transit should have 21 vehicles. Therefore, SLO Transit does not need to
purchase new fixed route vehicles in order to implement service plan elements.
SLO Transit does not own vans which would be suitable for the microtransit pilot. If microtransit service is
successful in San Luis Obispo, the City should purchase at least three new vans toward the end of the
planning period. This is reflected in the financial plan table below.
Other Capital Improvements
Table 21 in Chapter 8 presents a seven-year capital improvement plan for all items outside of revenue
fleet replacement. This includes bus yard improvements, technology, bus stop improvements, BEB
charging infrastructure, and rehabilitation of the Downtown Transit Center.
This seven-year capital improvement program totals $6 million and will be funded primarily through the
SB 125 program and Federal Transit Administration grants.
Long Term Plan for Relocated Transit Center
The SLO Transit Innovation Study includes the concept of Mobility Hubs, which brings together public
transit, bikeshare, carshare, scooter share, and other first-last mile solutions without the use of a private
vehicle. The study notes that a location of interest for a future Mobility Hub is the Downtown Transit
Center.
Page 39 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
Executive Summary Page E -10
The 2016 SRTP noted that SLOCOG was leading an effort to construct a new enhanced transit center on
Higuera Street between Santa Rosa Street and Toro Street. In 2012 the Coordinated Downtown San Luis
Obispo Transit Center Study recommended a facility consisting of up to 16 bus bays, indoor/outdoor
passenger waiting areas, driver break areas, restrooms and a transit information counter. The larger
transit center would allow for more buses to be able to pulse in and out of the transit center which would
enable enhanced route timing coordination. Currently SLO Transit has 5 bus bays. There are multiple
times of day when five buses are waiting at the transit center. With full implementation of this transit
plan (particularly changes to Route 2) additional bus bays will be required. In 2017 the SLO City Council
adopted the Downtown Concept Plan which also envisions a relocated transit center on Higuera Street
between Santa Rosa Street and Toro Street. In November of 2023 the SLO City Council approved the
purchase of a property in this block on the northwest corner of Higuera Street and Toro Street (1166
Higuera Street). This is the same property identified in the 2012 Coordinated Downtown San Luis Obispo
Transit Center Study as the preferred alternative to advance into environmental review (Alternative 6).
Initially this site is envisioned for parking. A transit center would require using the northern part of
Higuera Street which is currently striped for parking and a bike lane and was previously one of three one-
way travel lanes and parking.
Project development for a relocated transit center would need to involve close coordination between the
City of SLO and RTA along with SLOCOG. This would include the development of joint funding
applications, environmental clearance, design, project phasing and construction. A key feature not fully
envisioned in the 2012 study is the addition of bus charging at bus bays. This will be important to support
the transition to a BEB fleet by both SLO Transit and RTA.
FARE CHANGES
This SRTP does not recommend a fare increase for SLO Transit. SLO Transit fares are currently in line or
above other peer agencies and a fare increase would not be consistent with the goals of the City Council
to increase the transit mode split. Two fare strategies are recommended to encourage use of the transit
system:
x EExpand Downtown Access Program (DAP) – This provides free passes on SLO Transit for all people
employed in the downtown area. The qualifying area should be extended to include all areas
south of US 101, west of San Luis Obispo Creek, and north of Pismo Street. A southern extension
from the downtown area encompasses all the area south of Pismo Street, west of the Union
Pacific Railroad, and north of High Street. This includes the Railroad District.
x Simplify Day Pass Options – Simplify the fare structure by eliminating the five and seven-day
passes.
x Cal-IITP Open-Loop Contactless Fare Payment System – Continue to work with SLOCOG on the
implementation of fare payment technology which allows users to use any credit card/debit
card/phone (open-loop) to pay for their bus trip.
Page 40 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 1
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
San Luis Obispo County spans 3,616 square miles on California’s central coast. The majority of the
County’s 281,712 residents live in communities located within the United States (US) 101 or US 1
corridors.1 The City of San Luis Obispo is the county seat and the largest city in the County, with an
estimated population of 59,219 living within the urbanized area.2 Other population centers in the
County include the Cities of Paso Robles, Atascadero, Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, Pismo Beach, and
Morro Bay and the census-designated places (CDPs) of Nipomo, Los Osos, and Templeton. The California
Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly) is located in the City of San Luis Obispo and serves as a major
educational, economic, and cultural center for the region.
Public transit is an important component of the San Luis Obispo County transportation system,
enhancing connectivity both within and between communities. Public transit not only aids mobility-
limited residents, but also yields other benefits such as decreased road congestion, improved air quality,
increased economic opportunity, and better access to education.
1 United States Census Bureau. (2022). Age and Sex, American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. Retrieved from
https://data.census.gov/
2 Federal Transit Administration. (2023). FY 2023-2010 Census UZA Population Data. Retrieved from
https://www.transit.dot.gov/
Note: Overlooking Morro Rock [Photo], by Blake Carroll, 2016, Flickr.
Page 41 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 2
Public transit will play an even more significant role in San Luis Obispo County as the region works to
advance the goals of the 2023-2045 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), such as reducing single-
occupant vehicles, mitigating congestion on US 101 and other roadways, and limiting vehicle miles
traveled. The RTP and other studies relevant to public transportation in San Luis Obispo County are
summarized in Appendix A.
The San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (RTA) and San Luis Obispo Transit (SLO Transit) are the
two largest public transit providers in San Luis Obispo County. The two agencies have retained LSC
Transportation Consultants, Inc. to update each agency’s respective Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) as
part of a joint effort. While two separate Draft Plans were developed, a series of joint interim memos
were initially prepared to both coordinate services to the greatest extent possible, as well as to
summarize project progress.
This document, SLO Transit Draft Short Range Transit Plan, is the compilation of a series of Working
Papers. Although this document focuses on the City of San Luis Obispo and its transit services, some
background information is provided at a more regional level.
Chapter 2 summarizes the key characteristics of SLO Transit, including the services currently offered and
the agency’s capital amenities.
Chapter 3 briefly describes other transit services operating in the region, with an emphasis on how these
other services connect to SLO Transit.
Chapter 4 - In this chapter, SLO Transit fiscal year (FY) 2022-23 performance is presented alongside
existing performance standards. Then, peer transit operators for both programs are analyzed as a means
of guiding revised performance standard recommendations.
Chapter 5 - This chapter reviews the demographic and economic characteristics of both San Luis Obispo
County and the City of San Luis Obispo, with a focus on data relevant to transit demand and the near-
term future of RTA and SLO Transit services.
Chapter 6 - This chapter evaluates SLO Transit operations and performance.
Chapter 7 - Service alternatives for SLO Transit are presented. The alternatives are based on public input
and the recommendations of related studies, including the recent SLO Transit Innovations (Transit
Innovations) Study (2024).
Chapter 8 - This chapter focuses on the recommended capital improvements needed to operate transit
services over the planning period, specifically the transit fleet, the bus stops, and the Downtown Transit
Center.
Chapter 9 - This chapter presents “base case” financial forecasts which were used as the basis for the
financial plan.
Chapter 10 - This chapter reviews potential changes to the SLO Transit fare structure.
Page 42 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 3
Chapter 11 - This chapter outlines the Short-Range Transit Plan service and capital elements
recommended for implementation over the seven-year planning period. A financial plan presenting
revenues and expenditures for seven years is also presented.
Appendix A - Presents recent planning studies relevant to the Short-Range Transit Plan effort.
Appendix B - Presents demographic maps of San Luis Obispo.
Appendix C - Presents route profiles for SLO Transit, including boardings by hour and by stop.
Appendix D - Presents results of the on-board survey, the community survey, and a summary of
stakeholder input.
Appendix E - Presents existing and future coordination between SLO Transit and RTA, including
scheduling/transfer opportunities and joint capital projects, as well as a discussion of the regional ADA
paratransit service, Runabout.
Appendix F - Presents a review of marketing strategies.
Page 43 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 4
This page intentionally left blank.
.
Page 44 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 5
Chapter 2
OVERVIEW OF CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TRANSIT SERVICES
INTRODUCTION
The City of San Luis Obispo Transit (SLO Transit) provides local fixed route service for the City of San Luis
Obispo and Cal Poly. This chapter discusses SLO Transit services, as well as how SLO Transit connects to
other regional transit programs. SLO Transit fares, vehicles, and amenities are also described.
HISTORY, GOVERNANCE, AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
SLO Transit has provided local transit service to the City of San Luis Obispo and
Cal Poly since 1974. SLO Transit is administered by the Mobility Services
Division, a branch of the City’s Department of Public Works. The transit
program is managed by the Mobility Services Business Manager and the Transit
Coordinator. The Mobility Services Business Manager reports to the Deputy
Director of Mobility Services. The City contracts operations and maintenance
functions to a purchased transportation contractor, Transdev North America.
The SLO Transit organizational chart is shown in Figure 1.
The Mass Transportation Committee (MTC) advises the City Council regarding
public transit programs. The MTC has seven members: one Cal Poly designated
employee, one Cal Poly student representative designated by the Associated
Students, Inc., one senior citizen 62 years or older, one person from the
business community, one person with technical transportation planning
experience, one disability community representative, and one member at-large.
Depending on interest, two members from the general public can be appointed
as well.
SLO TRANSIT SERVICES
SLO Transit Fixed Routes
Table 1 presents key SLO Transit service characteristics. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, SLO Transit
operated eight fixed routes, three tripper services, one evening express service, and one seasonal
trolley. During the COVID-19 pandemic, two of the tripper services and the evening express service were
suspended due to staffing difficulties stemming from the nationwide bus operator shortage. While the
three suspended services have not yet resumed operations as of the time of writing, they are
summarized in Table 1 alongside the active SLO Transit services.
SLO Transit service hours vary depending on the time of year, with SLO Transit operating extended
service hours when Cal Poly is in session. During the academic year, SLO Transit service hours are
generally 6:00 AM to 11:10 PM on weekdays and 8:15 AM to 8:10 PM on weekends. During the summer,
service hours are generally 6:00 AM to 8:00 PM on weekdays and 8:15 AM to 8:10 PM on weekends. SLO
Transit services are described individually on the following pages and depicted in Figure 2.
Page 45 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 6
Page 46 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 7
Table 1: Summary of SLO Transit Services and Frequency
Start End Start End Start End
Bus: Fixed Route
Route 1A - Johnson, Tank Farm, Airport 6:15 AM 10:00 PM 8:15 AM 8:00 PM SLO Government Center Same as start 60
Route 1B - Broad, Airport, Johnson 6:45 AM 6:30 PM -- -- SLO Government Center Same as start 60
Route 2A - Higuera, LOVR 3, Madonna 6:15 AM 10:00 PM 8:15 AM 8:05 PM SLO Government Center Same as start 60
Route 2B - Madonna, LOVR 3, Higuera 6:45 AM 6:35 PM -- -- SLO Government Center Same as start 60
Route 3A - Promenade, LOVR 3, Cal Poly 6:20 AM 11:10 PM 8:20 AM 8:10 PM SLO Government Center Same as start 30 - 60
Route 3B - Cal Poly, LOVR 3, Amtrak Station 6:45 AM 10:35 PM -- -- SLO Government Center Same as start 30 - 60
Route 4A - Foothill, Cal Poly, Monterey 6:00 AM 11:05 PM 8:15 AM 8:05 PM SLO Government Center Same as start 45
Route 4B - Monterey, Cal Poly, Ramona Dr 6:15 AM 10:30 PM -- -- SLO Government Center Same as start 45
San Luis Tripper 4, 5 7:15 AM 4:00 PM -- -- SLO Government Center Same as start 4 Round Trips
Laguna Tripper 4 7:35 AM 3:40 PM -- -- SLO Government Center Same as start 1 Round Trip
Highland Tripper 5 7:45 AM 9:00 AM -- -- Ramona at Palomar Kennedy Library 30
6 Express 5 6:00 PM 9:20 PM -- -- Cal Poly Performing Arts Center Same as start 30
Old SLO Trolley 6 5:00 PM 9:10 PM -- -- La Cuesta Inn Same as start 20
Source: SLO Transit
Note 6: The Old SLO Trolley operates on Thursdays during the summer and fall. The Old SLO Trolley provides Holiday Trolley service on Fridays and Saturdays in December.
Weekday
Service
Frequency
(Minutes)
Service Hours 1, 2
Weekday Weekend Start & End Locations
Note 1: Summary accurate as of December, 2023. No service on Thanksgiving and Christmas. SLO Transit operates the weekend service schedule on New Year's Day,
Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, Presidents' Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, the Friday after Thanksgiving, Christmas Eve, New Year's Eve.
Note 2: Service hours presented represent academic year schedule. Hours are reduced during the summer.
Note 3: LOVR stands for Los Osos Valley Road.
Note 4: On Mondays, San Luis Tripper service starts at 8:45 AM and Laguna Tripper service starts at 8:50 AM.
Note 5: The San Luis Tripper, Highland Tripper, and 6 Express are currently suspended.
Page 47 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 8
Page 48 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 9
Routes 1A & 1B
Routes 1A and 1B provide bidirectional service to southeast San Luis Obispo, with Route 1A operating in
the clockwise direction and Route 1B operating in the counterclockwise direction. Both Routes 1A and
1B operate on an hourly frequency; Route 1A departs the Government Center at 15 minutes after the
hour and Route 1B departs at 45 minutes after the hour. During the academic year, Route 1A operates
from 6:15 AM to 10:00 PM on weekdays and from 8:15 AM to 10:00 PM on weekends. Route 1B
operates the same schedule year-round, operating from 6:45 AM to 6:30 PM on weekdays only. Stops
served by Routes 1A and 1B include the Dignity Health French Hospital Medical Center, the San Luis
Airport, Tank Farm, Broad Street, and Johnson Avenue.
Route 2A & Route 2B
Routes 2A and 2B are bidirectional routes that serve southwest San Luis Obispo, with Route 2A
operating in the clockwise direction and Route 2B operating in the counterclockwise direction. Routes
2A and 2B provide hourly service; Route 2A departs the Government Center at 15 minutes after the
hour and Route 2B departs at 45 minutes after the hour. Route 2A operates from 6:15 AM to 10:00 PM
on weekdays and from 8:15 AM to 8:05 PM on weekends during the academic year. Route 2B follows
the same schedule year-round, running from 6:45 AM to 6:35 PM on weekdays. Areas served by Routes
2A and 2B include Social Services, the Department of Motor Vehicles, Laguna Middle School, and
Madonna Plaza.
Route 3A & Route 3B
Routes 3A and 3B provide bidirectional service from Cal Poly to commercial centers in San Luis Obispo,
with Route 3A running in the clockwise direction and Route 3B running in the counterclockwise
direction. During the academic year, Route 3A is available from 6:20 AM to 11:10 PM on weekdays and
from 8:20 AM to 8:10 PM on weekends. Route 3B runs from 6:45 AM to 10:35 PM on weekdays year-
round. Routes 3A and 3B typically run hourly, but service frequency is increased during the academic
year; when Cal Poly is in session, Route 3A runs twice per hour during the morning and Route 3B runs
twice per hour in the afternoon. Currently, the first 6:00 AM run of Route 3A is not operating due to a
lack of bus operators. Routes 3A and 3B both stop at the Cal Poly Kennedy Library, the San Luis Obispo
Amtrak Station, the Promenade, Madonna Plaza, and Laguna Middle school, among other locations.
Route 4A & Route 4B
Routes 4A and 4B are bidirectional routes which serve downtown San Luis Obispo and Cal Poly, with
Route 4A operating in the clockwise direction and Route 4B operating in the counterclockwise direction.
Both Routes 4A and 4B run every 45 minutes; Route 4B always leaves the Government Center 15
minutes after Route 4A. Route 4A runs from 6:00 AM to 11:05 PM on weekdays during the academic
year, and from 8:15 AM to 8:05 PM on weekends year-round. Route 4B only runs on weekdays,
operating from 6:15 AM to 10:30 PM during the academic year and from 6:15 AM to 6:50 PM when Cal
Poly is out of session. Key stops served by Routes 4A and 4B include the Cal Poly Kennedy Library, the
Cal Poly Performing Arts Center, Santa Rosa Park, and residential neighborhoods northwest of
downtown.
Page 49 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 10
Laguna Tripper
The Laguna Tripper is a supplemental service for students traveling to and from Laguna Middle School.
The Laguna Tripper only runs on weekdays during the school year. Daily service consists of one morning
run from the Government Center to Laguna Middle School and one afternoon return trip. The schedule
varies depending on the day due to variations in the school schedule.
Old San Luis Obispo (SLO) Trolley
The Old SLO Trolley is a seasonal service in downtown San Luis Obispo. In 2023, the Old SLO Trolley ran
on Thursdays from 5:00 PM to 9:00 PM from June 6 through November 30. Service was then extended
through December 2023 as the “Holiday Trolley.” Holiday Trolley service was provided on Fridays and
Saturdays in December from 12:00 PM to 8:00 PM.
The Old SLO Trolley starts at La Cuesta Inn and runs a fixed route through downtown along Monterey
Street, completing one loop every half hour. The service stops at sixteen stops throughout downtown,
with four timed stops: La Cuesta Inn, Monterey at Osos, Marsh at Chorro, and Monterey at California.
San Luis Tripper
The San Luis Tripper is a supplemental service for students traveling to and from San Luis Obispo High
School. When in service, the San Luis Tripper runs on weekdays during the school year, providing two
trips each morning from the Government Center to San Luis Obispo High School and then two reverse
trips in the afternoon. The San Luis Tripper is not currently running due to a lack of bus operators.
Highland Tripper
The Highland Tripper is a supplemental school-year service for students traveling to and from Cal Poly.
When in service, the Highland Tripper completes three round trips each weekday morning between the
stop at Ramona Drive and Palomar Avenue and Cal Poly via Highland Drive and Foothill Boulevard. The
Highland Tripper is not currently in service due to a lack of operators.
Route 6x
Route 6x provides half-hourly service from the Cal Poly Performing Arts Center and the Government
Center on Thursdays from 6:00 PM to 9:20 PM during the school year.
Key Transfer Locations
SLO Transit services have been designed so that passengers can transfer between local routes, as well as
to other regional transit services. Important SLO Transit transfer locations, and the services that stop at
each, are listed below.
x Government Center – SLO Transit fixed routes; RTA Routes 9, 10, 12, 14.
x Cal Poly Kennedy Library – SLO Transit Routes 3 A/B, 4 A/B; RTA Route 9.
x The Promenade – SLO Transit Routes 2 A/B, 3 A/B.
x San Luis Obispo Amtrak Station – SLO Transit Route 3B; Amtrak; Greyhound.
Page 50 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 11
SLO TRANSIT FARE STRUCTURE
The SLO Transit fare structure is shown in Table 2. Cash fares and multi-day passes can be purchased
onboard. Pass products can also be purchased at the City of San Luis Obispo City Hall Finance Counter
and the San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce.
The regular, one-way cash fare is $1.50. Senior adults ages 65 to 79, disabled passengers, and Medicare
card holders are eligible for the discounted fare of $0.75, or 50 percent of the regular fare. Seniors ages
80 and older ride SLO Transit for free by receiving a VIP card from the SLO Regional Rideshare office.
Children ages 4 and younger also can ride for free with a fare-paying adult. Cal Poly and the City have
currently negotiated a prepaid fare agreement that allows Cal Poly students, faculty, and staff to ride
SLO Transit for no additional fare.
SLO Transit offers multiple pass products. The 31-day pass costs $40.00 for regular passengers and
$20.00 for discount-eligible passengers. Grade-school students can purchase the 31-day pass for $25.00.
SLO Transit also offers 1-day, 3-day, 5-day, and 7-day passes that range in cost from $3.25 to $15.00.
Additionally, SLO Transit has a 16-ride pass that can be purchased for $24.00 and a 15-ride pass for
discount-eligible passengers that can be purchased for $11.25. Passengers can board SLO Transit with
Regional Pass products, as well: passengers can purchase a Regional Day Pass for $5.50 and 31-Day Pass
for $68.00 (or $34.00 for discounted passengers).
Table 2: SLO Transit Fare Structure
Fare Type Regular
Senior/
Disabled 1 VIP 2 Children 3 Student 4
One-Way Fare $1.50 $0.75 Free Free --
31-Day Pass $40.00 $20.00 -- -- $25.00
16-Ride Pass $24.00 -- -- -- --
15-Ride Pass -- $11.25 -- --Ψϭϭ͘Ϯϱ
7-Day Pass $15.00 --------
5-Day Pass $12.00 -- -- -- --
3-Day Pass $7.00 -- -- -- --
1-Day Pass $3.25 -- -- -- --
Regional 31-Day Pass 5 $68.00 $34.00
Regional Day Pass 5 $5.50 --------
Note 1: Discounts are for seniors ages 65 to 79, disabled, and Medicare card holders.
Note 3: Children 4 and under ride for free with a fare-paying caretaker.
Note 2: Seniors ages 80 and older are eligible for a VIP card that allows them to board all fixed
route services in SLO County for free. To receive the VIP card, eligible seniors must go to the
Regional Rideshare office and provide valid identification.
Note 5: Regional 31-Day and Day Pass allows unlimited rides on all RTA, SLO Transit, and Morro
Bay routes for the dates indicated.
Note 4: Students include all youth in grades K-12 with student ID.
Source: SLO Transit
-- -- --
Page 51 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 12
SLO TRANSIT CAPITAL ASSETS
Fleet Inventory
SLO Transit’s current revenue vehicle fleet is detailed in Table 3. The revenue fleet consists of seventeen
vehicles; fourteen of the vehicles are low-floor transit buses, one is a double-decker bus, one is a trolley,
and one is a cutaway. Of note, SLO Transit procured its first two battery-electric buses (BEBs), a low-
floor Proterra and a low-floor New Flyer, in 2023. The City has also issued a purchase order for six
additional BEBs and is working on approval to procure another two.
The average age of the low-floor vehicles is 12 years, and the average mileage is 338,234. Currently, SLO
Transit operates nine vehicles at peak times. SLO Transit has two support vehicles in addition to its
revenue fleet.
Table 3: SLO Transit Revenue Vehicle Fleet
Agency ID 1 Make Model Year Mileage
2
754 Gillig Low Floor 2007 300,899 2019
755 Gillig Low Floor 2007 313,874 2019
856 Double K Trolley 2008 71,219 2020
857 Gillig Low Floor 2008 480,498 2020
858 Gillig Low Floor 2008 475,880 2020
859 Gillig Low Floor 2008 481,177 2020
860 Gillig Low Floor 2008 454,148 2020
861 Gillig Low Floor 2008 445,314 2020
862 Gillig Low Floor 2008 448,708 2020
963 ůĞdžĂŶĚĞƌĞŶŶŝƐ Double Deck 2009 131,903 2022
1264 Gillig Low Floor 2012 292,711 2024
1365 Gillig Low Floor 2013 311,994 2025
1366 Gillig Low Floor 2013 302,951 2025
1167 El Dorado Cut-Away 2011 128,865 2016
1768 Gillig Low Floor 2017
136,818 2029
1769 Gillig Low Floor 2017
150,304 2029
1770 Gillig Low Floor 2017
140,006 2029
2371 4 Proterra Low Floor 2022
--2034
2372 4 New Flyer Low Floor 2022
--2034
Note 1: Information accurate as of December 2023.
Note 2: Mileage data accurate as of 4/8/2021 or 2/23/2022, depending on the vehicle.
Source: SLO Transit
Est.
Retirement
Date 3
Note 3: Estimated retirement dates based off of vehicle model's Federal Transit Administration's Useful Life
Benchmark.
Note 4: Indicates electric vehicles.
Page 52 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 13
Facilities
The SLO Transit Operations and Maintenance Facility is located at 29 Prado Road in San Luis Obispo, and
houses all operations, maintenance, and dispatch functions. The facility is located adjacent to the City’s
Water Department. The facility will eventually host fourteen chargers for BEBs. The 2023 RTP
recommended that a new, stand-alone maintenance facility be developed for SLO Transit in the next
few years to provide increased vehicle storage capacity and improved amenities for staff.
Park-and-Rides
The City of San Luis Obispo finished developing the Calle Joaquin Park-and-Ride lot in 2018, however,
the facility is not currently served by SLO Transit. The spot contains 31 parking spaces, two motorcycle
spaces, and a bus turnout.
Passenger Amenities
SLO Transit’s passenger amenities help keep passengers safe and comfortable while waiting for the bus.
Amenities catered towards bicyclists, such as bike racks, help increase connectivity to the transit system
by encouraging bicycling for first/last mile travel. SLO Transit’s large passenger amenities are described
briefly in this section.
Bus Stops
SLO Transit serves 166 bus stops within San Luis Obispo and the nearby Cal Poly Campus. Of these stops,
50 have shelters and 111 have benches. Solar lights are installed at 23 stops and electronic, real-time
schedule signs are installed at 3 stops. Almost all of the SLO Transit bus stops have an information kiosk
as well (96 percent). The two largest SLO Transit bus stops are the Government Center transit center
and the Cal Poly Kennedy Library. Some SLO Transit stops are shared with the RTA.
Bicycle Amenities
SLO Transit has five bus stops with bicycle racks: the Government Center, Marsh Street at Osos Street,
Marsh Street at Chorro Street, the San Luis Obispo Amtrak Station, and Santa Rosa Street at Leff Street.
Page 53 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 14
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 54 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 15
Chapter 3
OVERVIEW OF OTHER REGIONAL PUBLIC TRANSIT SERVICES
INTRODUCTION
This chapter summarizes other transportation programs in San Luis Obispo County. It is important to
note that this Chapter does not discuss every transportation service in San Luis Obispo County but
instead focuses on the services that provide direct connections to/from the RTA or SLO Transit.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
Atascadero Dial-A-Ride
The City of Atascadero provides the Atascadero Dial-a-Ride (DAR) within city
limits. The Atascadero DAR service area also extends to the Trader Joe’s and
medical corridor in Templeton. City staff are directly responsible for the
management of the transit program and dispatch, while bus operator positions
are filled by contracted staff. The City owns all of the Atascadero DAR vehicles,
which are equipped with wheelchair lifts and bicycle racks.
The Atascadero DAR is a general public, door-to-door service available on weekdays from 7:30 AM to
3:30 PM. Fares vary by trip distance: the general public fare for trips within the downtown city zone is
$5.00, while the general public fare for trips to the outer zone is $8.00. Seniors, disabled residents, and
Medicare card holders are eligible for discounted fares. Passengers can schedule rides on the
Atascadero DAR to RTA Route 9 bus stops if they need to travel to other communities in the region.
Morro Bay Transit
The City of Morro Bay provides the Morro Bay Transit service, which consists of a
single, deviated fixed route available to the general public and the Morro Bay
Trolley, which operates on Saturdays and Sundays from early June through early
October each year. The City contracts operations responsibilities to an outside
agency.
The Morro Bay Transit fixed route operates Monday through Friday from 6:25
AM to 6:45 PM. The deviation feature of the fixed route is referred to as “Call-A-Ride”; to request a
deviation up to 0.75 miles from the route, passengers must call dispatch in advance to schedule their
pick-up/drop-off. The Call-A-Ride component of Morro Bay Transit is available to the general public.
General public one-way fares are $1.50 for the fixed route and $2.50 for Call-A-Ride. Discounted fares
are also available. Morro Bay Transit also offers day pass and punch pass products. Morro Bay Transit
accepts the Regional Day and 31-Day Pass products. Runabout passengers ride for free with their
Runabout card. Passengers who need to travel beyond Morro Bay can transfer to RTA Routes 12 and 15
at a few locations within the city, with the most significant transfer center being the City Park.
Page 55 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 16
Monterey-Salinas Transit
The Monterey-Salinas Transit District (MST) is comprised of the Cities of
Carmel, Del Rey Oaks, Gonzales, Greenfield, King City, Marina, Monterey,
Pacific Grove, Salinas, Sand City, Seaside, Soledad, and the County of
Monterey. MST operates thirty-four fixed routes and complementary
paratransit service, referred to as MST Rides, throughout a 159-square-
mile service area using a 170-vehicle fleet.
MST Route 84 provides service from King City, in Monterey County, south to Paso Robles, in San Luis
Obispo County, serving San Lucas, San Ardo, Bradley, and San Miguel along the way. The service is
available seven days per week and makes two roundtrips per day. RTA passengers can transfer to MST
Route 84 by taking RTA Route 9 or Paso Robles Routes A/B to the North County Transit Center. The
general public fare for Route 84 is $2.00, and the discounted fare is $1.00.
Santa Maria Regional Transit
The City of Santa Maria, in northern Santa Barbara County, operates
the Santa Maria Regional Transit (SMRT) service, which consists of
twelve local fixed routes, three regional fixed routes, and
complementary paratransit service. The SMRT service area includes
the City of Santa Maria, as well as the unincorporated communities of
Orcutt, Tanglewood, New Cuyama, Lompoc, Vandenberg, Los Alamos,
Buellton, Solvang, Santa Ynez, and the Chumash reservation. General
public one-way fares are $1.50 for the local fixed routes and $2.00 for the regional routes. Discounted
fares are available, as well as various pass products. SMRT and RTA Route 10 both serve the Santa Maria
Transit Center. Of note, SMRT recently increased service frequency on most of the fixed routes to 45
minutes instead of hourly, limiting the number of timed-transfer opportunities between SMRT and RTA.
Senior GO!
Senior Go! is a transportation service available to seniors ages 65 and older
in San Luis Obispo County. Senior GO! is a SLOCOG program supported by
Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds. SLOCOG contracts the RTA
to administer the Senior GO! service and Ventura Transit Systems, Inc. to
operate the service.
Senior GO! is available weekdays from 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM and Saturdays
from 10:00 AM to 3:00 PM. Eligible passengers can request up to four one-
way trips each month, to and from destinations within San Luis Obispo County. Fares vary based on the
distance travelled; the starting one-way fare is $2.50. Passengers can use Senior GO! to access other
local and regional transit services within San Luis Obispo County, including the RTA and SLO Transit, by
requesting rides to active bus stops.
Page 56 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 17
San Luis Obispo Regional Rideshare
The San Luis Obispo Regional Rideshare (SLO Rideshare) is a division of
SLOCOG. The objective of SLO Rideshare is to reduce the need for those
who live, work, and/or visit San Luis Obispo County to drive alone. While
SLO Rideshare does not directly provide transit services, the program still
increases regional mobility by providing trip-planning assistance, offering
emergency rides, and coordinating the region’s Safe Routes to School
program, among other efforts. Programs offered include:
x 511 Trip Planning – people can dial 511 anywhere in San Luis Obispo County for up-to-date
information on road conditions, public-transit services, ridesharing, etc.
x iRideshare – a free online ride-matching system.
x Park-and-ride map – SLO Rideshare offers an online map with information on park-and-rides
available in the region.
x Emergency rides home – SLO Rideshare helps coordinate free or low-cost rides home in the case
of an emergency for all participants registered with iRideshare.
x Technical assistance for developers and jurisdictions looking to reduce the vehicle miles traveled
(VMTs) within the project area or community.
NONPROFIT TRANSPORTATION PROVIDERS
Cambria Community Bus
The Cambria Community Council is a nonprofit organization that
provides transportation assistance to seniors (ages 60 and older) and
individuals with disabilities in the communities of Cambria and San
Simeon. The Cambria Community Bus is a door-to-door service provided
by the Cambria Community Council Monday through Friday from
8:00 AM to 4:30 PM. The service relies on volunteer drivers to provide
rides. Passengers must call at least one day in advance to schedule a ride. All rides are free. In addition
to local trips, the Cambria Community Bus makes one roundtrip to San Luis Obispo each month for
residents with specific shopping or medical needs. Cambria Community Bus passengers can transfer to
RTA Route 15 by requesting service to a local bus stop and paying the required RTA fare.
SMOOTH
SMOOTH, Inc. is a private nonprofit organization dedicated to
addressing transportation challenges and helping people
access the services they need. SMOOTH is contracted by
numerous local groups, organizations, and agencies, including
the City of Guadulupe, the County of Santa Barbara, and the Tri-Counties Regional Center, to provide
transportation services in northern Santa Barbara County, with occasional trips into San Luis Obispo
County.
Page 57 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 18
SMOOTH also operates its own Senior Dial-a-Ride (DAR) service in Santa Maria and Orcutt for adults
ages 60 and older. The Senior DAR service is available Monday through Friday from 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM
and serves all trip purposes. Residents must schedule rides in advance by calling SMOOTH. One-way
fares for the Senior DAR service are $2.00. A personal caretaker can ride along with seniors for free if
desired. San Luis Obispo County residents can take advantage of SMOOTH’s Senior DAR by first taking
RTA Route 10 to Santa Maria, then scheduling a ride on the Senior DAR.
Ride-On Transportation
Ride-On Transportation is a nonprofit organization dedicated to improving
transportation services in San Luis Obispo County. All of Ride-On’s proceeds
support the nonprofit United Cerebral Palsy of San Luis Obispo County.
Ride-On serves as a Consolidated Transportation Service Agency (CTSA) and as
a Transportation Management Association (TMA) for the county.
Ride-On’s CTSA division provides door-to-door shuttle services for seniors, veterans, people with
disabilities, and social-service agencies. The CTSA division also supports other social-service agencies in
the area which provide their own transportation by assisting with vehicle maintenance, driver training,
and other services. Ride-On’s TMA division provides general public-transportation services, including
vanpools, shuttles to the San Luis Obispo Airport and local Amtrak stations, medical transportation, and
special event transportation, among other services. Ride-On hours vary depending on the program.
PRIVATE FOR-PROFIT REGIONAL PROVIDERS
Amtrak
San Luis Obispo County is served by two Amtrak rail lines: the
Coast Starlight and the Pacific Surfliner. The Coast Starlight travels
from Seattle to Los Angeles and serves San Luis Obispo County
once daily in both the northbound and southbound directions,
stopping at the San Luis Obispo Amtrak Station and the North
County Transit Center. The Pacific Surfliner serves the southern
California coast, stopping in San Diego, Orange County, Los Angeles, and Ventura before eventually
arriving in San Luis Obispo. The Pacific Surfliner makes two roundtrips to/from San Luis Obispo County
each day, stopping at the Grover Beach and San Luis Obispo Amtrak stations both northbound and
southbound.
San Luis Obispo County is also served by Amtrak Thruway bus service, which enables timed connections
to the various rail routes. At this time, Thruway bus tickets must be purchased with a train ticket.
However, this policy will likely change in upcoming years. Amtrak Thruway Route 17 connects to the
Pacific Surfliner train, traveling from San Francisco to Santa Barbara and stopping in Paso Robles,
Atascadero, Cal Poly, and San Luis Obispo along the way. Amtrak Thruway Route 18 provides service
from Santa Maria to Hanford to provide connectivity to the Capitol Corridor rail, stopping in Grover
Beach, San Luis Obispo, Atascadero, and Paso Robles.
Page 58 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 19
There are many different options for San Luis Obispo County residents to connect to Amtrak services via
local transit routes, including multiple RTA, SLO Transit, dial-a-ride, and non-profit transportation
services. There are no discounts provided to passengers transferring from local transit routes. Amtrak
ticket prices, both rail and bus, vary greatly depending on the passenger’s intended trip length.
American Star Tours/Flix Bus
American Star Tours and Flix Bus provide long-distance, intercity bus
transportation. In San Luis Obispo County, American Star Tours and
Flix Bus operate along United States (US) 101, stopping at the Grover
Beach Amtrak Station, San Luis Obispo Amtrak Station, the Cal Poly
Performing Arts Center, the Atascadero Amtrak Thruway bus stop,
and the North County Transit Center. One-way American Star
Tours/Flix Bus tickets from San Luis Obispo to San Francisco start at
approximately $26.00. One-way American Star Tours/Flix Bus tickets
from San Luis Obispo to Los Angeles start at approximately $25.00.
Page 59 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 20
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 60 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 21
Chapter 4
CURRENT POLICIES AND STANDARDS
INTRODUCTION
An important element in the success of any organization is a clear and concise set of goals and
objectives, as well as the performance measures and standards needed to attain them. This can be
particularly important for a public transit agency, for several reasons:
x Transit goals can be inherently contradictory. For instance, the goal of maximizing cost-
effectiveness can tend to focus services on the largest population centers, while the goal of
maximizing service availability can tend to disperse services to outlying areas. In another
example, transit services can be targeted to serve those who are most in need and without
automobiles, or they can be designed to be competitive with the private automobile and
serve those with access to alternative transportation. To best meet its overall mission, a
public transit agency must therefore continually balance the trade-offs between goals.
Adopting policy statements allows for a discussion of community values regarding transit at a
higher level than possible when considering case-by-case issues.
x As a public entity, a public transit organization is expending public funds and therefore has a
responsibility to provide the public with transparent information on how funds are spent. The
effectiveness and efficiency of spending can be evaluated by assessing how well a transit
agency is meeting its adopted goals. Funding partners also have a responsibility to ensure
that funds provided to the transit program are being used appropriately.
x Adopted goals and performance standards help to communicate the values of the transit
program to other organizations, to the public, and the organization staff.
Transit agencies should regularly reevaluate goals and standards. This is especially true given service
changes implemented in response to the COVID-19 pandemic; in the wake of the pandemic, service
standards may need to be modified to be more realistically measure performance. New standards may
also be merited for any new services implemented in recent years.
In this chapter, SLO Transit fiscal year (FY) 2022-23 performance is presented alongside existing
performance standards. Then, peer transit operators for both programs are analyzed as a means of
guiding revised performance standard recommendations.
Page 61 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 22
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO EXISTING
POLICIE
As the public transit operator for the City of San Luis Obispo, SLO Transit is guided by the transportation
policies defined in the City’s General Plan. In addition, the City develops transit program goals as part of
the biannual budgeting process. Performance standards were developed as part of the 2009 SRTP effort
and updated in the 2016 SRTP.
As stated in the City of San Luis Obispo 2023-2025 Financial Plan , the SLO Transit Core Service Objectives
are as follows:
x Quality transportation for transit-dependent people.
x Convenient transportation for all community members.
x An attractive alternative to driving, which can reduce traffic congestion and air pollution.
San Luis Obispo General Plan
An updated City General Plan Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) was adopted by the San Luis
Obispo City Council on December 9, 2014. The Circulation Element was amended in 2017 and includes
the following key policy and program statements regarding transit:
1.6.1 Transportation Goals- Goal #2 Reduce people's use of their cars by supporting and promoting
alternatives such as walking, riding buses and bicycles, and using carpools. (Note that this goal is
quantified in the document by setting a goal of 12 percent transit mode split).
1.7.1 Encourage Better Transportation Habits - San Luis Obispo should: 1. Increase the use of
alternative forms of transportation and depend less on the single-occupant use of vehicles; and 2. Ask
the RTA to establish an objective similar to #1 and support programs that reduce the interregional use of
single-occupant vehicles and increase the use of alternative forms of transportation.
1.7.2 Promote Alternative Forms of Transportation - San Luis Obispo should: 2. Complete
improvements to the city's transit system serving existing developed areas by 2035 and provide service
to new growth areas.
1.7.4 Support Environmentally Sound Technological Advancement – 1B. When replacing any City
vehicle or expanding the City's vehicle fleet, the City will consider purchasing alternative fuel vehicles
that reduce air pollution.
1.7.5 Support a Shift in Modes of Transportation – San Luis Obispo will: 1. Physically monitor the
achievement of the modal shift [of 12% transit], and bi-annually review and adjust transportation
programs if necessary.
Traffic Reduction
2.2.4 Incentives for Educational Institutions - The City shall continue to work with Cal Poly, Cuesta
College, and other educational institutions to provide incentives to all students, faculty, and staff to use
alternative forms of transportation.
Page 62 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 23
Transit Service Policies
3.1.1 Transit Development - The City shall encourage transit accessibility, development, expansion,
coordination, and marketing throughout San Luis Obispo County to serve a broad range of local and
regional transportation needs.
3.1.2 City Bus Service - The City shall improve and expand the city bus service to make the system more
convenient and accessible for everyone. Transit services owned and operated by the City shall endeavor
to maintain and improve all systemwide transit standards identified in the City’ SRTP.
3.1.3 Paratransit Service – The City shall continue to support paratransit service for seniors and persons
with disabilities by public, private, and volunteer transportation providers.
3.1.4 Campus Service - The City shall continue to work with Cal Poly to maintain and expand the "free
fare subsidy program" for campus affiliates. The City shall work with Cuesta College and other schools to
establish similar programs.
3.1.5 Unmet Transit Needs - The City shall work with SLOCOG to identify and address Unmet Transit
Needs.
3.1.6 Service Standards - The City shall implement the following service standards for its transit system
and for development that is proximate to the transit network:
A. Routes, schedules, and transfer procedures of the City and regional transit systems
should be coordinated to encourage commuter use of buses.
B. In existing developed areas, transit routes should be located within 1/4 mile of existing
businesses or dwellings.
C. In City expansion areas, employment-intensive uses or medium, medium-high, or high-
density residential uses should be located within 1/8 mile of a transit route.
D. The spacing of stops should balance patron convenience and speed of operation.
3.1.7 Transit Service Access - New developments should be designed to facilitate access to transit
service.
Transit Service Programs
3.2.1 Transit Plans - The City shall continue to implement the SRTP (5-year time frame) and coordinate
with SLOCOG on implementing the Long-Range Transit Plan (20-year time frame). The Plans shall
consider funding partnerships to continue the Downtown Trolley service as part of the overall transit
system as funding permits.
3.2.2 Bulk Rate Transit Passes - The City shall make available bulk rate transit passes to all groups.
3.2.3 Commuter Bus Service - The City of San Luis Obispo shall work with the RTA to maintain and
expand commuter bus service to and from the City of San Luis Obispo during peak demand periods
consistent with the SRTP and Long-Range Transit Plan.
3.2.4 Transit Service Evaluation - The City shall coordinate with the RTA to evaluate the benefits and
drawbacks of consolidated service.
Page 63 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 24
3.2.5 Marketing and Promotion - The City shall develop and maintain a comprehensive marketing and
promotion program to reach individual target audiences.
3.2.6 - The City shall update its SRTP to evaluate adding mass transit stops at the high school and the
middle school.
3.2.7 - When evaluating transportation impacts, the City shall use a Multimodal Level of Service analysis.
3.2.8 Regional Transit Center - The City shall work with other agencies to develop a regional transit
center downtown.
Air Transportation Policies
11.1.3 Public Transit Service - The City shall encourage improved public transit service to the County
airport as soon as practical.
Biennial Budgeting Process
The City has developed an integrated process that ties goal setting with the bi-annual budget
development. SLO Transit has a crucial role in the Major City Goal (MCG) for Climate Action, Open Space
& Sustainable Transportation. The key strategies to support the City’s goal related to transit, and
therefore relevant to the 2024 SRTP, are included below.
Major City Goal (MCG) Strategic Approach 4.3
“Preserve and Enhance Convenient and Equitable Alternative and Sustainable Transportation Options:
The City will continue to implement actions in support of General Plan mode share targets (e.g., 50
percent of trips occurring outside of a single occupancy vehicle). This will occur through continued
disciplined focus on the implementation of the highest priority (“Tier 1”) Active Transportation projects,
innovations and improvements to transit service, and supportive programming. For those that need to
drive, the City will focus on enabling and deploying publicly accessible electric vehicle charging
infrastructure.”
Task K – “Transit Innovation Study implementation: Begin Planning implementation of strategies
recommended in the Final Transit Innovation Study, including the incorporation of near-term strategies
as part of the SLO Transit/RTA Short Range Transit Plan update, as called for in CAP Connected
Community Task 4.2.A and the APMP Strategies 1.C.”
Within the Department of Public Works, the strategic goal to support the citywide MCGs is the
following:
“Create a new division within the Public Works Department that will lead Parking, Transit, and Active
Transportation with the goal of creating a cohesive team that will increase mobility within the City
focusing on bridging gaps between transit, active transportation, and parking programs. Implement
objectives from the Active Transportation Plan including trail, pedestrian, and bicycle improvements and
street enhancements to uphold traffic safety”.
This new division has been named the Mobility Services Division of Public Works which aims to further
the organizational effectiveness of transit, parking, and active transportation under one umbrella
division.
Page 64 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 25
City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery (2020)
The City of San Luis Obispo adopted the Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery (CAP) in 2020. The
CAP provides a work program to help the City reach carbon neutrality by 2035. A high-functioning transit
system is a key component of the CAP and for reducing vehicle miles traveled. The CAP calls for
electrifying transit fleets, reducing service headways, and exploring new transit alternatives, such as
microtransit, Bus Rapid Transit, and Transit Signal Priority, in the 2024 SLO Transit SRTP. CAP also
recommends assessing the feasibility of a no-cost transit membership program. Some projects
recommended in the CAP, such as updating the City’s Active Transportation Plan and developing a
transit electrification plan, have since been completed.
Volume 2 of the CAP is the Technical Foundation and Work Program, which includes the following
actions related to transit:
Connected Community Action 4.1: Develop a transit electrification strategic plan and begin
implementing it in 2020.
Connected Community Action 4.2: Shorten transit headways through accelerated implementation of the
existing SRTP.
Connected Community Action 4.3: Explore additional innovative transit options in the 2024 SRTP (e.g., on-
demand deviated routes, electric fleet expansion, microtransit, Bus Rapid Transit, and Transit Signal Priority).
Connected Community Action 4.3: Assess the feasibility of a “free to the user” transit ridership program.
Volume 3 of the CAP is the 2023-2027 Work Program, which includes the following near-term actions:
Connected Community Action 4.1.A: Continue to electrify the SLO Transit bus fleet.
Connected Community Action 4.2.A: Incorporate recommendations from the Transit Innovation Study into
the SRTP and begin implementation immediately.
SLO Transit Innovation Study
The SLO Transit Innovation Study was conducted on behalf of the City by Arcadis (Formerly IBI Group) in
2023. The City Council received a report from staff on the study on January 23, 2024. The dramatic loss
in ridership that resulted from the COVID-19 pandemic was a motivation for initiating the Transit
Innovation Study. The Transit Innovation Study restates the City of SLO Climate Action Plan objectives of
a 7 percent transit mode split, or the proportion of all trips made by transit, by 2030 and a 12 percent
transit mode split by 2035.
The Transit Innovation Study provides actionable recommendations to improve fixed route service,
explore alternative service modes, and broadly enhance transit as a viable alternative to the private
automobile to meet the City’s adopted mode split objectives. The study recommends 17 transit
innovations that are categorized into the following five themes:
-Critical Upgrades that Support Ongoing Operations
-Technologies that Improve Rider’s User Experience
-Fare Program Updates to Increase Transit Accessibility
Page 65 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 26
-Enhanced Service and Alternative Transit Options
-Bus Shelter and Street Improvements for Rider Safety and Comfort
The Transit Innovation Study identified the need for improved fixed route service as one of the most
critical needs. Specifically, the study recommended that the City consider increasing weekday headways
on Routes 3 and 4 to 15-minute headways during the academic year. In addition, the Transit Innovation
Study identifies the following strategies for improving fixed route service:
-Optimize Existing Routes: The study notes this can include better aligning service with peak
demand, reducing travel times, and improving transfers between routes. This “fine-tuning”
of routes to meet passenger needs can be done in phases.
-Establish Express Bus Service: Express service means establishing limited stops along a
route to reduce travel times. One potential option recommended by the study was to
explore express bus service to downtown San Luis Obispo.
-Increase Available Fleet and Drivers: Adding more buses and drivers would be necessary to
increase frequency. Of course, budget constraints may have to involve trade-offs between
more frequent service and route coverage throughout the City.
-Expanding Service Operating Hours: Expanding service span to begin earlier in the morning
and run later at night is another common improvement to fixed route service and another
alternative that will be considered in the SRTP. While additional buses are not needed for
expanded operating hours, it would require more driver shifts and increased bus mileage.
In addition to fixed route service improvements, the Transit Innovation Study recommends pursuing
micromobility services. This would involve implementing one or more app-based on-demand services
within specific zones. This is known generally as microtransit, and it could be a strategy to supplement
or, in some cases, replace fixed routes to allow for fixed route resources to be relocated to increase
fixed route frequency.
The core effort in an SRTP is the evaluation and recommendation of transit service alternatives, along
with an assessment of the likely impact on ridership and costs. The 2024 SLO Transit SRTP will
incorporate the recommended transit innovations into the service alternatives for SLO Transit as
appropriate. In the meantime, City staff have noted that there are a few recommendations from the
Transit Innovation Study that can be implemented in the short term while the SRTP is underway.
Expanded fare options for K-12 students, a recommended innovation, were already implemented in
February of 2024: the City Council approved a pilot program to offer K-12 students single-ride fares for
$1.00 and 15-ride passes for $15.00. This pilot program will last through June 5, 2025. The other
improvements that staff believe can be implemented in the short term are:
-Open-Loop Fare Payment Technology – In December 2023, SLOCOG approved $2.6 million
in TIRCP funds to implement the open-loop contactless payment system. The City will
coordinate with RTA and SLOCOG to introduce this technology.
-Pursue Grant Funding for Technology Upgrades – In November 2023, staff submitted
projects to SLOCOG for both TIRCP and ZETCP funding for Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL)
Page 66 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 27
and on-board surveillance cameras for buses. These requests have been submitted to the
California State Transportation Agency for review.
-Upgrades to the Downtown Access Pass (DAP) Program – Policy changes to simplify this
program can be done administratively with minimal cost. The Transit Innovation Study
recommended replacing the 90-day re-verification requirement with an annual re-
verification. Also, it was recommended that enrolling in the program be simplified by
completing an easy-to-access form.
2016 Short Range Transit Plan
The last SRTP Update for the City of San Luis Obispo was completed in 2016 by LSC Transportation
Consultants and AECOM, Inc. The 2016 SRTP included SLO Transit Service Standards, which were
updated and carried over from the 2009 SRTP. Some of the key performance standards were based on
the average of peer systems in the last SRTP update. The peer analysis conducted in the 2016 SRTP has
been updated, as shown in Table 5, using the most recently available NTD annual reporting data (FY
2021-2022)
SLO Transit Triennial TDA Performance Audit
Every three years public transit operators in California that receive Transportation Development Act
funding are reviewed by an independent firm selected by the Regional Transportation Planning Agency.
This is known as the Triennial Performance Audit (TPA).
For the FY 2013-14 through FY 2016-17 TDA TPA, SLO Transit was found to comply with all applicable
TDA requirements. SLO Transit was also found to have partially implemented or to have been in the
process of implementing two of the four recommendations made in the previous audit. The
recommendations made in the audit were as follows:
1.“Revise revenue and cash handling practices to be compliant with industry best practices for an
operation the size and scope of SLO Transit.
2. Provide consistent and accurate performance measures on all transit reporting, including State
Controllers Reports, National Transit Database, and SLOCOG.
3. Take positive steps, in cooperation with the new operations manager, to develop an esprit de
corps among SLO Transit operators and contractor staff.
4. Complete a full outside maintenance audit.
5. Enhance SLO Transit’s website to improve usability.
6. Add Grants and Reporting Coordinator position and reallocate duties among four (4) Transit
Service positions.”
During the most recent audit period (FY 2017-18 – FY 2019-20), SLO Transit fully complied with six out of
the nine applicable TDA requirements. SLO Transit was in partial compliance with submitting reports to
the State Controller on time, calculating full-time employee equivalent data, and meeting farebox
recovery ratio standards. SLO Transit had implemented three of the six previous audit recommendations
(recommendations 3, 4, and 6, as numbered above), was in the process of implementing one
Page 67 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 28
recommendation (recommendation 1), and had partially implemented one recommendation
(recommendation 2). The TPA provided three new recommendations for SLO Transit:
1.“Ensure that full-time-employee-equivalent data reported are consistent with the TDA definition.
2. Pursue the negotiation of a new transit-services agreement with Cal Poly that reflects the new
operating environment.
3.Continue advocacy for funding a transit-grants coordinator.”
SLO Transit Service Standards
Table 4 presents the existing SLO Transit service standards, FY 2022-23 performance for each metric,
and recommended changes to the performance measures. In past SRTPs, SLO Transit’s fiscal condition
standards of farebox recovery ratio, passengers per vehicle revenue hour, cost per passenger, and cost
per vehicle revenue hour were tied to the performance of peer agencies. Because the City’s goals for
transit are unique and ambitious, this SRTP proposes no longer linking SLO Transit performance
standards to peers. Instead, peer agency performance should be used simply as a gauge to understand if
SLO Transit is performing within industry norms.
The Standard for farebox recovery ratio is set at 20 percent based on SLOCOG requirements. A minimum
standard and a higher-performing target are being set for productivity, cost-effectiveness, and cost-
efficiency standards. The recommended measures in these categories are as follows:
-Passengers per Vehicle Revenue Hour is set at a minimum of 11.5 based on the peer
average, and a target standard of 36 based on the highest ridership year of FY 2015-16.
-Cost per Passenger is set at a maximum of $11.23 based on the peer average, and a target
standard of $3.85 based on current system costs and the ridership in FY 2015-16.
-Cost per Vehicle Revenue Hour is set at a maximum of $145 based on the FY 2022-23
actuals with 5 percent allowed for inflation of labor, services, and supplies. This may need to
be reevaluated based on future operating contract renewals. The target standard is set at
$137.04 based on increasing vehicle revenue hours and miles back to the level provided in
FY 2015-16 at current system costs.
Page 68 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 29
Table 4: SLO Transit Service Standards (1/2)
Standard Existing Measure FY 2022-23 Performance Proposed Measure Monitoring Schedule/ Responsibility
Residential Availability 90% of population within ¼ mile of a bus route 66% No Change Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council
Employment concentrations of 200 or more employees Substantially served by transit No Change
Health Centers Substantially served by transit No Change
Middle and High Schools Substantially served by transit No Change
Colleges/Universities Substantially served by transit No Change
Shopping Centers over 25 stores or 100,000 SF of retail space Substantially served by transit No Change
Social Service/Government Center Substantially served by transit No Change
5 to 7 stops per mile in core (every other block) Not available
Provide 5 to7 stops per mile in core service area
(every other block)Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council
Fringe 4 to 5 per mile, as needed based on land uses Not available
Provide 4 to 5 stops per mile outside of core
service area based on land uses Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council
Frequency 30 minute peak
60 minute off peak
Route 1AB = 60min; Route 2= 60min; Route
3AB=30&60min; Route 4AB=45min; San Luis Tripper= 4
round trips; Laguna Tripper=1 round trip; 6X=30min;
Trolley=20min
15 minute peak
30 minute off peak
(as feasible within budget constraints and
service availability goals)
60 minute minimum
5 AM to 10 PM on weekdays 6:15 AM-11:10 PM Weekdays Will modify based on service alternatives
6 AM to 7 PM on weekends 8:15 AM - 8:10 PM Weekends 8:15 AM - Midnight on Friday/Saturday
Directness Maximum 25% of passengers transferring
Per October, 2023 on-board survey 20% of SLO Transit
passengers transferred Maximum 20% of passengers transferring
Dependability 95% on-time service (not early and no more than 5 minutes
late)See Figure 15 No Change
Service Delivery Rate -- New Standard -- To begin measuring in FY 2024/24 or earlier if possible 99% or greater
Standard
Existing
Measure FY 2022-23 Performance Proposed Measure Monitoring Schedule/ Responsibility
Speed Regular routes maximum of 15 MPH
Systemwide operating speed is 11.1 MPH. Route 3A is
highest MPH @ 13.7; Route 4B is lowest MPH @ 8.3
Regular routes will operate at maximum of 15
MPH and a Minimum of 8 MPH Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council
Loading 25% standees for short periods acceptable Not available
No more than 25% standees for 15 minute
periods Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council
Public Information Timetable, maps, advertising Public Information is widely available in all formats.
Website, Social Media, Timetable, maps,
advertising shall be kept current and widely
available. Adhere to the adopted public notice
policy.
Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council
Service Delivery and Coverage
Patron Convenience
Sources: 2016 Short Range Transit Plan; 2022 National Transit Database; FY 2022-2023 SLO Operating Data
Fixed Route Transit Availability
to Major Activity Centers
Span
Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council
Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council
Bus Stop Spacing
Page 69 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 30
Table 4: SLO Transit Service Standards (2/2)
Standard Existing Measure FY 2022-23 Performance Proposed Measure Monitoring Schedule/ Responsibility
No significant financial audit
findings. -- New Standard -- No negative audit findings No Change Finance and Administration will report any negative audit findings.
Fare Structure Fare Structure -Qualitative criteria
Base one-way fare is $1.50 with discounts to senior and
disabled. Multiple fare products available to passengers.
CalPoly students ride free of charge
Offer a Fare Structure that serves varied ridership
markets and is simple for patrons to understand and
use, and is up to date with current with technology
Mobility Services Staff with City Council Approval of Fare Structure
Modifications
Farebox Recovery - Significantly alter routes less than 60% of peer
group average 19.1%TDA minimum farebox ratio of 20% systemwide
including local support
Review and modify routes between 60% and 80% peer group average --Review and modify routes that are less than the
systemwide required TDA farebox ratio
Significantly alter routes less than 60% of peer group average Passengers per Vehicle Revenue Hour = 16.7 Px/VRH Min= 11.5 SRTP Target = 36.0
Review and modify routes between 60% and 80% peer group average --Review and modify routes that are less than the
minimum
Significantly alter routes more than 140% of peer group average, or
SLO system average cost per passenger
Cost per Pax= $8.26
Cost per VRH = $137.74
Cost Per Passenger
Max = $11.23
SRTP Target = $3.85
Cost per VRH
Max = $145
SRTP Target = $137.04
Review and modify routes between 120% and 140% average --Review and modify routes that exceed the the
maximum
Standard Existing Measure FY 2022-23 Performance Proposed Measure Monitoring Schedule/ Responsibility
Collisions -- Begin tracking on an annual basis
Rate of preventable vehicle collisions will not exceed
1 per 100,000 vehicle miles Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council
Standard Existing Measure FY 2022-23 Performance Proposed Measure Monitoring Schedule/ Responsibility
25 or More Boardings See Chapter 8
Provide passenger shelters, seating and lighting for
bus stops with 20 or more boardings per day Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council
-- -- Provide lighting at 100% of bus stops Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council
Bus Stop Signs Denote SLO Transit, contact information, and route Bus stop sign information denotes route and contact
information
100% of signs are accurate, readable and in good
condition Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council
Clean and good condition Bus appearance is clean and in good condition
100% of preventive maintenance will be performed
within 10% of the scheduled mileage interval, or every
3 months
Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council
-- --
Replace 100% of all revenue vehicles no more than
40% beyond the FTA-defined useful life standard in
terms of years or miles
Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council
Road Call Ratio 4,000 to 6,000 miles per road call Not available
No more than 5 road calls per 100,000 vehicle
revenue miles Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council
Productivity
Cost Effectiveness and
Efficiency
Fleet and Facilities
Revenue Equipment
Fiscal Condition
Farebox Recovery
Safety
Sources: 2016 Short Range Transit Plan; 2022 National Transit Database; FY 2022-2023 SLO Operating Data
Track Quarterly by Mobility Services Staff and report annually to City Council
Track Quarterly by Mobility Services Staff and report annually to City Council
Track Quarterly by Mobility Services Staff and report annually to City Council
Waiting Shelters
Page 70 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 32
SLO TRANSIT PEER COMPARISON
The purpose of this peer comparison is to provide information to gauge if local transit operating
statistics are reasonable on a systemwide basis and to provide the agency information to evaluate
potential changes to services and performance measures. The 2016 SRTP included a focused peer
analysis to quantify SLO Transit’s fiscal and productivity standards. In addition, the 2016 SRTP included a
more expanded peer analysis which was used to inform the creation of service alternatives. In this
chapter, the peers from the prior SRTP were reviewed and narrowed down to the six peer transit
systems below. These peers were selected, in consultation with City staff, based on university campus
enrollment, city population, and the number of buses in maximum fixed route service being within the
same order of magnitude as San Luis Obispo. Also, for this comparison, zero-fare systems were not
selected. The peer agencies are as follows:
x Bloomington-Normal, IL
x Bowling Green, KY
x St. Cloud, MN
x Pocatello, ID
x Flagstaff, AZ
x Pueblo, CO
The peer data shown is gathered from the National Transit Database 2021-2022 Reporting Year. It
should be noted that multiple factors can cause variations in ridership, costs, and revenues among
public transit operations. In addition, the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic impacted ridership and
service delivery differently among peers, factors which were not evaluated in this comparison.
Table 5 displays the performance indicators for the six peer transit agencies provides an analysis of SLO
Transit’s performance indicators in relation to the grouped peer statistics and ranks SLO Transit’s
performance indicators in relation to all peers combined.
For this peer comparison, an additional metric of Passenger Trips per Capita has been added. Among the
peer fixed route services for 9 performance indicators, SLO has an average ranking of 3 out of 7
operators, including SLO Transit. SLO Transit’s highest ranking is 1 st for average fare per passenger and
farebox recovery ratio. SLO Transit’s lowest ranking is 7 th for operating cost per vehicle revenue mile. It
is notable that SLO Transit has the second-ranked farebox recovery ratio and is 248 percent of the peer
average in that category. The passenger trips per capita among the peer agencies vary significantly from
1 passenger per capita in Bowling Green, KY to 33 in Bloomington-Normal, IL. The peer average is 11
passenger trips per capita. SLO Transit ranks 3 rd with 10 passengers per capita. This peer comparison
does not include a comparison of demand response peers because the City of SLO does not operate ADA
paratransit service.
Page 71 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 33
Table 5: SLO Transit Peer Group Data and Performance Indicators
Peer System University
Fall 2022
Enrollement
City
Population
2022
Fixed Route
Buses in
Service
Operating
Expenses Fare Revenue
Vehicle
Revenue
Miles
Vehicle
Revenue
Hours
Unlinked
Passenger
Trips
Bloomington-Normal Public Transit System Illinois State University 20,683 52,838 26 $10,627,212 $1,180,732 1,215,890 100,154 1,718,364
City of Bowling Green Western Kentucky University 16,495 74,926 10 $1,176,202 $12,579 175,435 14,595 54,157
City of Pocatello, dba: Pocatello Regional Transit Idaho State University 12,319 57,730 11 $1,112,945 $143,879 258,832 16,245 126,544
Northern Arizona Intergovernmental Public Transportation Authority,
dba: Mountain Line public transit Northern Arizona University 23,207 75,907 19 $9,129,849 $1,129,816 912,707 73,569 1,298,670
City of Pueblo, dba: Pueblo Transit Colorado State University Pueblo 33,648 111,456 14 $4,013,846 $308,974 482,040 34,791 497,528
St. Cloud Metropolitan Transit Commission, dba: Metro Bus St. Cloud State University 10,093 69,568 20 $9,338,001 $578,880 980,663 72,238 598,396
City of San Luis Obispo, CA Cal Poly San Luis Obispo 21,778 48,341 15 $3,348,735 $710,758 330,244 28,144 468,945
Peer System Passenger Trips per Capita
Cost per
Vehicle
Revenue Mile
Cost per
Vehicle
Revenue
Hour
Passenger per
Vehicle
Revenue Mile
Passengers
per Vehicle
Revenue
Hour
Cost per
Passenger
Average
Fare
Subsidy per
Passenger-
Trip
Farebox
Recovery
Ratio
Bloomington-Normal Public Transit System 33 $8.74 $106.11 1.41 17.2 $6.18 $0.69 $5.50 11.1%
City of Bowling Green 1 $6.70 $80.59 0.31 3.7 $21.72 $0.23 $21.49 1.1%
City of Pocatello, dba: Pocatello Regional Transit 2 $4.30 $68.51 0.49 7.8 $8.79 $1.14 $7.66 12.9%
Northern Arizona Intergovernmental Public Transportation Authority,
dba: Mountain Line public transit 17
$10.00 $124.10 1.42 17.7 $7.03 $0.87 $6.16 12.4%
City of Pueblo, dba: Pueblo Transit 4 $8.33 $115.37 1.03 14.3 $8.07 $0.62 $7.45 7.7%
St. Cloud Metropolitan Transit Commission, dba: Metro Bus 9 $9.52 $129.27 0.61 8.3 $15.61 $0.97 $14.64 6.2%
Peer Maximum 33 $10.00 $129.27 1.42 17.7 $21.72 $1.14 $21.49 21.2%
Peer Average 11 $7.93 $103.99 0.88 11.5 $11.23 $0.75 $10.48 10.4%
Peer Minimum 1 $4.30 $68.51 0.31 3.7 $6.18 $0.23 $5.50 1.1%
City of San Luis Obispo, CA 10 $10.14 $118.99 1.42 16.7 $7.14 $1.52 $5.63 21.2%
SLO Transit % of Peer Avg. 89% 128% 114% 161% 145% 64% 201% 54% 205%
SLO Transit Rank (1 = Best) 3 75233121
Note 1: Peer Data for FY 2021-22
Note 2: Data for fixed route services only.
Source: National Transit Database; US Census
Performance Indicators
Input Data 1, 2
Page 72 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 34
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS (SLOCOG)
As the Regional Transportation Planning Agency and the Metropolitan Planning Organization, SLOCOG is
integral in the funding allocation and planning process for transportation projects and programs
including public transit. As such, it is worthwhile to review SLOCOG policies and monitoring efforts. As
discussed below, the primary policy document that directly addresses transit policy, funding, and
projects is the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).
SLOCOG 2023-2045 RTP
SLOCOG’s 2023 – 2045 Regional Transportation Plan, adopted in June of 2023, provides an important
regionwide planning and policy document. The Vision Statement of the RTP is “A fully integrated,
intermodal transportation system that facilitates the safe and efficient movement of people, goods, and
information within and through the region.” To support the vision the RTP identifies the seven “Pillars”
of Infrastructure, Mobility, Economy, Safety, Healthy Communities, Environment, and Fiscal
Responsibility that are supported by Goals and Policy Objectives. The RTP identifies 28 Action Strategies
specifically for public transportation3.
EXISTING MONITORING AND ONGOING SERVICE IMPROVEMENT PROCESSES
The following data is reviewed quarterly (and reported to the board semi-annually):
x Service delivery rate
x On-time performance by route and by service
x Passenger loads (crowding) by route
Other standards are reviewed on an annual or biennial basis.
3 SLOCOG 2023-2045 Regional Transportation Plan Final, Adopted June 7, 2023 – Chapter 3: Vision, Goals Policies
Page 73 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 35
Monthly, the contractor (Transdev) provides a summary report that details the following:
x Ridership by route by fare category
x Total passenger revenue by fare category
x Revenue and non-revenue vehicle hours and miles, by route and by weekday/Saturday/Sunday
x Ridership per revenue vehicle-miles and revenue vehicle-hour, by route
x Costs and budget tracking
A “Performance Measures Report” is prepared by SLO Transit staff quarterly. This summarizes the
following data:
x Passengers by mode (fixed route daytime, trolley, fixed route evening)
x Revenue-hours and revenue-miles by mode
x Productivity (passengers per revenue hour) by mode
x Contractor operating costs by mode
x Fare revenues by mode
x Farebox ratio by mode
x Average fare by mode
x Cost and subsidy per rider, by mode
x Year-over-year trends in ridership by fare type, revenue hours, and revenue miles, by
weekday/Saturday/Sunday
Page 74 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 36
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the analysis of peer transit agencies and current SLO Transit performance, the following
presents recommendations for updated goals, objectives, and standards. Quantitative performance
standards referenced below will be used to evaluate potential service changes later in this document.
The City’s General Plan provides a reasonable set of goals for the transit program. It bears noting that if
the City is to achieve the General Plan and Climate Action Plan goal of a 12 percent transit mode split by
2035, it would require a substantial expansion of transit ridership. SLO Transit achieved its highest
ridership in FY 2015-2016 at just over 1.2 million boardings. In the first full fiscal year of the COVID-19
pandemic – FY 2020-2021 – ridership fell to 179,456. Ridership increased to 515,002 in FY 2022-2023
and continues to increase. City staff recently reported that a comparison of existing transit ridership
with total travel demand indicates that at present approximately 2 percent of travel is via transit4.
SLO Transit would need to double its current ridership to return to the 2016 peak ridership of 1.2
million. At that time, staff reported a calculated mode share of 7 percent for transit. It also may well
require some combination of “auto disincentives” such as expanded paid parking programs and
restrictions on parking availability to achieve the 2030 goal of 7 percent and the 2035 goal of 12
percent.
It would be beneficial to the transit program to develop and adopt its own Mission Statement separate
from the City’s. This key policy element can help focus the organization on those ideals that are most
important and can also help create a sense of common purpose within the staff of the Mobility Division
of DPW. A reasonable starting point would be “To enhance the mobility and environment of San Luis
Obispo through effective and safe public transit services.”
Recommended standards for SLO Transit services are identified in Table 4. Specific considerations
regarding the performance standards are as follows:
x The service span standards for weekends (6:00 AM to 7:00 PM) may be too broad, as it exceeds
the current AM span (8:15 AM to 8:10 PM). The service span for weekdays (5:00 AM to 10:00
PM) is exceeded by existing service at night, which is 11:10 PM for Route 3A. However, morning
service begins at 6:15 AM, which is 1 hour and 15 minutes after the stated standard. Service to
the Cal Poly campus later into the night has been discussed in recent public forums as being a
priority transit improvement. This SRTP process will evaluate expanded span of service as part of
the potential service alternatives.
x The road call ratio shown in the 2009 and 2016 SRTP (4,000 to 6,000 miles per road call) would
better be stated as “no less than X road calls per 100,000 vehicle service miles”. In the FY 2021-
2022 National Transit Data Report, SLO Transit reported an average of 4,234 miles between
major mechanical failures. The median number of miles between major mechanical failures
(similar definition to “road call”) for similar-size fixed route operators in California was 27,000
4 2019 City Transportation Survey as reported by City staff in January 23, 2024 Council Agenda Report for the Transit
Innovation Study Review
Page 75 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 37
miles5. Given that the current minimum standard of 4,000 miles is relatively low compared to
the transit industry's typical standards, it is recommended that a standard of “no more than 5
road calls per 100,000 vehicle revenue miles” be added. In addition, it is recommended that
transit staff review the incidents reported as major mechanical failures that fit the definition
provided in the NTD reporting guidelines to ensure that mechanical failures are not being over-
reported.
x The operating speed standard is stated as a maximum of 15 MPH. It is recommended that a
minimum route operating speed be established as well. Given the current range of operating
speeds between 8.3 and 13.7 MPH among SLO Transit routes, the recommended measure is
“Regular routes will operate at a maximum of 15 MPH and a minimum of 8 MPH”.
x The recommended changes to the Farebox Recovery Ratio, Passengers per Vehicle Hour, Cost
per Passenger, and Cost per Vehicle Revenue Hour are discussed in the introduction to Table 4
above. The quantification of these standards is based on a review of peers, current year costs,
and the maximum ridership in FY 15/16.
5 FY 2022 NTD Annual Data – Using California operators with 75 or fewer vehicles in maximum service for motor bus
mode only.
Page 76 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 38
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 77 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 39
Chapter 5
STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS
INTRODUCTION
This chapter reviews the demographic and economic characteristics of both San Luis Obispo County and
the City of San Luis Obispo, with a focus on data relevant to transit demand and the near-term future of
RTA and SLO Transit services.
DEMOGRAPHICS
Population Projections
Population projections are useful for estimating how transit demand may change in the future; if the
population grows, transit demand will likely increase as well. Population projections by age group for
San Luis Obispo County, sourced from the California Department of Finance, are shown in Table 6.
Overall, the San Luis Obispo County population size is expected to remain relatively consistent over the
upcoming decades, growing by less than 2 percent from 2020 to 2040.
Within the current decade, the fastest-growing age group is senior adults: from 2020 to 2030, the
population of mature retirees (those between 75 and 84 years old) is forecasted to grow by 61 percent
and the population of older seniors (those ages 85 and older) is forecasted to grow by 24 percent. The
older senior population is expected to continue growing from 2030 to 2040, meaning the older senior
cohort will almost double in size from 2020 to 2040 (+98 percent). All the other age cohorts are
experiencing negative growth this decade except for infants and toddlers (+3 percent). The college-aged
adult population projections do not account for the many Cal Poly students who do not live in San Luis
Obispo County full-time and therefore are not technically considered residents.
The forecasted growth of San Luis Obispo County’s senior adult population is important, as many seniors
rely on transportation services for mobility. The growing senior population will likely drive increased
demand for transportation services catered to the needs of seniors, such as non-emergency medical
transportation, door-through-door services, and paratransit.
Table 6: San Luis Obispo County Population Projections by Age Category
Year
Total
(All Ages)
Preschool
(0-4 years)
School Age to
Young Adult
(5-17 years)
College Age
(18-24 years)
Working Age
(25-64 years)
Young
Retirees
(65-74 years)
Mature
Retirees
(75-84 years)
Older Seniors
(85 or older)
2020 282,639 12,638 35,703 32,797 141,676 34,410 17,428 7,987
2030 286,547 13,015 33,548 32,333 134,940 34,639 28,131 9,941
2040 287,621 15,367 34,702 25,380 142,440 25,058 28,855 15,819
2020 to 2030 Change
Number 3,908 377 -2,155 -464 -6,736 229 10,703 1,954
Percent 1% 3% -6% -1% -5% 1% 61% 24%
2030 to 2040 Change
Number 1,074 2,352 1,154 -6,953 7,500 -9,581 724 5,878
Percent 0% 18% 3% -22% 6% -28% 3% 59%
Sources: US Census Bureau, California Department of Finance. Report P-2B: Population Projections by Individual Year of Age, 2010-2060, California
Counties
Page 78 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 40
Transit Dependent Population
A large portion of transit ridership is drawn from what is referred to as the transit-dependent
population. The transit-dependent population is typically considered to comprise youths, senior adults,
persons with a disability, low-income persons, and persons who live in zero-vehicle households. This
section discusses where transit-dependent persons live in San Luis Obispo County and the City of San
Luis Obispo, and in turn what areas of the County and City have the greatest need for transit services
based on demographics. Appendix B includes additional data and maps depicting where transit-
dependent persons live in both the County and City.
San Luis Obispo County
An analysis of San Luis Obispo County demographic data by census tract (Appendix B), sourced from the
US Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2022 5-Year Estimates, yielded the following
takeaways:
About 17 percent of San Luis Obispo County residents are youth younger than 18 years old,
slightly lower than the rate observed across the State of California (22 percent).
Communities home to large numbers of the overall countywide youth population include
Paso Robles, the City of San Luis Obispo, Atascadero, Nipomo, and Arroyo Grande.
Senior adults over the age of 65 comprise 21 percent of the total San Luis Obispo County
population, a greater rate compared to the State of California (16 percent). The City of San
Luis Obispo, Paso Robles, Arroyo Grande, and Los Osos are all home to significant
proportions of the overall countywide senior population.
13 percent of San Luis Obispo County residents have a disability, based on the definition
used by the US Census Bureau. This is a similar disability prevalence in the State of California
(12 percent). Large proportions of the countywide disabled population live in the City of San
Luis Obispo, Paso Robles, Arroyo Grande, and Atascadero.
It is estimated that 12 percent of San Luis Obispo County residents are persons living below
the federal poverty level. The San Luis Obispo County poverty rate is identical to what is
observed across the State of California as a whole (12 percent). Although the City of San Luis
Obispo is technically home to about half of the county’s low-income population, this statistic
is swayed due to the large number of full-time students living in the community. Other
communities with large numbers of low-income residents include Paso Robles and
Atascadero.
The US Census Bureau estimated that 4 percent of San Luis Obispo County homes are zero-
vehicle households. This is a lower rate than the State of California as a whole (7 percent). A
third of the county’s zero-vehicle households are located in the City of San Luis Obispo.
Other communities with many of the county’s total zero-vehicle households are Atascadero,
Paso Robles, Arroyo Grande, and Nipomo. It should be noted that San Luis Obispo County
has an identical rate of single-vehicle households as the State of California (31 percent).
Page 79 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 41
San Luis Obispo County Transit Needs Index
The purpose of the Transit Needs Index (TNI) is to discern which areas of San Luis Obispo County have
the greatest comparative need for transit services across all of the transit-dependent subgroups. The TNI
succinctly reveals how transit-dependent residents are distributed across San Luis Obispo County, and in
turn where additional or expanded transportation services may be most warranted. The San Luis Obispo
County TNI is shown in Table 7 and Figures 3 through 6.
To develop the TNI, the population density of each subgroup was calculated for each census tract. Then,
the concentration values were divided into five groups. The groups were used to rank the subgroups
within each community on a scale of 1 (very low need) to 5 (very high need) based on the density of said
group (number of people per square mile) compared to the respective density of that demographic
group in the other census tracts. The five respective rank scores for each census tract were then
summed to determine an overall TNI rank.
The areas with the highest TNI ranks, and therefore the greatest assumed need for transportation
services, are Grover Beach, Oceano, west and southwest Arroyo Grande, Paso Robles, Baywood Park in
Los Osos, and various neighborhoods in the City of San Luis Obispo. Transit needs within the City of San
Luis Obispo are discussed in greater detail in the following section. Regions of San Luis Obispo County
with moderate need for transit services, based on the TNI, include northeast Morro Bay, Atascadero,
and Nipomo. All of the areas with high to moderate needs are already served with transit, either by the
RTA, SLO Transit, or other local transit services such as Morro Bay Transit, Atascadero Dial-a-Ride, or
Nipomo Dial-a-Ride.
It should be noted that while the TNI provides a useful assessment of transit needs, other factors, such
as total population size and development density, also need to be considered when determining where
to expand transit services. For instance, even though some areas ranked highly in the TNI due to a high
concentration of potentially transit-dependent persons in the area, the overall populations are small.
Consequently, it may not be feasible to operate transportation services in those areas due to the high
operating cost that would be required but likely very low ridership.
City of San Luis Obispo
City of San Luis Obispo demographic data, sourced from the US Census Bureau’s American Community
Survey (ACS) 2022 5-Year Estimates, was reviewed by the census block group to determine patterns
regarding transit dependency. Key trends are listed below:
Youths younger than 18 years old comprise 9 percent of the city’s population, similar to the
rate observed countywide. Block groups with large youth populations include those
encompassing the southeastern and southern areas of the city, Laguna Lake, S. Higuera
Street, and the area near the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport.
About 12 percent of the City of San Luis Obispo’s residents are senior adults over the age of
65, significantly less than the countywide rate. Block groups in the southeastern, southern,
and Laguna Lake areas of San Luis Obispo are home to the greatest number of senior adults.
The City of San Luis Obispo has a low disability rate, with only 8 percent of the city’s
population estimated to have a disability per US Census Bureau definitions. The three block
Page 80 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 42
groups home to the most disabled residents are located in southern San Luis Obispo, in the
northwestern area of Downtown, and along S. Higuera Street.
A quarter of residents in the City of San Luis Obispo are estimated to be persons living
below the federal poverty level, as defined by the US Census Bureau. This is significantly
higher than the countywide rate (12 percent), however, this statistic is influenced by the
high number of university students living in the city who do not work or only work part-
time. Block groups with large numbers of low-income residents include those encompassing
Downtown, Foothill Boulevard, Highland Drive, the northeastern portion of the city, and the
neighborhoods directly adjacent to the Cal Poly campus.
7 percent of homes in the City of San Luis Obispo are zero-vehicle households, a greater
proportion than what is observed countywide. Most zero-vehicle households are located in
block groups encompassing Downtown, Broad Street, and neighborhoods near Cal Poly. The
City has a similar rate of single-vehicle households as the State and County (32 percent).
City of San Luis Obispo Transit Needs Index
As previously mentioned, the Transit Needs Index (TNI) shows which areas have the greatest relative
need for transit services based on the concentration of transit-dependent residents. The method for
calculating the TNI ranks was described in the previous section discussing countywide demographics.
The City of San Luis Obispo TNI is shown in Table 8 and Figure 7.
Most areas of the City of San Luis Obispo have moderate to high transit needs based on the TNI. Block
groups encompassing Downtown and south-central San Luis Obispo have the overall highest TNI ranks,
scoring either high or very high for the majority of demographic categories considered. Block groups
with moderate transit need, based on the TNI, are found in northeastern, eastern, and southeastern San
Luis Obispo, along S. Higuera Street, Foothill Boulevard, and Highland Drive, as well as near the southern
portion of the Cal Poly campus. Of the aforementioned areas with high to moderate transit needs, all
are served with some level of SLO Transit and/or service.
Page 81 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 43
Table 7: San Luis Obispo County Transit Needs Index (1/2)
1
2
3
4
5
Youth
(Under 18
Years)
Senior Adults
(65+)
Persons with a
Disability
Persons Below
Poverty Level
Zero-Vehicle
Households
Overall Transit
Needs Index
Rank
100.16 San Miguel 111115
100.17 Lake Nacimiento 111115
101.01 Paso Robles - West 111115
101.03 Paso Robles - Central 111115
101.04 Paso Robles - North 5121110
102.02 Paso Robles - South East 111115
102.04 Paso Robles - South 5321112
102.05 Paso Robles - East 5421315
102.06 Paso Robles - Union Road 211116
102.07 Paso Robles - North East 111115
103.01 Shandon 111115
103.02 Paso Robles, Templeton 111115
103.03 Whitley Gardens 111115
104.03 Cambria - South 111115
104.04 Cambria - North 111115
105.04 Cayucos 111115
105.05 Morro Bay - North East 133119
105.06 Morro Bay - North West 111115
106.02 Morro Bay - South 121116
106.03 Morro Bay - Central 111115
107.01 Los Osos - Baywood Park 5541116
107.03 Los Osos - East 321118
107.07 Los Osos - Cuesta-by-the-Sea 111115
109.02 SLO - Northeast 1115513
109.03 Cal Poly SLO - South 1124513
109.04 Cal Poly SLO - North 111115
110.01 SLO - Southeast 111115
110.02 SLO - East 111115
111.01 SLO - Downtown 2133514
111.03 SLO - South 111115
111.04 SLO - Broad St 3111511
111.05 SLO - South Central 5411516
112.01 SLO - Foothill Blvd, Highland Dr 111115
112.02 SLO - Downtown (Northwest)111115
113 SLO - Laguna Lake 111115
Source: LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
Legend
Very Low Rank
Low Rank
Medium Rank
High Rank
Very High Rank
Census Tract
Rank
Page 82 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 44
Table 7: San Luis Obispo County Transit Needs Index (2/2)
1
2
3
4
5
Youth
(Under 18
Years)
Senior Adults
(65+)
Persons with a
Disability
Persons Below
Poverty Level
Zero-Vehicle
Households
Overall Transit
Needs Index
Rank
114 CA Men's Colony 131117
115 SLO - S. Higuera St. 4231111
115.1 SLO - Camp SLO, SLO Airport 111115
116 Avila Beach, Port San Luis 111115
117 Pismo Beach, Shell Beach 121116
117.1 Pismo Beach - South 131117
117.1 Pismo Beach - East 111115
118 Arroyo Grande - North 111115
119 Arroyo Grande - Southeast 111115
119 Arroyo Grande - West 4411111
119 Arroyo Grande - Southwest 5551521
120 Grover Beach - South 5551117
120 Grover Beach - East 5451116
121 Grover Beach - West 5331113
122 Oceano - West 4221110
122 Oceano - Halcyon 4541418
123 Edna, Huasna 111115
123.1 Los Berros 111115
123.1 Black Lake, Callender 111115
124 Nipomo - Southwest 211116
124 Nipomo - Northwest 211116
124.1 Nipomo - Southeast 111115
124.1 Nipomo - Northeast 211116
125 Atascadero - Northeast 411118
125 Atascadero - Southeast 411118
125.1 Atascadero - North 111115
126 Atascadero - Southwest 211116
126 Atascadero - Northwest 111115
127.1 Santa Margarita 111115
127.1 Santa Rita, Morro Toro 111115
127.1 Templeton - West 111115
127.1 San Luis Obispo Co. - Southeast 111115
130 San Simeon 111115
131 Templeton, Creston 111115
Source: LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
Legend
Very Low Rank
Low Rank
Medium Rank
High Rank
Very High Rank
Census Tract
Rank
Page 83 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 45
Table 8: City of San Luis Obispo Transit Needs Index
1
2
3
4
5
Census
Tract
Block
Group
Youth
(Under 18
Years)
Senior Adults
(65+)
Persons with a
Disability
Persons Below
Poverty Level
Zero-Vehicle
Households
Overall Transit
Needs Index
Rank
109.02 1SLO - Northeast 141 2 1
9
109.02 2SLO - Northeast 114 5 4
15
109.02 3SLO - Northeast 115 5 5
17
109.03 1 Cal Poly SLO - South 115 4 5
16
109.03 2 Cal Poly SLO - South 113 1 2
8
109.03 3 Cal Poly SLO - South 114 1 3
10
109.04 1Cal Poly SLO - North 111 1 1
5
109.04 2Cal Poly SLO - North 111 1 1
5
110.01 1 SLO - Southeast 555 1 1
17
110.01 2 SLO - Southeast 111 1 1
5
110.01 3 SLO - Southeast 354 1 1
14
110.02 1SLO - East 111 1 1
5
110.02 2SLO - East 155 1 2
14
111.01 1SLO - Downtown 545 2 5
21
111.01 2SLO - Downtown 133 1 4
12
111.01 3SLO - Downtown 334 1 4
15
111.03 1SLO - South 121 1 1
6
111.03 2SLO - South 131 1 1
7
111.04 1SLO - Broad St 333 1 4
14
111.05 1 SLO - South Central 451 1 2
13
111.05 2 SLO - South Central 554 1 5
20
111.05 3 SLO - South Central 451 1 2
13
112.01 1 SLO - Foothill Blvd, Highland D 345 41
17
112.01 2 SLO - Foothill Blvd, Highland D 111 11
5
112.02 1 SLO - Downtown (Northwest)111 11
5
112.02 2 SLO - Downtown (Northwest)143 13
12
113 1 SLO - Laguna Lake 111 11
5
113 2 SLO - Laguna Lake 121 11
6
113 3 SLO - Laguna Lake 332 11
10
113 4 SLO - Laguna Lake 311 11
7
113 5 SLO - Laguna Lake 142 11
9
114 1CA Men's Colony 151 11
9
115.01 1 SLO - S. Higuera St. 444 11
14
115.05 1 Camp SLO, SLO Airport 111 11
5
115.05 2 Camp SLO, SLO Airport 111 11
5
Source: LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
Rank
Legend
Very Low Rank
Low Rank
Medium Rank
High Rank
Very High Rank
Page 84 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 46
Page 85 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 47
The City TNI should be considered alongside other data, such as total population size, activity centers,
and development density, to determine whether transit services should be increased to unserved or
underserved areas.
COMMUTING PATTERNS
Commuting data for San Luis Obispo County, sourced from the US Census Longitudinal Employer
Household Dynamics dataset (2021), is presented in Table 9. The top portion of the table shows where
employees working in San Luis Obispo County commute from, while the bottom portion shows where
residents of San Luis Obispo County commute to.
Counties # of Jobs % of Total Cities/Towns # of Jobs % of Total
San Luis Obispo 71,112 68.0%San Luis Obipo 11,977 11.5%
Santa Barbara 11,633 11.1%Paso Robles 9,661 9.2%
Los Angeles 3,310 3.2%Atascadero 9,285 8.9%
Kern 1,608 1.5%Santa Maria 6,077 5.8%
Fresno 1,511 1.4%Arroyo Grande 4,540 4.3%
Monterey 1,490 1.4%Los Osos 3,933 3.8%
Orange 1,204 1.2%Nipomo 3,648 3.5%
Ventura 1,046 1.0%Grover Beach 3,487 3.3%
San Diego 910 0.9%Morro Bay 2,978 2.8%
Tulare 907 0.9%Templeton 2,453 2.3%
All Other Locations 9,862 9.4%All Other Locations 46,554 44.5%
Total Number of Jobs 104,593 Total Number of Jobs 104,593
Counties # of Jobs % of Total Cities and Towns # of Jobs % of Total
San Luis Obispo 71,112 64.8%San Luis Obipo 20,635 18.8%
Santa Barbara 10,911 9.9%Paso Robles 9,444 8.6%
Los Angeles 7,630 7.0%Atascadero 7,097 6.5%
Orange 2,227 2.0%Santa Maria 6,330 5.8%
Kern 2,121 1.9%Arroyo Grande 3,669 3.3%
Monterey 1,663 1.5%Los Angeles 3,467 3.2%
Fresno 1,656 1.5%Templeton 3,298 3.0%
Ventura 1,521 1.4%Pismo Beach 2,776 2.5%
Santa Clara 1,399 1.3%Morro Beach 2,665 2.4%
San Diego 1,119 1.0%Grover Beach 1,904 1.7%
All Other Locations 8,385 7.6%All Other Locations 48,459 44.2%
Total Number of Jobs 109,744 Total Number of Jobs 109,744
Note: Bold text indicates locations within San Luis Obispo County.
Source: US Census Bureau LEHD Database, 2021.
Table 9: San Luis Obispo County Commute Patterns
Where Employees In San Luis Obispo County Commute From
Where San Luis Obispo County Residents Commute to
Page 86 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 48
It is important to note that the data represents a; number of jobs and not the number of people; one
person may hold multiple jobs across the study area, however, this is not reflected in the LEHD data.
Another caveat is that the LEHD data does not indicate whether a job is held by a remote worker,
however, some remote work patterns can be assumed. For instance, likely, most San Luis Obispo County
residents with jobs located in Los Angeles County are working remotely at least part of the time. Even
with these caveats, the LEHD data still provides useful information about popular commute patterns
that could potentially be served by transit.
Most San Luis Obispo County jobs are held by county residents (68 percent). The San Luis Obispo County
communities that supply the greatest number of employees are the Cities of San Luis Obispo (12 percent
of county jobs), Paso Robles (9 percent), and Atascadero (9 percent). Notably, 11 percent of San Luis
Obispo County jobs are held by residents of Santa Barbara County, and about 6 percent are held by
residents of Santa Maria specifically. In the City of San Luis Obispo, 38 percent of jobs held by employed
residents are located within the City itself (6,700).
As expected, the majority of San Luis Obispo County residents’ jobs are also within the county (65
percent). Nearly one out of every five positions held by San Luis Obispo County residents are located in
the City of San Luis Obispo (19 percent). Other places where large numbers of San Luis Obispo County
residents work include Paso Robles (9 percent of jobs held by county residents), Atascadero (7 percent),
and Arroyo Grande (3 percent). The top out-of-county location where San Luis Obispo County residents
are employed is Santa Barbara County (10 percent of jobs held by San Luis Obispo County residents).
More specifically, 6 percent of jobs held by San Luis Obispo County residents are located in Santa Maria.
According to a study conducted by the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments, the residents
commuting south to Santa Barbara County tend to live in Nipomo, Arroyo Grande, and Grover Beach.6
Looking at the potential for transit to serve popular commutes, it is necessary to consider how
commuting patterns have changed since the COVID-19 pandemic. The widespread implementation of
remote and hybrid work policies in the wake of the pandemic has resulted in many people commuting
less frequently in 2024 than in 2019, therefore reducing the need for transit services designed for
commuters. This trend was noted in a recent report by the Santa Barbara County Association of
Governments, which found through an analysis of Replica data that about 15 percent of Santa Barbara
County resident workers were working from home on any given day in 2022, up from 6 percent in 2019.
Interestingly, the same report found that the shift to working from home only occurred for Santa
Barabara County residents with an annual income of $75,000 to $100,000 or more. As lower-income
workers are more likely to use the bus, this indicates a continued need for transit service for work
purposes and Cal poly enrollment.
The California Polytechnic University (Cal Poly) is a four-year California State University in the City of San
Luis Obispo. Cal Poly is a major transit trip generator for both the RTA and SLO Transit, as many students
and staff rely on transit for their transportation needs. Cal Poly has had 20,000 to 21,500 full-time
equivalent students enrolled during the Fall Quarter since the 2015-16 school year. Cal Poly's historical
enrollment, based on the Fall Quarter Census, is shown in Figure 8.
6 Santa Barbara County Association of Governments. (2023). Understanding Regional Travel Patterns – Draft [PDF].
Page 87 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 49
Per the Cal Poly Campus Master Plan (2019), Cal Poly intends to increase the student headcount to
25,000 by 2035, an increase of about 4,000 students compared to 2022. The growing student body will
likely drive increased demand for transit services within the City of San Luis Obispo as well as the greater
region. Another factor that may influence Cal Poly transit ridership in the future is that Cal Poly is
undertaking multiple capital projects that will increase the total number of students living on campus
from 8,000 to 15,000 by 2030. This increase in Cal Poly’s on-campus residential capacity will be
correlated to an increase in staff to manage the new facilities. The planned shift towards more students
living on campus may alter SLO Transit travel patterns in particular, with peak hourly ridership likely
changing as a result of more students starting their day on campus.
Page 88 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 50
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 89 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 51
Chapter 6
EVALUATION OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TRANSIT
INTRODUCTION
This chapter evaluates SLO Transit operations and performance. First, ten-year operating trends are
discussed. Then, a more detailed performance assessment by service is presented for FY 2022-23.
Additional route-specific data is incorporated into the route profiles included in Appendix C.
In addition to reviewing operations data, LSC solicited public, stakeholder, and bus operator feedback to
learn how SLO Transit services are utilized and perceived by both passengers and community members
alike, as well as to determine short-term service improvements to help SLO Transit better meet local
transportation needs. Input regarding SLO Transit was gathered through an onboard survey, an online
community survey, stakeholder meetings, and drop-in bus operator interviews. These efforts are
summarized in Appendices D (onboard survey), E (community survey), and F (stakeholder and bus
operator input).
SLO TRANSIT TEN-YEAR TRENDS
Two major events influenced SLO Transit operations in the last ten years: the COVID-19 pandemic and
the nationwide bus operator shortage. In March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic prompted many
businesses and schools to institute remote work policies to encourage people to comply with regional
stay-at-home orders. The widespread adoption of remote work/school policies caused SLO Transit
ridership to plummet, and this ridership decline in turn caused SLO Transit to reduce service levels.
In the years since the COVID-19 pandemic, many bus operators have either retired or left their positions
in pursuit of higher-paying roles with less public exposure. This trend has resulted in a nationwide bus
operator shortage. Locally, the high cost of living in San Luis Obispo County and the City of San Luis
Obispo has limited the number of potential bus operators even further. The bus operator shortage has
made it incredibly difficult for SLO Transit to resume pre-pandemic service levels.
Operations
SLO Transit's ten-year (FY 2013-14 through FY 2022-23) operations data are shown in Table 10. The
impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and bus operator shortage are evident in the data; SLO Transit
ridership declined significantly in FY 2019-20 as local businesses and schools, including Cal Poly, moved
to remote formats. While most businesses and schools are operating in-person once again as of 2024,
SLO Transit has not returned to pre-pandemic service levels due to several factors, including staffing
levels and lower ridership.
Page 90 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 52
Ridership
SLO Transit ridership for FY 2013-14 through FY 2022-23 is shown in Table 10 and Figure 9. Of the ten
years considered, ridership peaked in FY 2015-16 at 1,209,707 passenger-trips. Ridership had already
been declining from this peak before the pandemic, decreasing by 19 percent from FY 2015-16 to FY
2018-19. This pre-pandemic transit ridership decline was a trend observed nationwide and can be
attributed to factors such as low fuel costs and low interest rates that made it easier for many people to
purchase and use personal vehicles. This ridership decline was then exacerbated by the pandemic; from
FY 2018-19 to FY 2020-21, SLO Transit ridership decreased by 82 percent.
SLO Transit ridership has slowly recovered since the lows experienced during the pandemic.
Systemwide, SLO Transit served 515,002 passenger-trips in FY 2022-23, an increase of 186 percent over
FY 2020-21. Figure 10 shows how the recovery of ridership has varied by service by year. As shown, the
SLO Transit routes that serve Cal Poly (Routes 3A, 3B, 4A, and 4B) have seen the greatest growth in
ridership since the pandemic.
This growth can be attributed to the large number of students who ride these services; ridership
decreased when Cal Poly shifted to primarily remote instruction in the spring of 2020 and subsequently
increased when Cal Poly returned to primarily in-person instruction during the 2021-22 school year.
Ridership recovery on Routes 1B and 2B has been less consistent due to multiple service reductions
resulting from the bus operator shortage.
Table 10: SLO Transit Operations - FY 2013-14 - FY 2022-23
Fiscal Year
Passenger-
Trips
Local
Revenue
2013-14 1,142,749 32,983 399,892 $3,235,378 $650,800
2014-15 1,099,547 33,016 396,269 $3,445,334 $656,115
2015-16 1,209,707 33,963 412,377 $3,450,953 $721,541
2016-17 1,131,879 34,698 437,145 $3,701,634 $702,644
2017-18 945,288 37,535 382,799 $3,532,310 $771,861
2018-19 981,995 39,599 441,483 $3,533,504 $703,061
2019-20 715,383 32,882 372,376 $3,283,817 $643,776
2020-21 179,456 29,994 330,124 $3,116,232 $323,759
2021-22 468,945 28,144 330,244 $3,348,735 $710,758
2022-23 515,002 30,870 343,103 $4,252,122 $742,743
% Change
FY 13-14 to FY 22-23 -55% -6% -14% 31% 14%
Source: National Transit Database
Service Parameters
Service
Hours
Service
Miles
Operating
Costs
Page 91 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 53
Page 92 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 54
Service Levels
From FY 2013-14 to FY 2018-19, SLO Transit's annual service levels increased, with the number of vehicle
service hours increasing by 20 percent and the number of vehicle service miles increasing by 10 percent.
These increases can be attributed to service changes implemented as a result of recommendations
made in the 2016 update of the SLO Transit SRTP, including changes to the routing structure.
SLO Transit service levels have been lower in the years since the pandemic due to service reductions
resulting from low ridership and the bus operator shortage. In particular, San Luis Tripper, Highland
Tripper, and Route 6x operations have been suspended since the pandemic, and the Old SLO Trolley
only resumed operations in FY 2023-24. As of FY 2022-23, SLO Transit vehicle service hours have
decreased by 6 percent from FY 2013-14 and by 22 percent from FY 2018-19. SLO Transit vehicle service
miles have decreased by 14 percent from FY 2013-14 and by 22 percent from FY 2018-19.
Operating Costs
SLO Transit’s operating costs increased from $3.24 million in FY 2013-14 to $4.25 million in FY 2022-23
(+31 percent). Operating costs first increased by 9 percent from FY 2013-14 to FY 2018-19, then costs
rapidly increased by 20 percent from FY 2018-19 to FY 2022-23. The significant increase in costs
observed over the last 5 years in particular is largely due to record-high inflation and the need to offer
competitive job offers to recruit more employees. However, it is worth noting that the consumer price
index (CPI) increased by a similar amount (30 percent) during this ten-year time period, indicating SLO
Transit operating costs have not increased much more than inflation.
Local Revenues
SLO Transit’s local revenues, which include passenger fares and funding from Cal Poly, increased by 14
percent over the last ten years, growing from $650,800 in FY 2013-14 to $742,743 in FY 2022-23.
Revenues declined during the pandemic as a result of the drop in ridership, however, revenues have
grown in the years following. Of the ten years considered, SLO Transit’s local revenues peaked in FY
2018-19 at $771,861.
Performance
The SLO Transit's ten-year operating data was used to calculate several performance indicators, detailed
in Table 11. Trends evident from the data include:
The number of passenger-trips per vehicle service hour is an indicator of the relative
productivity of transit service. This measure decreased by 52 percent over the last 10 years
and by 33 percent over the last 5 years.
Passenger-trips per vehicle service mile is another indicator of productivity. This measure
decreased by 47 percent over the last 10 years and by 33 percent over the last 5 years.
The operating cost per passenger-trip has increased by 192 percent over the last 10 years.
This measure peaked in FY 2020-21 when the pandemic was in full swing and SLO Transit
ridership was at its lowest but has since dropped 52 percent as ridership returned.
Page 93 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 55
The SLO Transit operating cost per vehicle service hour increased by 40 percent over the
last 10 years and 54 percent over the last 5 years.
Overall, the ten-year performance trends reflect the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic; SLO Transit
ridership decreased, and operating costs increased as a result of the pandemic, causing negative impacts
to SLO Transit’s productivity and cost efficiency.
SLO TRANSIT FY 22-23 OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE
Operations
Table 12 details SLO Transit operating data by service for FY 2022-23. The Old SLO Trolley, San Luis
Tripper, Highland Tripper, and Route 6x did not operate in FY 2022-23, therefore these services are not
included.
Table 11: SLO Transit Performance - FY 2013-14 - FY 2022-23
Fiscal Year Hour Mile
2013-14 34.6 2.9 $2.83 $98.09
2014-15 33.3 2.8 $3.13 $104.35
2015-16 35.6 2.9 $2.85 $101.61
2016-17 32.6 2.6 $3.27 $106.68
2017-18 25.2 2.5 $3.74 $94.11
2018-19 24.8 2.2 $3.60 $89.23
2019-20 21.8 1.9 $4.59 $99.87
2020-21 6.0 0.5 $17.36 $103.90
2021-22 16.7 1.4 $7.14 $118.99
2022-23 16.7 1.5 $8.26 $137.74
% Change
FY 13-14 to FY 22-23 -52% -47% 192% 40%
% Change
FY 18-19 to FY 22-23 -33% -33% 129% 54%
Source: National Transit Database
Performance
Operating Cost per
Passenger-Trip
Passengers Per
Operating Cost per
Service Hour
Page 94 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 56
Ridership
SLO Transit served 515,002 passenger-trips in FY 2022-23. Route 4A had the greatest ridership, carrying
153,525 passenger-trips, or 30 percent of all annual ridership. Other routes with high ridership included
Routes 3A (85,585 passenger-trips), 2A (72,298 passenger-trips), and 4B (68,567 passenger-trips). It
should be noted that the generally higher ridership observed on the A routes versus the B routes is due
to the A routes operating on more days of the week and for longer hours.
Figure 11 depicts how SLO Transit ridership by passenger-type varied by month. Given that such a large
proportion of SLO Transit ridership is comprised of Cal Poly students and staff, SLO Transit ridership
fluctuates depending on when Cal Poly is in session; in FY 2022-23, ridership was highest from
September through November (Fall Quarter) and January through June (Winter and Spring Quarters).
Ridership clearly dipped when the school had vacations or breaks, such as during the summer months,
December, and March. General public ridership stayed relatively consistent throughout the year.
Service Levels
SLO Transit operated 30,870 vehicle service hours and 343,103 vehicle service miles in FY 2022-23. The A
Routes required greater service levels due to having longer weekday service spans and operating on
weekends. Looking at mileage, Route 3A operated the most vehicle service miles (21 percent of the
systemwide total) due to the longer service span, higher service frequency during the school year, and
longer route length compared to many of the other SLO Transit routes.
Table 12: SLO Transit Operations by Service - FY 2022-23
Service
Passenger-
Trips
Route 1A 50,349 5,179 52,857 $572,119
Route 1B 11,452 1,922 20,006 $212,958
Route 2A 72,298 5,208 61,899 $589,598
Route 2B 12,215 1,647 19,175 $185,804
Route 3A 85,585 5,208 71,402 $605,108
Route 3B 53,979 3,016 40,655 $349,290
Route 4A 153,525 5,322 48,625 $578,627
Route 4B 68,567 3,183 26,477 $341,816
Laguna Tripper 7,032 185 2,007 $20,631
Systemwide 515,002 30,870 343,103 $3,455,950
Sources: City of San Luis Obispo, LSC.
Service Parameters
Service
Hours
Service
Miles
Marginal
Operating Cost
Page 95 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 57
Operating Costs
To determine the SLO Transit operating cost by service, the FY 2022-23 adopted budget was used to
develop an operating cost model. Each SLO Transit operating expense was allocated to the service
quantity (vehicle service hours or vehicle service miles) upon which it is most dependent. The costs not
dependent on service levels were designated as fixed costs. The costs were then divided by FY 2022-23
service levels to yield the following formula:
FY 2022-23 SLO Transit Operating Cost Model = $93.81 x annual vehicle service hours +
$1.63 x annual vehicle service miles +
$796,172 in fixed costs
The cost model was used to calculate the marginal operating costs of each SLO transit route, as shown in
Table 12. Overall, the A Routes were more expensive than the B Routes or Laguna Tripper due to the
greater service levels. Route 3A was the most expensive SLO Transit service in FY 2022-23 ($605,108)
because of the large number of vehicle service hours and miles required for operations. The Laguna
Tripper was the least expensive service ($20,631), as the service consisted of only two trips per weekday
during the school year.
Performance Analysis
Table 13 and Figures 12 through 14 show FY 2022-23 performance indicators for each SLO Transit
service. Important trends to note from the service-specific performance analysis are as follows:
Page 96 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 58
Table 13: SLO Transit Performance by Service - FY 2022-23
Service Hour Mile
Route 1A 9.7 1.0 $11.36 $110.47
Route 1B 6.0 0.6 $18.60 $110.80
Route 2A 13.9 1.2 $8.16 $113.21
Route 2B 7.4 0.6 $15.21 $112.81
Route 3A 16.4 1.2 $7.07 $116.19
Route 3B 17.9 1.3 $6.47 $115.81
Route 4A 28.8 3.2 $3.77 $108.72
Route 4B 21.5 2.6 $4.99 $107.39
Laguna Tripper 38.0 3.5 $2.93 $111.52
Systemwide 16.7 1.5 $6.71 $111.95
Sources: City of San Luis Obispo, LSC.
Performance
Marginal Operating Cost
per Passenger-Trip
Passengers Per Marginal Operating Cost
per Service Hour
Page 97 of 987
SLO RTA and SLO Transit 2024 SRTPs LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO RTA and SLO Transit Page 59
Page 98 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 60
Systemwide, SLO Transit served 16.7 passenger-trips per vehicle service hour in FY 2022-23.
The most productive routes, based on this metric, were the Laguna Tripper (38.0 passenger-
trips per hour), Route 4A (28.8), and Route 4B (21.5), three services that are all highly
utilized by students. The least productive routes were Routes 1B (6.0 passenger-trips per
hour) and 2B (7.4).
SLO Transit carried 1.5 passenger-trips per vehicle service mile in FY 2022-23. The Laguna
Tripper, Route 4A, and Route 4B all served more passenger-trips per vehicle service mile
than the systemwide total. Considering this performance measure, Routes 1B (0.6
passenger-trips per mile) and 2B (0.6) were also the least productive services.
The SLO Transit FY 2022-23 marginal operating cost per passenger-trip was $6.71. The
Laguna Tripper was the most cost-efficient service ($2.93 per passenger-trip), followed by
Route 4A ($3.77) and Route 4B ($4.99). The most expensive service per passenger-trip was
Route 1B ($18.60), followed by Route 2B ($15.21) and Route 1A ($11.26).
The marginal operating cost per vehicle service hour was similar across the various SLO
Transit services, ranging from $107.39 on Route 4B to a high of $116.19 on Route 3A.
Generally, this measure was lower on the low-mileage routes (Routes 4 A/B, 1 A/B, and the
Laguna Tripper) and higher on the high-mileage routes (Routes 3 A/B and 2 A/B).
In sum, the SLO Transit services which are catered to Cal Poly and local K-12 students (Routes 3 A/B, 4
A/B, and the Laguna Tripper) were more productive and cost-efficient compared to other services.
On-Time Performance
LSC recorded SLO Transit's on-time performance by service during October 2023 as a part of the greater
onboard passenger survey effort conducted for the SRTP (Appendix D). Figure 15 shows the proportion
of timepoint stops that were early, on-time, 6 to 10 minutes late, 11 to 15 minutes late, or more than 15
minutes late as measured by what time the bus departed from established timepoints. The on-time
performance data shown was collected during the equivalent of one weekday of service, so the data
reflects a limited number of runs.
Based on the data collected by LSC, Routes 1A, 4A, 4B, and the Laguna Tripper had the best on-time
performance, as they were on-time for 80 percent or more of the timepoint stops. Routes 1A and 1B left
the timepoints early more frequently than any other services. Route 2A (65 percent) and the Old SLO
Trolley (54 percent) had the largest proportions of timepoints for which the bus left late. Routes 2A (40
percent), 3A (34 percent), and 3B (21 percent) had the largest proportions of timepoints for which the
bus left more than 15 minutes late. While this data is based on limited runs, it suggests that on-time
performance is a challenge for SLO Transit, especially on Routes 2 A/B and 3 A/B. On-time performance
is an important aspect of service quality and reliability, therefore the SLO Transit SRTP will consider
service modifications to improve on-time performance.
Page 99 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 61
FINDINGS
During the last ten years, SLO Transit operations and performance were significantly impacted by the
COVID-19 pandemic, as well as by the subsequent nationwide bus operator shortage and rise in
inflation. SLO Transit ridership declined during the COVID-19 pandemic due to the widespread
implementation of remote work and school structures across the region, including at Cal Poly. SLO
Transit reduced service levels in response to the reduced demand, however, the shortage of bus
operators has made it difficult to reinstate pre-COVID service levels. Multiple years of high inflation
rates also resulted in SLO Transit operating costs increasing at a rapid rate.
Since the peak of the pandemic in FY 2020-21, SLO Transit systemwide performance has slowly
improved with the return of both local and Cal Poly ridership. In FY 2022-23, SLO Transit served 515,002
passenger-trips. Productivity increased to 16.7 passenger-trips per vehicle service hour and 1.5
passenger-trips per vehicle service mile. The best-performing SLO Transit services in FY 2022-23, in
terms of productivity and cost-efficiency, were Routes 4A/B, Routes 3A/B, and the Laguna Tripper. In
regard to on-time performance, Routes 1A, 4A, 4B, and the Laguna Tripper were the best performing.
Looking forward, it is likely that more than minor service modifications will be needed to increase SLO
Transit ridership to the levels necessary to achieve the City of San Luis Obispo’s adopted goal of a 12
percent transit mode split. The analyses presented in this Chapter highlight service inefficiencies that
should be addressed to increase the reliability and utility of the service for both existing passengers as
well as potentially new passengers. The public and stakeholder input summarized in Appendices D
provides additional insight beyond the analyses presented in this Chapter about how SLO Transit could
potentially improve to further attract discretionary ridership.
Page 100 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 62
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 101 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 63
Chapter 7
SLO TRANSIT SERVICE ALTERNATIVES
INTRODUCTION
In this chapter, service alternatives for SLO Transit are presented. The alternatives are based on public
input and the recommendations of related studies, including the recent SLO Transit Innovations (Transit
Innovations) Study (2024). Given the City’s goal of achieving a 7 percent transit mode split by 2030 and
12 percent transit mode split by 2035, many of the service alternatives are designed to increase
ridership. Each alternative is evaluated as a stand-alone option in this chapter; the combined impacts of
the recommended plan elements will be detailed in the Draft SLO Transit SRTP.
The following discussion of SLO Transit service alternatives is organized by the type of change proposed.
Changes to service frequency are discussed first, followed by potential changes to service hours. Then,
options for introducing microtransit service to San Luis Obispo are presented, followed by routing
alternatives. The various alternatives are then compared using the new performance standards
recommended in WP2. For each alternative, the impacts on ridership and operating costs are estimated.
Ridership and cost estimates assume implementation in FY 2025-26 and are based on the following
parameters:
1. The projected SLO Transit FY 2025-26 operating budget, as presented in the City of San Luis
Obispo 2023-25 Financial Plan Supplement, was used to estimate the operating costs of each
existing service assuming no change to service levels (“status quo” scenario). The per-hour and
per-mile costs were then used to estimate the cost impacts of the various alternatives, per the
following equation:
Change in SLO Transit Marginal Operating Cost = $50.22 X Change in Vehicle Service Hours
+ $2.23 X Change in Vehicle Service Miles
For the alternatives evaluations that follow, operating cost estimates represent “marginal”
costs. In other words, fixed costs are excluded from the analysis unless identified specifically.
The reason for looking at marginal costs of potential changes or improvements is that fixed
costs (such as administrative staff salaries, utilities, and supplies) will not change if service
levels are increased or decreased. However, fuel/maintenance costs (cost per mile) and driver
salary costs (costs per hour) will increase incrementally as vehicle hours and miles are
increased. Fixed costs and capital costs will be included in the discussion when the Draft
Financial Plan is prepared.
2. Ridership estimates are based on projected full-year SLO Transit FY 2023-24 ridership, expected
population growth in San Luis Obispo County during the next two years, ridership data from
peer systems, and standard transit demand elasticity factors, depending on the alternative.
Elasticity is an economic term which measures the change in behavior of one variable in
response to the change in a related variable. For example, if service levels are doubled, historical
data has shown that ridership will not double but rather increase by around 47 percent.
Elasticity factors vary for different variables such as headways, total travel time or transfer time.
Variation has also been found in urban areas vs. suburban areas or during peak or non-peak
periods. The Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Report 95 Traveler Response to
Page 102 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 64
Transportation System Changes Chapter 9 – Transit Scheduling and Frequency is a good resource
for transit elasticity factors.
3. Service was assumed to include 180 academic year weekdays, 81 non-academic year weekdays,
52 Saturdays/holidays, and 52 Sundays, unless otherwise noted.
4. The assumed average cash fares received per boarding on each route are shown in Table 14. The
average cash fare values were calculated by dividing the total annual cash fare revenue received
on the route during FY 2022-23 by total annual boardings. The average cash fare estimates do
not account for fees received from Cal Poly.
SERVICE FREQUENCY ALTERNATIVES
The Transit Innovations Study recommended increasing service frequency to improve service quality and
increase ridership. Additionally, more frequent service was one of the most requested improvements
during the onboard passenger survey (42 percent of respondents), corroborating that improving service
frequency would likely benefit SLO Transit ridership. This section considers alternatives to increase SLO
Transit service frequency. The options discussed demonstrate the wide range of potential impacts that
can result from increasing service frequency to differing extents. The service frequency alternatives are
summarized in Table 15.
Table 14 : SLO Transit Average Cash Fare per Boarding by Route
FY 2022-23
Boardings Cash Fares
Average Cash
Fare per Boarding
Route 1A 50,349 $51,823.37 $1.03
Route 1B 11,452 $9,381.51 $0.82
Route 2A 72,298 $72,317.92 $1.00
Route 2B 12,215 $12,348.40 $1.01
Route 3A 85,585 $27,594.63 $0.32
Route 3B 53,979 $14,563.33 $0.27
Route 4A 153,525 $11,662.94 $0.08
Route 4B 68,567 $4,780.27 $0.07
Laguna Tripper 7,032 $2,048.69 $0.29
Systemwide 515,002 $206,521 $0.40
Source: SLO Transit
Page 103 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 65
Table 15: SLO Transit - Service Frequency and Span Alternatives
Ridership
Service
Hours
Service
Miles
Marginal
Operating
Cost
Cash Fare
Revenues 2
Operating
Subsidy
Status Quo1
Route 1A 55,900 5,300 50,700 $379,100 $57,500 $321,600
Route 1B 20,000 3,100 29,900 $222,300 $16,400 $205,900
Route 2A 80,300 5,300 57,900 $395,100 $80,300 $314,800
Route 2B 22,100 3,100 33,200 $229,600 $22,300 $207,300
Route 3A 94,700 6,300 82,400 $499,900 $30,500 $469,400
Route 3B 65,700 4,900 61,700 $383,500 $17,700 $365,800
Route 4A 152,800 5,500 47,800 $382,600 $11,600 $371,000
Route 4B 70,900 4,000 31,000 $269,900 $4,900 $265,000
Laguna Tripper 10,100 200 2,000 $14,500 $2,900 $11,600
Old SLO Trolley 1,600 300 1,800 $19,100 $600 $18,500
System Total 574,100 38,000 398,400 $2,795,600 $244,700 $2,550,900
Service Frequency and Span Alternatives - Change from Status Quo 3
Increase Route 4 Frequency During Academic Year
Increase Route 4A Frequency - 8:00 AM - 10:00 AM 4,200 300 2,300 $20,200 $300 $19,900 1
Increase Route 4B Frequency - 3:00 PM - 5:00 PM 3,900 300 2,100 $19,700 $300 $19,400 1
Net Impact (Combined 4A and 4B) 8,100 600 4,400 $39,900 $600 $39,300 1
Double Service Frequency on Routes 1, 2, 3, 4 (A & B)
Full Service Day, Year-Round 208,300 33,500 347,000 $2,455,000 $83,500 $2,371,500 8
8:00 AM to 6:00 PM, Weekdays, Year-Round 119,700 19,600 234,200 $1,505,800 $48,000 $1,457,800 8
Full Service Day, Weekdays, Academic Year 153,600 20,900 231,700 $1,565,500 $61,600 $1,503,900 8
Double Service Frequency on Rts 1A, 2A, 3A, 4A
Full Service Day, Weekdays, Academic Year 89,600 11,300 133,800 $865,400 $35,900 $829,500 4
Double Service Frequency on Routes 3A, 3B, 4A, 4B
Full Service Day, Weekdays, Academic Year 101,200 11,600 136,100 $885,600 $40,600 $845,000 4
Extend Weekday Evening Service on A Routes
Extend Service to 12:00 AM - Academic Year 5,100 1,000 10,900 $74,500 $2,000 $72,500 0
Extend Service to 10:00 PM - Non-Academic Year 2,200 700 7,000 $50,700 $900 $49,800 0
Expand Service on B Routes
Operate B Routes on Weekends - 7:45 AM - 8:00 PM 39,600 3,200 46,000 $263,100 $15,900 $247,200 0
Operate 3B and 4B on Weekends 29,400 1,600 25,300 $136,700 $11,800 $124,900 0
Extend Routes 1B and 2B until 10:00 PM -
Weekdays, Academic Year 4,000 1,400 14,500 $102,600 $1,600 $101,000 0
Provide Academic Year Service Levels Year-Round 16,300 2,300 26,400 $174,300 $6,500 $167,800 0
Change in Annual Service
Additional
Buses
Needed
Note 1: Status quo operations are based on FY 2023-24 ridership through 3/31/24 and expected annual population growth. Service estimates are based
on FY 2022-23 operating parameters. Cost estimates are based on the projected FY 2025-26 SLO Transit budget and the SLO Transit cost model.
Note 2: The average cash fare per boarding by route is detailed in Table 13.
Note 3: Parameters and costs represent change over existing services. Estimates represent marginal costs and do not include fixed costs.
Page 104 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 66
Increase Route 4 Frequency During Academic Year
Routes 4A and 4B serve northeast San Luis Obispo, connecting downtown and the Cal Poly campus with
residential areas along Foothill Boulevard, Highland Drive, and Grand Avenue. Service is operated on a
45-minute loop, using one bus in each direction. Route 4 is the most popular SLO Transit service; Route
4A is projected to provide upwards of 152,000 passenger-trips in FY 2025-26, and Route 4B is projected
to provide 70,000 passenger-trips. Increasing service frequency during peak travel periods would likely
further benefit ridership and improve connectivity between downtown and Cal Poly.
Increase Route 4A Frequency – 8:00 AM – 10:00 AM
Ridership is quite high on Route 4A (clockwise direction), particularly on the runs departing the
Government Center at 8:15 AM, 10:30 AM, and 11:15 AM, all of which were observed to carry more
than 50 passengers. Given this high demand, the City could increase service frequency on weekday
mornings during the academic year by adding two new runs departing the Government Center at 8:30
AM and 9:15 AM.
Operating the two additional Route 4A runs would increase the City’s marginal operating cost by
$20,200 per year. An elasticity analysis based on existing ridership during this service period indicates
that ridership would be increased by an estimated 4,200 boardings per year, generating $300 in
additional cash fares (not accounting for the fare revenue agreement with Cal Poly). Note that there
could be additional ridership generated by potential passengers who currently do not use the existing
service due to crowding. This alternative would require an additional peak bus.
Increase Route 4B Frequency – 3:00 PM – 5:00 PM
Route 4B, which operates in the counterclockwise direction, carries particularly high passenger loads on
the 4:00 PM and 4:45 PM runs (50 passengers each). Adding two additional runs departing the
Government Center at 4:15 PM and 5:00 PM on weekdays in the academic year could expand capacity
and improve convenience during the afternoon peak ridership period. The annual marginal operating
subsidy for the two runs would be $19,400 per year, based on the increase to service levels and fare
revenue. Adding Route 4B service in the afternoon would require an additional peak bus (though this
could be the same bus added for the 4A additional runs in the morning). It is estimated the runs would
provide 3,900 passenger-trips per year.
Double Service Frequency on All Regular Routes
A more substantial service increase would be to double service frequency on all regular SLO Transit fixed
routes (Routes 1 A/B, 2 A/B, 3 A/B, and 4 A/B). At present, SLO Transit service frequencies are relatively
low for an urban transit system, consisting of hourly service on Routes 1, 2, and 3 and service every 45
minutes on Route 4. Doubling service would result in bus service every 30 minutes on Routes 1, 2, and
3A and every 22.5 minutes on Route 4. The increase in ridership would help to achieve sustainability
goals, including the Transit Innovations Study goal to increase transit mode split to 7 percent by 2030. As
discussed below, three options for doubling service frequency were considered.
Page 105 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 67
Full Day, Year-Round
Doubling service frequency on all regular SLO Transit routes for the full-service day, year-round would
result in a significant increase to the City’s marginal operating cost; service levels would increase by
33,500 vehicle service hours and 347,000 vehicle service miles per year, requiring $2.45 million in
operating funds. Eight additional vehicles would also be needed throughout the entire service day,
which would require the City to expand its existing fleet and hire more bus operators. The drastic
increase to service frequency would also have a significant impact on ridership, as elasticity analyses
indicate that systemwide ridership would grow by 208,300 passenger-trips per year, equal to a 40
percent increase in ridership on Routes 1 through 4.
The additional fleet would also expand the required capacity of the SLO Transit maintenance facility,
with regard to bus storage, charging, and maintenance work bays. Accommodating a doubling of
frequency could also exceed the capacity of the Downtown Transit Center. At present, the 5-bus
capacity of the DTC is adequate to serve the hourly service on Routes 1, 2, and 3 (as well as the other
services) by offsetting the “A” buses 30 minutes from the “B” buses. Simply adding new runs 30 minutes
off of the existing service times (to provide desirable consistent 30-minute headways) would result in six
buses onsite for Routes 1 through 3, as well as up to two buses for Route 4, as well as less frequent
buses for the tripper and express services. While the peak number of buses at the DTC could be reduced
by changing the schedules for some or all of the additional services, this would result in unbalanced
service times and a loss in transfer opportunities.
8:00 AM – 6:00 PM, Weekdays, Year-Round
SLO Transit ridership, like many transit systems, is lower in the early morning and later evening. To
ensure the more effective use of resources, the City could double the service frequency from 8:00 AM to
6:00 PM on weekdays only. This service enhancement would increase service levels by 19,600 vehicle
service hours and 234,200 vehicle service miles annually at a marginal operating cost of $1.5 million. To
estimate the ridership impact, elasticity analyses for each route on the proportion of ridership that
occurs from 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM. In sum, doubling service frequency during the weekday daytime hours
would increase systemwide ridership by 119,700 passenger-trips per year, equal to a 23 percent
increase in ridership on Routes 1 through 4. The implications on capital needs discussed for the first of
these options would be the same for this option.
Full Day, Weekdays, Academic Year
Most SLO Transit ridership occurs during the Cal Poly academic year. Another means to double service
frequency but concentrate resources during periods of high ridership would be to double service
frequency on weekdays during the academic year. Annual service levels would increase by 20,900
vehicle service hours and 231,700 vehicle service miles. Elasticity analyses indicate that annual ridership
would increase by 153,600 passenger-trips (a 30 percent increase in total ridership for Routes 1 through
4), therefore the net financial impact would be a $1.56 million increase to the SLO Transit marginal
operating subsidy. The capital needs to expand the fleet, fleet facilities and passenger facilities would be
the same as discussed for the previous alternatives.
Page 106 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 68
Double Service Frequency on All A Routes, Full Weekdays, Academic Year
In consideration of the high operating cost and capital impacts of full doubling of frequency, another
option was evaluated that focuses on doubling the frequency of the four “A” routes, leaving the “B”
routes unchanged. This has the advantage of providing equitable improvement of service across the
SLO Transit service area. This option focuses the service improvement across the full weekday span of
service, within the academic year only. Ridership impacts were evaluated based on an elasticity analysis
of the A routes only, with a reduction included to reflect the proportion of existing A route ridership that
transfers to and from the B routes (based on the onboard survey). This option would require an
additional 11,300 vehicle-hours and 133,800 vehicle miles of service annually. Ridership would be
increased by 89,800 boardings per year. The total operating subsidy would be increased by $829,500
annually, and four additional buses would need to be operated.
Double Service Frequency on Routes 3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, Full Weekdays, Academic Year
Another approach to a partial increase in service frequency would be to focus additional service on the
two best performing of the four main routes, specifically Routes 3 and 4 (both A and B directions), for
the full span of service in the academic year. This option would increase service by 11,600 vehicle-hours
and 136,100 vehicle-miles per year. Considering the impact of no availability of direct transfers between
Routes 3 and 4 and Routes 1 and 2, ridership would be increased by 101,200 boardings per year.
Operating subsidies would be increased by $845,000 annually, and four additional buses would need to
be in operation at peak times.
SPAN OF SERVICE ALTERNATIVES
The next set of SLO Transit alternatives focuses on the “span of service,” or the hours that transit
services operate. Passengers requested multiple changes to the SLO Transit span of service during the
onboard passenger survey; the most requested service improvements were later evening service (54
percent of respondents), more frequent service (42 percent), additional Saturday service (39 percent),
and additional Sunday service (32 percent). The span of service alternatives is also summarized in Table
15.
Extend Weekday Evening Service on A Routes
To provide residents with a later-night transit option, two alternatives for extending service on Routes
1A, 2A, 3A, and 4A were considered.
Extend Service to 12:00 AM – Academic Year
Currently, the last departures on weekdays during the academic year on the A Routes occur at 9:15 PM
(Routes 1A and 2A), 10:15 PM (Route 3A), and 10:30 (Route 4A), terminating the last runs 45 minutes
later. Extending service on all four A Routes until midnight would add Route 1A and Route 2A departures
at 10:15 PM and 11:15 PM and Route 3A and 3B departures at 11:15 PM. Based on late evening
ridership on transit services at other California universities, this additional service is estimated to
increase ridership by 5,100 boardings per year. While it would not require additional vehicles to
Page 107 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 69
operate, the increase in service hours and miles would result in an increase in operating costs of $74,500
per year.
Extend Service to 10:00 PM – Non-Academic Year
During the non-academic year, the last runs start at 7:15 PM on Routes 1A, 2A, and 3A and 7:30 PM on
Route 4A. Extending service until roughly 10:00 PM would require operating two additional runs on
Routes 1A, 2A, and 3A, and three additional runs on Route 4A. An evaluation of ridership by hour in the
academic versus non-academic year as well as ridership patterns in typical small urban areas indicates
that these additional runs would generate 2,200 passenger-trips per year. Annual operating costs would
be increased by $50,700. No additional buses would be required.
Expand Service on B Routes
Operate B Routes on Weekends – 7:45 AM – 8:00 PM
The four counterclockwise B routes do not operate on weekends. As a result, service is limited to the
large one-way A routes. While the fact that some key corridors are served by more than one A route
(such as DTC – Foothill Boulevard or DTC – Madonna Road) still provides some direct bi-directional
service, other trips can require a long travel time around the majority of the one-way A loop. As an
example, a trip between the DTC and Broad/Santa Barbara requires a 34-minute in-vehicle travel time
on Route 4A, compared to only seven minutes when Route 4B is operating. In addition, some stops
(such as the Amtrak Station) are served only on B routes and thus do not have any service on weekends.
The reduction in service also effectively reduces the available frequency of service.
Operating all four B routes on Saturdays and Sundays (as well as holidays on which weekend service is
provided) would incur an annual operating cost of $263,100. An evaluation of the weekday versus
weekend ridership on the A routes during the same service span as well as the existing weekday B
ridership by route indicates that overall ridership would increase by 39,600 passenger-trips per year.
Note that no additional buses would be required to provide this service expansion.
Operate Routes 3B and 4B on Weekends
Another option would be to focus the additional B Route weekend service on Routes 3 and 4, which
have the highest ridership. This would result in an annual marginal operating cost increase of $136,700
and an increase in annual ridership of 29,400. This option performs the best out of all the weekend
options.
Extend Routes 1B and 2B until 10:00 PM – Weekdays, Academic Year
While Routes 3A and 4B provide departures up until 10:00 PM on weekdays during the academic year,
the last Route 1B and Route 2B departures of the day currently are provided at 5:45 PM, reducing the
convenience of transit services for the southern portions of San Luis Obispo by increasing travel times,
reducing frequency and eliminating service to some stops. Consistent B route service could be provided
Page 108 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 70
throughout the city by operating an additional 4 daily trips of Routes 1B and 2B on academic weekdays,
with the last departures at 9:45 PM.
An analysis of ridership on existing services on weekday evenings during the academic year indicates
that operating these additional runs would serve approximately 4,000 additional passenger-trips per
year. While additional buses would not be required, annual operating costs would be increased by
$102,600 annually.
Provide Existing Academic Year Span of Service Year Round
Cal Poly administration has indicated plans to expand class offerings and associated student activity
levels in the summer. While specific details have yet to be defined, it is worthwhile to evaluate the cost
and baseline ridership impacts of providing the same span and level of service currently offered in the
academic year over the entire year. This would increase annual vehicle-hours by approximately 2,400
and annual vehicle-miles by approximately 26,400. Baseline additional ridership is estimated based on
existing average productivity in the non-academic year (7.1 passenger-trips per vehicle service hour),
yielding a total increase of 16,300. Note that there may be additional increases in ridership generated
by an increase in summer Cal Poly activity. Overall, annual operating costs would be increased by
$174,300. No additional fleet would be required. This option also has the benefit of providing more
consistent year-round driver schedules, which has the potential to increase driver retention.
ROUTING AND MICROTRANSIT ALTERNATIVES
Another set of alternatives were considered regarding route realignments and the provision of
microtransit service. These alternatives are summarized in Table 16.
Implement Evening Microtransit Pilot in Southeast San Luis Obispo
Microtransit is a relatively new form of demand response public transit. Through the use of technology
and phone apps, it is possible for a passenger to request a ride “on-demand” within certain areas and
certain times. The benefit of microtransit is that it is not limited to a set route with set stops, but rather
passengers can be picked up at their curb and dropped off at the curb of their destination. This allows
homes on the outlying edges of neighborhoods to be served more directly. The disadvantage of
microtransit is that if there is high demand for service, there could be a 30-minute or longer wait for a
ride. Passengers who depend on public transit to travel to work or appointments at specific times may
find microtransit less convenient.
Microtransit has been successful in areas that are not easily served by a fixed route, low productive fixed
routes or during the evenings and weekends, when there is less demand. Generally, SLO Transit Routes
are very productive and therefore, it is not cost effective to replace the fixed routes with on-demand
microtransit. However, the option of microtransit in the evening, when demand is typically lower, was
explored.
As part of this alternative, replacing Route 1A with microtransit service between the hours of 7 PM and
9 PM on a year-round basis was reviewed. Currently, Route 1B ends service at 6:30 PM. Therefore,
hourly service is only available in the clockwise direction between 7 PM and 9 PM. Routes 1A and 1B
Page 109 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 71
serve residences in southeast San Luis Obispo as well as the San Luis Airport. Figure 16 presents an
example microtransit service area.
In order to serve the level of transit demand currently seen on Route 1A during the evening hours, two
vehicles would be needed to provide service between 7 PM and 9 PM and only one vehicle would be
needed during the 9 PM hour. This would cost an additional $33,600 annually in operating costs
(including the costs of the annual technology license). As SLO Transit does not currently have small
vehicles in its fleet, two vans would also need to be procured to operate this service.
Given the fact that curb to curb service would be available, around 250 more homes could be served
directly with microtransit than with the fixed route. Therefore, there would be a small increase in
ridership over the existing Route 1A evening ridership by around 100 trips per year. As development
progresses along Tank Farm Road, this microtransit service area could be expanded. However, as
demand for service increases, another vehicle would be required, further increasing costs.
Page 110 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 72
Page 111 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 73
Implement Late Night Microtransit Pilot - Academic Year
Microtransit could be more widely applied to the entire city as a “Late Night” service. SLO Transit
services are not available past 11 PM and only Routes 3 and 4 operate this late during the academic
year. The general geographic extent of a potential city-wide late night microtransit service area is
displayed in Figure 17. As part of this alternative, microtransit would be available between 10 PM and
midnight during the academic year. In order to maintain a reasonable level of cost, this alternative
assumes that three vans would be used for an annual operating cost of $122,800 if service is provided
only on weekdays during the academic year and $160,600 if service is provided 7 days a week during the
academic year (only two peak vehicles would be required). Ridership was estimated by reviewing
ridership by hour on other microtransit services. For the weekday scenario around 4,700 trips are
estimated. If late night microtransit were operated 7 days/week, roughly 7,100 trips could be carried.
If implemented, this should be a one-to-two-year pilot program. Again, three vans would need to be
procured, if the current contractor is used. Alternatively, some areas have had success in procuring a
separate contractor who specializes in microtransit to operate as a “turnkey” service. Under this
scenario, the City would not have to purchase new vehicles or the microtransit software, as it would be
included in the total cost of the contract.
Reinstate Route 6X
Prior to COVID, Route 6X was operated on Thursday evenings during the academic year, connecting the
Cal Poly Campus with the Downtown Transit Center on Thursday evenings (which the Farmers Market is
in operation) from 6:00 PM to 9:00 PM. One bus was used to operate a loop route every half hour.
Ridership averaged 2,600 passenger-trips per year. Considering the historic ridership and the changes in
overall transit ridership since 2020, a reinstated service is estimated to serve 2,200 passenger-trips per
year. The annual operating cost would be relatively modest, at $7,200 annually.
Reinstate SLO Tripper
Prior to the pandemic, the SLO Tripper route consisted of 2 AM and 2 PM runs per school day
connecting the Transit Center with SLO High School. If this route were reinstated, the current operating
cost would be $18,500 per year. San Luis Coastal Unified School District data indicates that the High
School enrollment has increased by 3 percent since 2019. Applying this factor to the 2019 ridership, this
service would carry approximately 7,100 passenger-trips per year and require an operating cost of
$17,200. An additional bus would need to be operated.
Page 112 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 74
Page 113 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 75
Table 16: SLO Transit - Routing and Microtransit Alternatives
Ridership
Service
Hours
Service
Miles
Marginal
Operating
Cost
Cash Fare
Revenues 3
Operating
Subsidy
Status Quo1
Route 1A 55,900 5,300 50,700 $379,100 $57,500 $321,600
Route 1B 20,000 3,100 29,900 $222,300 $16,400 $205,900
Route 2A 80,300 5,300 57,900 $395,100 $80,300 $314,800
Route 2B 22,100 3,100 33,200 $229,600 $22,300 $207,300
Route 3A 94,700 6,300 82,400 $499,900 $30,500 $469,400
Route 3B 65,700 4,900 61,700 $383,500 $17,700 $365,800
Route 4A 152,800 5,500 47,800 $382,600 $11,600 $371,000
Route 4B 70,900 4,000 31,000 $269,900 $4,900 $265,000
Laguna Tripper 10,100 200 2,000 $14,500 $2,900 $11,600
Old SLO Trolley 1,600 300 1,800 $19,100 $600 $18,500
System Total 574,100 38,000 398,400 $2,795,600 $244,700 $2,550,900
Routing and Microtransit Alternatives - Change from Status Quo2
Implement Evening Microtransit Pilot in Southeast SLO 4
7:00 PM - 10:00 PM, Weekdays, Year-Round 100 500 8,800 $33,600 $200 $33,400 2
Implement Late Night Microtransit Pilot - Weekdays, Academic Year 4
10:00 PM - 12:00 AM, Weekdays, Academic Year 4,700 1,400 17,500 $122,800 $11,100 $111,700 3
10:00 PM - 12:00 AM, 7 Days/Week, Academic Year 7,100 1,700 21,625 $160,600 $11,100 $149,500 3
Reinstate Route 6X 2,200 100 1,000 $7,200 $900 $6,300 1
Reinstate SLO Tripper 7,100 280 1,430 $17,200 $2,800 $14,400 1
Reinstate Highland Tripper 6,600 230 2,430 $17,000 $2,600 $14,400 1
Revise Routes 1 and 3 in Downtown SLO
Route 1A 3,200 0 1,600 $3,500 $3,300 $200 0
Route 1B 3,600 0 -600 -$1,400 $3,000 -$4,400 0
Route 3A 6,900 0 0 $0 $2,200 -$2,200 0
Route 3B 4,000 0 -3,500 -$7,700 $1,100 -$8,800 0
Total 17,700 0 -2,500 -$5,600 $9,600 -$15,200 0
Note 4: Assumes a general microtransit fare of $4.00 per one-way trip, or an average fare of $2.36 per passenger. Costs include $4,500/year for app license
for one vehicle.
Change in Annual Service(2)
Additional
Vehicles
Needed
2022-23 operating parameters. Cost estimates are based on the projected FY 2025-26 SLO Transit budget and the SLO Transit cost model.
Note 2: Parameters and costs represent change over existing services. Estimates represent marginal costs and do not include fixed costs.
Note 3: The average cash fare per boarding by route is detailed in Table 13.
Page 114 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 76
Reinstate Highland Tripper
An additional tripper that has not been operated since the pandemic is the Highland Tripper. This is a
short loop route connecting the Cal Poly campus with the housing areas to the west with three round-
trips per school day, and provides additional capacity and service times in the peak AM travel period.
Considering the previous ridership and the overall change in Cal Poly ridership since the pandemic, this
service would currently carry roughly 6,600 annual passenger-trips. Reinstating this service would
increase operating cost needs by $17,000, and would require the operation of an additional bus.
Revised Routes 1 and 3 in Downtown San Luis Obispo
As discussed in Technical Memorandum 3, the on-time performance of Routes 2 and 3 is poor. Over a
total of 298 runs observed as part of this study, 65 percent of Route 2A runs were more than 5 minutes
behind schedule, along with 49 percent of Route 2B runs, 48 percent of Route 3A runs and 47 percent of
Route 3B runs. In addition to adding uncertainty to service times on each route, this low level of
dependability results in missed transfers to/from other routes.
The following options were evaluated to potentially reduce running time and improve on-time
performance:
Both Route 2A and 2B in the outbound direction could be streamlined somewhat by traveling along
Higuera Street between Higuera/Nipomo and Higuera/Pismo, rather than using Nipomo Street and
Pismo Street. This would reduce the route length by 0.2 miles and save roughly 1 minute of travel time.
It would eliminate service to two existing stops (Nipomo at Pismo and Pismo at Archer, that serve 6
passenger-trips per day, or approximately 2,000 passengers per year. Given the limited reduction in
travel time, this option is not considered further.
In the inbound direction, both Routes 2A and 2B operate a relatively direct route along Marsh Street to
Santa Rosa Street, then travel west on Mill and south on Osos to the transit center. A faster option
would be to enter US 101 northbound at the Marsh Street interchange and exit at Osos Street, which
would reduce running time by approximately 4 minutes. However, existing stops at Marsh/Archer,
Marsh/Broad, March/Osos, and Santa Rosa/Higuera would be missed. These stops serve approximately
13 passengers per day, or 6,200 per year (70 percent on Route 2A and 30 percent on Route 2B). As this
option would have a substantial impact on existing ridership and would eliminate much of the service
between southwest downtown San Luis Obispo and the Transit Center, it is not considered further.
Routes 3A and 3B between the downtown transit center and Higuera Street/South Street both travel
along South Street and Santa Barbara Street. Route 3B also serves the Amtrak Station at the end of
Santa Rosa Street, while Route 3A travels along Osos Street. Routes could be shortened by using Pismo
Street between Santa Rosa Street and Higuera Street on Route 3A and using Marsh Street on Route 3B.
This would reduce Route 3A route length by 0.7 miles and reduce Route 3B route length by 0.9 miles.
Service would be eliminated to 7 stops on Route 3A and 8 stops on Route 3B. Total ridership at these
stops is currently roughly 31 passengers per day or 7,600 per year, evenly split between the two
individual routes. However, given the slower running speeds in downtown compared with High Street
and the southern portion of Santa Barbara Street, only roughly 1 minute of travel time would be saved
in each direction. This option is not considered further, given the substantial impact on ridership and
limited benefit to running time.
Page 115 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 77
Another option would be to reroute Routes 3A and 3B onto US 101 between the Downtown Transit
Center and the Madonna Street interchange and shift Routes 1A and 1B onto the exiting Routes 3A/3B
routes between Broad Street/High Street and the Downtown Transit Center. This would reduce the
running time of Route 3A by roughly 5 minutes and Route 3B by roughly 7 minutes, which would
significantly improve the on-time performance of Routes 3A and 3B.
Service would be fully eliminated from only a total of four existing stops. Setting aside those stops within
a quarter mile walk of other remaining stops, those stops that lose all convenient service consists of the
following:
Broad at Islay (Route 1A)
Broad at Leff (Route 1B)
South at King W (Route 3A)
South at King W (Route 3B)
The stops along Broad Street on Routes 1A/1B in total currently serve 2 passenger-trips per day or 800
per year, while the stops along South Street on Routes 3A/3B currently serve 7 passenger trips per day
or 1,000 per year, for a total of 9 daily trips and 1,800 annual trips.
This realignment option would also reduce service between the downtown Transit Center and central
downtown San Luis Obispo by rerouting Route 1 out of the area. However, as the current Route 1
schedule is very close to the Route 2 schedule in both directions, this would not significantly reduce the
convenience of transit service. This option would also reduce the travel times between southwest San
Luis Obispo and the Downtown Transit Center. Improving the dependability of Route 3A/3B would also
improve the connections to other routes at the Transit Center. Running times on Route 1A/1B are not
expected to change significantly; while the revised Route 1A is 0.3 miles longer than at present, it would
avoid congestion in the lower downtown area.
As shown in Table 16, this strategy would not change vehicle-hours of service but would reduce annual
vehicle-miles by 2,500. Ridership impact was estimated based on the ridership change associated with
improvements in dependability, the changes in in-vehicle travel time, the loss of ridership at the four
stops with elimination of service, as well as the shift in existing Routes 3A/3B ridership to Routes 1A/1B.
Overall, annual ridership is estimated to increase by a total of 17,700 passenger boardings per year.
Considering the operating costs savings generated by the reduction in mileage plus the additional
passenger revenues, the net operating subsidy would be reduced by $15,200 per year. No additional
buses would be required.
ADDITIONAL SERVICE ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS – NEW DEVELOPMENT
As a result of input received from the San Luis Obispo City Council, additional service alternatives were
analyzed.
New Developments
There are two major projects currently under development in the southern portion of San Luis Obispo
that merit consideration for expanded transit service.
Page 116 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 78
San Luis Ranch
At full buildout, the San Luis Ranch development along Madonna Road will include a total of 604
dwelling units. This includes 299 high-density housing units, 34 affordable housing units, and 83
medium-density units, all of which have a higher potential to generate transit ridership. The higher-
density residential development is concentrated along Madonna Road and is already served by SLO
Transit. Under an agreement with Cal Poly, up to 300 students will soon be living in this area.
As an aside, the nearest existing stops to the high-density area are located along Madonna Road within a
reasonable 5-minute walk distance. While the westbound stop (just west of Dalido Drive has a shelter,
the eastbound stop (just east of Oceanaire Drive does not. As this will be the stop used by Cal Poly
students while waiting for a bus to campus, a shelter at this stop would be beneficial.
Avila Ranch
Avila Ranch is a mixed-use residential/neighborhood commercial development under development
along the north side of Buckley Road in southern San Luis Obispo. At buildout, it will include a total of
720 units, consisting of 125 higher-density units (24 units to the acre), 494 medium-density units (up to
20 units to the acre), and 101 lower-density units (7 units to the acre) as well as a small 15,000 square
foot neighborhood commercial center.
The denser residential areas with the highest potential for transit ridership are in the northern portion
of the site, along an extension of Eastwood Lane as well as along the east side of Horizon Lane in the
northeast corner of the site. This development is at least a half-mile walk to the nearest existing SLO
Transit stop (on South Higuera Street).
Service Alternatives
Alternatives are first presented that provide improved service to San Luis Ranch, as this project is farther
along in the development process. Alternatives that also would serve Avila Ranch are presented next.
An important consideration in these alternatives beyond serving the new developments is addressing
the existing poor service reliability of Routes 2A and 2B. LSC’s observations of on-time performance
indicate that a majority (65 percent) of Route 2A runs are 6 or more minutes behind schedule, with 40
percent more than 15 minutes late. While Route 2B’s reliability is better, 49 percent of runs still operate
at least 6 minutes land and 11 percent are more than 15 minutes late.
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch – 90 Minute Frequency
One option to serve San Luis Ranch would be to revise Routes 2A and 2B to better serve the
development by traveling along Froom Ranch Way between Dalido Drive and Los Osos Valley Road,
rather than Madonna Road, as shown in Figure 18. While Route 2 service to the stops near
Madonna/Oceanaire would be eliminated, these stops would still be served by Route 3 (which currently
generates 88 percent of the ridership at these stops). This would increase the Route 2A length by 0.8
miles while cutting 0.1 miles from Route 2B, respectively. To accommodate the additional running time
as well as to solve the existing poor on-time performance, the route cycle time would be increased from
Page 117 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 79
60 to 90 minutes. Operating the existing two buses would result in a 90-minute service frequency, which
is typically considered a poor level of service for urban transit in mid-sized to larger urban areas.
As shown in Table 17, this option would not change the annual vehicle hours used for Route 2 service
(two buses would be in operation throughout the existing span of service). The net decrease in mileage
would reduce operating costs by $61,500 per year.
This alternative would have several impacts on ridership:
x Service to San Luis Ranch would be improved. However, since much of the high-density housing
is already served by the stops along Madonna Street, this would be a relatively modest ridership
benefit.
x The improvement in on-time reliability would increase ridership, as passengers (and potential
passengers) have been proven to be very sensitive to poor service reliability. The document
Valuing Transit Service Quality Improvements (Victoria Transport Policy Institute, 2023)
indicates that “Increased transit travel speeds can be valued based on average time costs, but
reliability improvements should be valued at a higher rate, reflecting the high costs of
unexpected delay. Each minute of delay beyond a “normal” two or three-minute delay should
be valued at 3-5 times the standard in-vehicle travel time.” At present, Route 2A has about 10
minutes of excessive delay (on average) and Route 2B has about 5.5 minutes. This is perceived
by the passenger as at least 30 minutes of travel time for Route 2A and 17 minutes for Route 2B.
Providing a much more reliable transit service would therefore have a substantial ridership
benefit.
x Ridership would be reduced due to the reduction in frequency from 60 minutes to 90 minutes.
This can be found through elasticity analysis to have a moderate reduction in ridership.
x The resulting service would no longer provide “clockface headways” whereby the bus serves any
particular stop at the same time after each hour over the day. This has been found to be a
substantial benefit to riders (and thus an increase in ridership) as it is easy to learn and
remember service times. In addition, the current consistent transfer opportunities at the Transit
Center would no longer be provided. Direct timed transfers would vary hour by hour, with an
overall increase in the need to wait between buses. One strategy would be to schedule these
runs to provide direction connections at the Transit Center to Route 4B in the AM hours and
Route 4A in the PM hours, allowing trips to and from Cal Poly with minimal delays at the Transit
Center. Overall, however, the changed schedule would have a moderate additional reduction in
ridership.
In sum, this alternative is forecast to increase Route 2 ridership by 11,000 passenger boardings per year,
with the benefits of increased reliability and additional service to San Luis Ranch outweighing the
reductions from reduced frequency and consistency of schedule.
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch – 45 Minute Frequency
This option would be identical to the previous alternative, except that two additional buses would be
used to provide service every 45 minutes. This would avoid the reduction in ridership associated with
the change in headways and provide greater opportunity for connections at the Transit Center but at a
substantial operating cost. As shown in Table 17, a ridership increase of 65,000 boardings per year over
Page 118 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 80
existing ridership would be generated, but the annual operating cost would be increased by $462,600
and two additional buses would need to be in operation.
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch and Eliminate Descanso Street Loop –
60 Minute Frequency
Another option would be to revise Routes 2A and 2B to better serve San Luis Ranch but also eliminate
the service along Los Osos Valley Road north of Froom Ranch Road to the turnabout loop using Prefumo
Canyon Road, Del Rio Avenue, and Descanso Street. Eliminating service on this “Descanso Street Loop”
would reduce the route length by 2.5 miles and reduce running time by approximately 7 minutes. This
would solve roughly half of the existing on-time performance problem on Routes 2A and 2B if the routes
are operated on the existing 60-minute cycle length. Annual operating costs would be reduced by
$33,000.
All service would be eliminated to only two stops (along Del Rio Avenue at Profumo Canyon Road and at
Descanso Street). Ridership at these stops is modest, totaling only roughly 7 passenger boardings per
day. These passengers would need to walk at least an additional 850 feet to access the nearest stop on
Los Osos Valley Road. The stops along Los Osos Valley Road would still be served by Route 3, though
service frequency would be reduced from four times per hour to two times per hour. Approximately
10,200 annual boardings currently generated by Route 2A/2B in this area would be eliminated.
However, considering the ridership increase resulting from more reliable service throughout Routes
2A/2B and service to San Luis Ranch, the overall impact of this alternative would be a net increase of
18,000 passenger boardings per year.
Ridership
Service
Hours
Service
Miles
Marginal
Operating Cost
Cash Fare
Revenues
Operating
Subsidy
Additional
Vehicles
Needed
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch - 90
Minute Headways 11,000 0 -27,600 -$61,500 $11,000 -$72,500 0
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch - 45
Minute Headways 65,000 7,500 38,600 $462,600 $65,100 $397,500 2
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch &
Cut Descanso Loop - 60 Minute Headways 18,000 0 -14,800 -$33,000 $18,000 -$51,000 0
Extend Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch and
Avila Ranch - 90 Minute Headways 21,000 0 -14,300 -$31,800 $21,000 -$52,800 0
Extend Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch and
Avila Ranch - 45 Minute Headways 80,000 7,500 62,000 $514,700 $80,200 $434,500 2
New Avila Ranch Direct Route -- 60 Minute
Headway 34,800 5,300 49,300 $375,900 $34,900 $341,000 1
New Broad - Avila Ranch - S. Higuera Loop Route -
- 60 Minute Headway 53,000 8,400 87,400 $616,400 $53,100 $563,300 2
Change in Annual Service(2)
Table 17: SLO Transit - Route Alternatives to Improve On-time Performance and Serve
New Developments
Page 119 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 81
Page 120 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 82
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch and Avila Ranch – 90 Minute Frequency
By extending the Route 2 cycle length to 90 minutes, there would be more than adequate time to also
extend the route to serve Avila Ranch, as shown in Figure 21. To reduce the number of stops that would
need to be established, both Routes 2A and 2B would serve a clockwise loop around Suburban Road,
Eastwood Lane, the extension of Ventura Drive, the extension of Horizon Lane, and Buckley Road and
before returning north on South Higuera Street. Route 2A would be 14 miles in length while Route 2B
would be 12.8 miles in length. This option would operate the same number of vehicle-hours of service as
today, but the net effect of the fewer runs and longer route would be a reduction in annual vehicle-
miles of 14,300, yielding a reduction in annual operating cost of $31,900. The net impact on ridership
generated by the reduction in frequency, improved reliability, and additional service area would be an
increase of 21,000 boardings per year.
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch and Avila Ranch – 45 Minute Frequency
Adding two additional buses into Route 2A/2B service would provide service along an expanded route
every 45 minutes. Ridership would be increased by a substantial 80,000 boardings per year. However,
annual operating costs would be increased by $514,700 and an additional two buses would be needed in
operation.
Establish New Avila Ranch Direct Route – 60-Minute Frequency
Another option would be to establish a new route specifically to serve Avila Ranch. As shown in Figure
18, this route would use the existing Route 2 alignment south from downtown along South Higuera
Street and make a clockwise loop around Suburban Road, Eastwood Lane, the extension of Ventura
Drive, the extension of Horizon Lane, Buckley Road, and Vachelli Lane before returning north on South
Higuera Street. This route is 8.8 miles in length and can be reliably served in an hour cycle length.
In addition to providing service to Avila Ranch, this option has the benefit of doubling service along the
South Higuera Street corridor which has substantial ridership (roughly 2.5 times the ridership along the
Broad Street corridor along Routes 1A/1B). This route also could serve the Elks Lane/Prado Road loop off
of S. Higuera Street currently served by Route 2A, thereby reducing running time and improving the on-
time performance of Route 2A. Note that serving this loop in the northbound direction would require a
traffic signal at Elks Lane / S. Higuera Street to allow buses to reliably turn onto S. Higuera Street
northbound.
This option has the benefit of only requiring a single additional bus to serve Avila Ranch without
resulting in a 90-minute service frequency. Assuming service is provided over the same span as the
existing Route 2A span, annual operating costs would be increased by $375,900, while ridership would
be increased by 34,800 boardings per year.
Broad Street / Tank Farm Road / S. Higuera Loop Route to Serve Avila Ranch
A final option would be to create a large bi-directional route using Broad Street between the Transit
Center and Tank Farm Road, Tank Farm Road, Long Street, Cross Street, and Short Street to access the
Avila Ranch area and South Higuera Street to the Transit Center. As shown in Figure 18, this route is 10.4
Page 121 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 83
miles long, though the relatively high speeds along the long stretch of Tank Farm Road with no ridership
potential would allow it to operate in a 60-minute cycle length.
It is assumed that one direction would be operated over the same span as Route 2A and the other over
the same span as Route 2B, resulting in an annual operating cost of $616,400. Two additional buses
would be required at peak times.
Ridership would be generated by providing half-hourly service along both the Broad Street and South
Higuera Street corridors, by serving Avila Ranch, as well as by providing a new more convenient
connection for transit travel between southwest and southeast San Luis Obispo. Overall, ridership is
forecast to increase by 53,000 boardings per year.
Page 122 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 84
Page 123 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 85
PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF SLO TRANSIT SERVICE ALTERNATIVES
To evaluate the relative performance of the alternatives above, key impacts of each alternative were
compared. The change from the status quo ridership, marginal operating cost, passengers carried per
vehicle hour, and marginal operating cost per passenger were compared. This evaluation gives insight
regarding the relative advantages and disadvantages of the alternatives. Table 18 and Figures 20-23
show the relative performance of the service alternatives. The green highlight in Table 18 indicates
alternatives which meet performance standards developed as part of this transit plan.
Ridership
The impact of the various alternatives on annual ridership is shown in Figure 20. As indicated, the
alternatives vary widely, ranging from very little change in ridership associated with providing evening
microtransit service in southeast San Luis Obispo (replacing Route 1 service) up to 208,300 passenger-
trips per year generated by doubling service throughout the year across the operating day. Excluding the
options of doubling frequency, the greatest ridership increase is generated by operating the B routes on
weekend days (39,600) followed by operating just Route 3B and 4B on weekends (29,400) and revising
Routes 1 and 3 in downtown San Luis Obispo (17,700).
Page 124 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 86
Table 18: SLO Transit - Service Alternatives Performance Analysis
Annual
Ridership
Service
Hours
Service
Miles
Annual Marginal
Operating Cost 1
Passenger-
Trips per
Vehicle Service
Hour
Marginal Op.
Cost per
Passenger-Trip
IIncrease Ro ut e 4 A/B Frequen cy Durin g Acade mic Year
Increase Route 4A Frequency - 8:00 AM - 10:00 AM 4,200 300 2,300 $20,200 14.0 $4.81
Increase Route 4B Frequency - 3:00 PM - 5:00 PM 3,900 300 2,100 $19,700 13.0 $5.05
Dou ble Se rvic e Frequ e ncy o n Rou t es 1, 2, 3, 4 (A & B)
Full Service Day, Year-Round 208,300 33,500 347,000 $2,455,000 6.2 $11.79
8:00 AM to 6:00 PM, Weekdays, Year-Round 119,700 19,600 234,200 $1,505,800 6.1 $12.58
Full Service Day, Weekdays, Academic Year 153,600 20,900 231,700 $1,565,500 7.3 $10.19
Dou ble Se rvic e Frequ e ncy o n Rou t es 1, 2, 3, 4 (A On ly)
Full Service Day, Weekdays, Academic Year 89,600 11,300 133,800 $865,400 7.9 $9.66
Dou ble Se rvic e Frequ e ncy o n Rou t es 3, 4 (A & B)
Full Service Day, Weekdays, Academic Year 101,200 11,600 136,100 $885,600 8.7 $8.75
Exte nd Wee kday Evening Se rvic e on A Rou te s
Extend Service to 12:00 AM - Academic Year 5,100 1,000 10,900 $74,500 5.1 $14.61
Extend Service to 10:00 PM - Non-Academic Year 2,200 700 7,000 $50,700 3.1 $23.05
Exp an d Servic e on B Rou tes
Operate B Routes on Weekends Year Round - 7:45 AM - 8:00 PM 39,600 3,200 46,000 $263,100 12.4 $6.64
Operate 3B and 4B on Weekends 29,400 1,600 25,300 $136,700 18.4 $4.65
Extend Routes 1B and 2B until 10:00 PM -
Weekdays, Academic Year 4,000 1,400 14,500 $102,600 2.9 $25.65
Provide Acade mi c Yea r Servi ce Levels Year-Roun d 16,300 2,300 26,400 $174,300 7.1 $10.69
Imp le men t Evening Mi crotran sit Ser vic e in SE SLO 100 500 8,800 $33,600 0.20 $336.00
Imp le men t Late Night Mic ro transit - Weekdays 4,700 1,400 17,500 $122,800 3.4 $26.13
Imp le men t Late Night Mic ro transit - 7 days/wee k 7,100 1,700 21,625 $160,600 4.2 $22.62
Reinst ate Rou te 6X 2,200 100 1,000 $7,200 22.0 $3.27
Reinst ate SLO Tripp e r 7,100 280 1,430 $17,200 25.4 $2.42
Reinst ate Highlan d Trippe r 6,600 230 2,430 $17,000 28.7 $2.58
Revi se Ro ut es 1 and 3 in Downt own SLO 17,700 0 -2,500 -5,600 NA -$0.32
Revi se Ro ut e 2A/2B to Serve San Luis R anch - 90 Minu te
Headways 11,000 0 -27,600 -61,500 Note 2 -$5.59
Revi se Ro ut e 2A/2B to Serve San Luis R anch - 45 Minu te
Headways 65,000 7,500 38,600 462,600 8.7 $7.12
Revi se Ro ut e 2A/2B to Serve San Luis R anch & Cut
Descanso Loo p - 60 Min ut e Headways 18,000 0 -14,800 -33,000 Note 2 -$1.83
Exte nd Ro ute 2A/2B to Serve San Lu is Ran ch and Avila
Ranch - 90 Minut e H ead ways 21,000 0 -14,300 -31,800 Note 2 -$1.51
Exte nd Ro ute 2A/2B to Serve San Lu is Ran ch and Avila
Ranch - 45 Minut e H ead ways 80,000 7,500 62,000 514,700 10.7 $6.43
New Avi la Ranch Direc t Ro ute - 60 M in ut e Headway 34,800 5,300 49,300 375,900 6.6 $10.80
New Broad - Avila Ran ch - S. H iguera Loop Route - 60
Minn ut e Headway 53,000 8,400 87,400 616,400 6.3 $11.63
Recommended
Performance
Standards
11.5 $11.23
Note 1: Does not include fixed costs
Note 2: As there is an increase in ridership with no change in vehicle-hours, this measure calculates as infinite.
N et Impact
Alternatives meeting performance standards shaded in green. Note that alternatives meet standards by increasing
ridership at a greater rate than costs, eliminating a service not meeting standards, or increasing ridership while decreasing
costs.
Page 125 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 87
Page 126 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 88
Page 127 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 89
Page 128 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 90
Page 129 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 91
Marginal Operating Cost
Similar to the ridership impacts, the impact on annual marginal operating costs also varies widely, as
shown in Figure 19. At the high end, the full doubling of transit service across all service periods over the
year would increase operating costs by $2.45 Million, while limiting the doubling of service frequency to
the academic year would cost $1.56 Million, and limiting to daytime hours through the full year would
cost $1.5 Million. Doubling frequency on just the A Routes or Routes 3 and 4 (both A and B) would cost
in the order of $865,400 and $885,600, respectively.
On the other end, revising Routes 1 and 3 in downtown San Luis Obispo would yield a small overall
reduction in annual operating costs of $6,100. Beyond doubling frequency, other service alternatives
that are relatively costly are operating B routes on weekends ($263,100), implementing late-night
microtransit service ($122,800), and operating Routes 1B and 2B on weekday evenings in the academic
year ($102,600).
Passenger-Trips per Vehicle Service Hour
A standard measure of the productivity of a transit service is the passenger-trips served per vehicle-hour
of service. As shown in Figure 20, the “best” alternative by this measure is reinstating Highland Tripper,
which would serve 28.7 passenger-trips per vehicle-hour. This is followed by reinstating the SLO Tripper
and Route 6X. Operating Route 3B and 4B on Weekends (18.4), increasing Route 4A morning frequency
in the academic year (14.0), increasing Route 4B afternoon frequency in the academic year (13.0), and
operating the B routes on weekends (12.4) all meet productivity standards. The options that double
service frequency range from 6.1 to 8.7 passengers per vehicle service hour, with the most productive
being doubling service on Routes 3 and 4 in the academic year only. The worst option by this measure is
replacing evening Route 1 service with microtransit, which adds vehicle-hours but is not forecast to
change ridership very much. Note that the revision of Routes 1 and 3 in downtown San Luis Obispo
cannot be evaluated by this measure, as the number of vehicle-hours is not changed.
As discussed in Chapter 4, the standard for this measure is a minimum of 11.5 passenger-trips per
vehicle service hour. Those alternatives that meet this standard are reinstating Route 6X, Highland
Tripper, and SLO Tripper, increasing Route 4A frequency in the morning during the academic year,
increasing Route 4B frequency in late afternoons during the academic year, and operating the B routes
on weekends year-round, particularly 3B and 4B. Extending Route 2A/2B to serve San Luis Ranch and
Avila Ranch – 45 minute headways is very close with a productivity level of 10.7 trips per vehicle hour.
Marginal Operating Cost per Passenger-Trip
A final performance measure is the marginal operating cost per passenger-trip. This is a good measure
of the financial performance of the various alternatives, with the better alternatives indicated by a lower
value. Figure 21 indicates the “best” alternative by this measure is the revision of Routes 1 and 3 in
downtown San Luis Obispo, which saves $0.32 for every additional passenger-trip served (as it reduces
costs while increasing ridership). At the other extreme, replacing Route 1 in the evening with
microtransit requires a $357 per new trip served, followed by implementing late night microtransit
service ($26.13), followed by Route 1B and 2B service until 10 PM ($25.65). Considering the standard of
no more than $11.23 per passenger-trip, those that achieve the standard consist of:
Page 130 of 987
SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
San Luis Obispo Transit Page 92
x Routes 1 and 3 revisions in downtown San Luis Obispo
x Reinstating pre-COVID services such as Route 6X, Highland Tripper and SLO Tripper
x Increasing Route 4A frequency in the mornings during the academic year
x Increasing Route 4B frequency in the late afternoons in the academic year
x Operating the B routes on weekends year-round, 3B and 4B in particular
x Doubling frequency on all routes for a full-service day, weekdays, during the academic year
x Doubling frequency on the A routes for a full-service day, weekdays, during the academic year
x Doubling frequency on Routes 3A, 3B, 4A, and 4B for a full-service day, weekdays during the
academic year.
x Provide academic year service levels year-round
x All the options to revise 2A/2B to serve San Luis Ranch and Avila Ranch
x New Avila Ranch Direct Route – 60-minute headway
Summary
Based on the performance analysis of all the service alternatives, the following service alternatives
have the greatest potential to enhance the SLO Transit service:
x Realigning Routes 1 and 3 in downtown San Luis Obispo.
x Providing B route service on weekend days year-round.
x Increasing Route 4A frequency on weekday mornings in the academic year.
x Increasing Route 4B frequency on weekday afternoons in the academic year.
x Reinstating pre-COVID routes: Route 6X, Highland Tripper and SLO Tripper.
While doubling service frequency would generate substantial ridership benefits, it would require
significant new funding sources as well as consideration of capital fleet and facility needs. Doubling
frequency on Routes 3A, 3B, 4A, and 4B would have the lowest marginal operating cost per new
passenger-trip served.
Although the Revising Route 2A/2B to service San Luis Ranch with 90-minute headways meets
performance standards, reducing service frequency does not improve overall transit service nor does it
meet city goals of increasing frequency. Adding a second bus in each direction to have 45-minute
headways would have a large increase in ridership but also a large increase in costs. Revising Route
2A/2B to serve San Luis Ranch, cut the Descanso loop to maintain 60-minute headways with good on-
time performance, has good ridership and cost-saving benefits. When Avila Ranch warrants transit
service, the direct route on 60-minute headways performs the best.
Page 131 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 93
Chapter 8
SLO TRANSIT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
INTRODUCTION
This chapter focuses on the recommended capital improvements needed to operate transit services,
specifically the transit fleet, the passenger amenities, and the Downtown Transit Center.
FLEET REPLACEMENT PLAN
Transit vehicles must be regularly replaced to maintain a safe and reliable fleet. The SLO Transit Asset
Management Plan sets a target to allow no more than 50% of the revenue vehicle fixed route fleet to
exceed the FTA-defined useful life. As the vehicle procurement process can take multiple years, transit
agencies must identify their vehicle needs well in advance. Additionally, the State of California’s (CA)
Innovative Clean Transit (ICT) regulation will begin impacting transit vehicle procurement in 2026, at
which point 25 percent of small transit agency fleet bus purchases will be required to be ZEBs. By 2029,
this purchasing requirement will increase to 100 percent. By 2040, all vehicles in the fleet will need to be
ZEBs. To meet these standards, transit agencies can purchase either battery-electric buses (BEBs) or
fuel-cell electric buses (FCEBs).
Currently, ZEBs are considerably more expensive than gasoline or diesel vehicles, meaning SLO Transit
will need to secure additional funding to meet local match requirements for capital grants. While ZEBs
are more expensive at this point, the market is constantly changing as new models are released and
older models are improved, making it hard to predict future pricing. The seven-year SLO Transit vehicle
replacement schedule presented in this report is subject to change as new ZEB technologies become
available, and costs stabilize.
SLO Transit is actively replacing buses and has now committed fully to purchasing only BEBs. There is an
order of six BEB buses expected to be in service in the Fall of 2025 and an order of two BEB’s that are
expected to be in service in 2026.
Table 19 presents SLO Transit’s anticipated vehicle needs, and purchasing/refurbishment schedule
based on the agency’s current fleet, SLO Transit’s Zero Emission Bus Rollout Plan (2024), and the Useful
Life Benchmark (ULB) of the different vehicle models, as identified by the Federal Transit Administration
(FTA). Table 19 lists the number of buses currently on order but does not include the costs in the seven-
year bus replacement/refurbishment schedule. Only buses that have not yet been ordered and funded
are included in the costs. Table 19 does not include any expansion vehicle purchases required to support
the recommended service plan presented in this SRTP.
SLO Transit has 19 fixed-route vehicles that range in age from 2 to 17 years old. SLO Transit has one
replica trolley that is used seasonally and a double-decker bus which is less frequently used. SLO Transit
purchased two BEB’s in 2022. These buses are now in service and will eventually replace two older
model-year diesel buses or be used to expand the fleet for potential service expansion. For the current
level of service, the base fleet size is 17, with 15 fixed-route buses. The total number of vehicles that will
need to be replaced in the seven-year planning period will be 15. This does not include a potential
Page 132 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 94
expanded fleet for added services. The 15 buses in the base fleet which need to be replaced or
refurbished will completed as follows:
x 8 battery-electric Gillig buses currently on order
x 1 new battery-electric replica trolley
x 1 new battery-electric bus to replace the 2011 cutaway bus
x 5 refurbished model year 2007 (2), 2012 (1), and 2013 (2) Gillig diesel buses
x 1 refurbished interior on the model year 2009 double-decker bus
This results in a net addition of one fixed-route bus. This will allow for the transition to battery electric
buses while charging infrastructure is being developed. It is anticipated that some buses will need to
charge during the day, requiring more buses to be available for service. Given current market costs and
anticipated inflation, it is expected that vehicle replacement and refurbishment needs will cost SLO
Transit a total of $13 million over seven years.
Bus Refurbishment
SLO Transit has programmed funds to overhaul five buses – two in 2026, two in 2027, and one in 2028.
This will extend the life of five fixed-route diesel buses that would otherwise need to be retired by 2025.
These buses would have their useful life extended by at least seven years to 2033 and 2034. The work
being pursued by SLO Transit is a comprehensive refurbishment of the exterior, passenger
compartment, driver’s area, wheelchair loading, and securement systems, electrical system, engine
compartment, suspension, steering, brakes, heating/air-conditioning, radiator/cooling system, exhaust
system, engine, and transmission. In addition, SLO Transit is considering overhauling the interior of the
existing model year 2009 double-decker bus to have on hand for very high passenger load runs during
the academic year.
This effort will position SLO Transit to manage the transition to battery electric buses and to have an
expanded fleet for potential service additions. The budget for the full bus overhaul is $400,000 per bus.
The city has programmed $2.5 million to cover the cost of the five buses plus contingency. The cost for
the interior overhaul of the double-decker bus is budgeted at $150,000.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Table 20 presents a seven-year capital improvement plan for all items outside of revenue fleet
replacement. This includes bus yard improvements, technology, bus stop improvements, BEB charging
infrastructure, and rehabilitation of the Downtown Transit Center.
This seven-year capital improvement program totals $6 million and will be funded primarily through the
SB 125 program and Federal Transit Administration grants. The major components are discussed below.
Page 133 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 95
Table 19: SLO Vehicle Replacement/Refurbishment Schedule- By Year of Purchase Order
Existing
Orders
Prior to FY
25/26
25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32
Bus Replacements
Fixed Route Buses 0
Battery Electric - 35' $1,253,700 Number of Buses (35' BEB) 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Battery Electric - 40' $1,279,139 Number of Buses (40' BEB)6 0000000 0
Battery Electric Cutaway $355,000 Number of Buses (Cutaway BEB)3 00000000 0
Battery Electric Trolley $655,300 Number of Buses (Replica Trolley BEB) 0 0 0 1 0000 1
Total Number of Vehicles 8 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2
Total Cost 1 $9,483,376 $1,291,300 $0 $716,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,007,400
Bus Refurbishments
Fixed Route Buses
Diesel Buses $450,000 Number of Buses Refurbished 2 2 1 5
Diesel Double Decker $150,000 Number of Double Deck Refurbished 1 1
Total Number of Vehicles 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 6
Total Cost 1 $927,000 $1,113,900 $491,700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,532,600
Total Vehicle Needs $9,483,376 $2,218,300 $1,113,900 $1,207,800 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,540,000
Source: LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc, SLO Zero Emission Bus Rollout Plan.
Note 3: No Altoona tested electric cutaways are available as of the time of writing (October 2024).
Note 4: Presented schedule is based on the City of SLO Zero Emission Bus Rollout Plan (March 2024) and the Federal Transit Administration's Useful Life Benchmark. Future vehicle purchases are subject to change.
Additional vehicle purchases necessary to implement service elements included in this SRTP are not included in this table. The total costs do not include six-bus battery electric bus order authorized in July 2023, or
the two-bus battery electric bus order in March 2024
Note 1: 35-foot and 40-foot bus costs are based on recently issued purchase orders. All costs assume 3.0 percent annual inflation
7-Year Plan
Total
(excluding
existing bus
orders prior to
FY 25/26)
Plan Period (by Fiscal Year) 2
Estimated Current Cost of Vehicles
Estimated Current Cost of Vehicles
Note 2: Starting in 2026, 25% of new vehicle purchases in 2026 must be ZEBs.
Page 134 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 96
Table 20: SLO Transit Capital Projects - By Year of Contract Award or Purchase Order
Category Project
25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32
ZEB Charging Transit Facility EV Charging
Infrastructure $ 699,300 $ 699,300
Passenger
Amenities
Bus Shelter Replacements/Bus
Stop Improvement $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 630,000
Capital
Maintenance Parking Lot Maintenance - Bus Yard $ 500,000 $ 500,000
Technology City of SLO AVL System Replacement $ 430,000 $ 430,000
Transit Center Downtown San Luis Obispo Transit
Center Rehabilitation $ 140,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 3,140,000
Technology On-Board Bus Security Camera
System Replacement $ 750,000 $ 750,000
Technology Digital Displays at Key Bus Stops $51,500 $53,000 $54,500 $33,600 $34,500 $35,400 $36,600 $ 299,100
Non Revenue
Vehicles
Replacement of Road Supervisor
Van with Battery Electric Van 150,000$ $ 150,000
TOTAL $ 641,500 $ 1,183,000 $ 574,500 $ 1,623,600 $ 1,624,500 $ 125,400 $ 126,600 $ 6,598,400
Source: SLOCOG 2025 FTIP; City of SLO 2023-2025 Financial Plan; TIRCP Project List, 2023
7-Year Plan
Total
Plan Period (by Fiscal Year)
Page 135 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 97
TRANSIT FACILITIES
The SLO Transit Operations and Maintenance Facility is a 2.5-acre site located at 29 Prado Road in San
Luis Obispo, and houses all operations, maintenance, and dispatch functions. The facility is located
adjacent to the City’s Water Department. The facility will eventually host twelve dual-port chargers for
BEBs. The 2023 RTP recommended that a new, stand-alone maintenance facility be developed for SLO
Transit in the next few years to provide increased vehicle storage capacity and improved amenities for
staff.
Charging Infrastructure
The City of SLO recently completed an expansion of charging infrastructure at the operations and
maintenance facility. An additional expansion of charging infrastructure will be needed to transition to a
BEB fleet. In addition to the two BEB currently in the SLO Transit fleet, six more are expected to go into
service in the fall of 2025 and two more in 2026. This will be a total of ten BEBs in service by 2026.
The SLO Transit ZEB Rollout Plan notes that the buildout of the charging infrastructure at the bus yard
will consist of 24 parking stalls with charging dispensers. The city is also working on a multi-site solar
panel project which includes installation of panels at the bus yard to offset daytime charging needs. The
project includes the installation of three solar arrays over the newly improved bus parking and
maintenance area totaling 17,000 square feet of coverage. This will be completed by the Spring of 2026.
Passenger Amenities
Bus Stops
SLO Transit serves 166 bus stops within San Luis Obispo and the nearby Cal Poly Campus. Of these stops,
50 have shelters and 111 have benches. Solar lights are installed at 23 stops and electronic, real-time
schedule signs are installed at 3 stops. Almost all the SLO Transit bus stops have an information kiosk (96
percent). The two largest SLO Transit bus stops are the Downtown transit center and the Cal Poly
Kennedy Library. Some SLO Transit stops are shared with the RTA.
During the On-Board Survey effort which took place October 23rd through October 27th, 2023,
surveyors riding buses recorded boarding and alighting activity on SLO Transit fixed routes. Despite this
survey taking place over multiple days its goal was to capture service equivalent to a full weekday
service across all routes aside from the SLO transit Highland Tripper Route. This data is subject to human
error but provides a useful approximation of boarding activity at individual stops and actual boarding
numbers are likely to be greater than the recorded data.
Boardings at individual stops that were shared between multiple routes were added together to
estimate daily boardings across routes for individual stops. Stops with over 10 estimated daily boardings
were then cross-referenced with the SLO bus stop amenity inventory finalized January 2024 to identify
stops with 10 or more boardings and no bench, or 25 or more boardings and no shelter. Identified stops
were then explored in Google Maps Street View to verify the lack of those amenities. In some instances,
Page 136 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 98
stops were removed due to the presence of amenities not included in the organizational databases
highlighting the need to ensure these databases are accurate and up to date.
As shown in Table 21, there were 2 stops served by SLO routes that had 10 or more combined boardings
and no bench. There were 7 stops served by SLO routes that had 25 or more combined boardings and no
shelter. Space for improved bus stop amenities is lacking at some of these stops. A full listing of stops
that meet the recommended threshold for benches and buses is provided in Table 21 below.
The current bus shelter pricing in the CalACT pricing cooperative (RFP #20-01) ranges from $8,286 for a
9-foot shelter to $12,356 for a 21-foot shelter. This is base pricing and does not include options such as
trash receptacles and map cases. Installation costs will vary depending on site characteristics. The
shelter contract also includes solar-powered, real-time information displays for $8,183 which includes a
5-year data plan.
The SLO Transit Innovation Study included a focus on the importance of bus stops for rider safety and
comfort. Lighting and shelters at bus stops are identified as priorities. In addition to adding shelters to
high-boarding locations, the city is also prioritizing the replacement of older passenger shelters.
Other improvements identified in the SLO Transit Innovation Study include the addition of bus bulb-outs
in the downtown area. Bus bulb-outs are extensions of the curb allowing the bus to stop and board
passengers in the travel lane. In this sense, the bulb-out is the opposite of a pull-out where the bus pulls
out of the travel lane to the curb. With pull-outs, the bus needs to wait for traffic to clear to pull back
into the travel lane. With a bulb-out, the bus is essentially stopping in the travel lane and can proceed
without waiting for traffic to clear. In addition to the efficiency of boarding passengers, the bulb-out also
provides additional space for shelters, signage, seating, and passenger waiting. There are no specific bus
bulb-out projects included in this plan. The addition of bulb-outs needs to be weighed against blocking
the travel lane and potentially creating traffic congestion. Bus bulb-out design needs to be integrated
into the overall street, intersection, parking, and sidewalk design at the bulb-out location.
Deterring Loitering at Bus Stops
Passenger amenities at bus stops are important to enhance a person’s experience while waiting for the
bus. In addition to being safe, convenient, comfortable, and accessible for pedestrians waiting for the
bus, bus stop amenities need to be designed with features to discourage long-term occupancy and
sleeping. Features meant to deter this activity include vertical bars to segment benches into smaller
seating areas, sloped benches, partial enclosure of the shelter, and perforated panels rather than solid
panels. Passenger shelter lighting that is illuminated during all hours of darkness can also act as a
deterrent and security measure.
Park-and-Ride Lots
The City of San Luis Obispo finished developing the Calle Joaquin Park-and-Ride lot in 2018, however,
the facility is not currently served by SLO Transit or the RTA. The spot contains 31 parking spaces, two
motorcycle spaces, and a bus turnout. There are no plans for additional park-and-ride improvements in
the seven-year planning period.
Page 137 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 99
Bicycle Amenities
SLO Transit has five bus stops with bicycle racks: the Downtown Transit Center, Marsh Street at Osos
Street, Marsh Street at Chorro Street, the San Luis Obispo Amtrak Station, and Santa Rosa Street at Leff
Street. The SLO Transit Innovation Study recommends increased bike parking at or near bus stops as a
first-last mile connection to transit and as a measure to reduce single-occupancy automobile trips. Bike
parking can take the form of bike racks or lockers. A recent example of bike lockers with the ability to
rent by the hour are the Bike Link lockers on Morro Street north of Pacific Street where 6 lockers have
been added. These lockers are close to multiple bus stops in the downtown area.
Downtown Transit Center
The 2016 SRTP noted that a significant constraint to the regional San Luis Obispo public transit network
is the existing transit hub in downtown San Luis Obispo (Government Center). This currently consists of
a SLO Transit facility on the west side of Osos Street between Mill Street and Palm Street and an RTA
facility on the east side of Osos Street between Monterey Street and Palm Street. The SLO Transit facility
provides sawtooth bays for up to five buses along with shelter structures. The RTA facility provides
approximately 200 feet of straight curb, which is adequate to accommodate up to three buses,
depending on the order in which individual buses arrive. There is also a drop-off-only area around the
corner on Palm Street that accommodates a fourth bus. However, the following deficiencies remain:
x There is inadequate space for all RTA buses at peak times, resulting in buses that park around the
corner on Palm (potentially conflicting with other uses), or that end up parked at an angle to the
curb. This can block travel lanes on Osos Street, increase hazards to passengers boarding/alighting
the bus, and preclude deployment of the wheelchair lift/ramp.
Table 21: SLO Transit Stop Amenity Concerns
Route and Stop Stop ID Routes Served Shelter Bench
Combined
Boardings Across
Routes
Space for
Improved
Ammenities
Stops With 25 or More Daily Boardings and No Shelter
LOVR at Laguna Lane (Middle School) (West)0218 2A, 3B No Yes 47 Yes
Ramona at S. Tassajara 0327 3A, 4B, LT No Yes 41 No
Foothill at Patricia 0405 3A, 4A, 4B, LT No No 36 No
Foothill at La Entrada 0325 2A, 2B, 3A, LT No Yes 28 No
Madonna Road at Madonna Plaza (East) 0251 3A, 4B, LT No Yes 26 Yes
Foothill at Rosita 0334 4A No No 25 No
Stops with 10-24 Daily Boardings and No Bench
La Cuesta Inn 1 Trolley No No 22 Yes
Monterey at Toro 0404 4B, Trolley No No 22 Yes
Monterey at California 0406 4B, Trolley No No 20 No
Madonna Road at Madonna Plaza (West) 0208 2B,3A No No 15 No
Monterey/Osos 3 Trolley No No 13 Yes
Foothill at Cuesta 0332 3B,4A,LT No No 12 No
Grand at Monterey 0410 4B No No 12 No
LOVR at Laguna Lane (Middle School) (East) 0226 2A,2B,3B No No 10 Yes
Source: LSC Boarding and Alighting Counts, SLO Transit Stop Amenities Database, Google Maps
Page 138 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 100
x The number of bays available for SLO Transit limits the ability to schedule services to maximize
direct bus-to-bus transfers.
x While there are restrooms available at nearby public buildings (City Hall, Library), these are only
available during operating hours.
x Transferring between the SLO Transit and RTA systems requires walking across two streets.
x Both blocks are on a grade that exceeds the desired maximum slope of a facility as defined by the
ADA (2 percent). This creates challenges for wheelchair users transferring between buses and can
also increase hazards associated with using a lift or ramp.
x Bus shelter capacity is inadequate at peak times, particularly for RTA passengers. The south-facing
passenger shelters also cause passenger discomfort during afternoon periods due to inadequate
shade.
x There is inadequate street lighting for night-time operations, as well as to address personal
security concerns.
x The 8-foot-wide sidewalks adjacent to the RTA bus locations get congested, particularly when a
wheelchair lift, or ramp is in use.
The SLO Transit Innovation Study includes the concept of Mobility Hubs, which bring together public
transit, bikeshare, carshare, scooter share, and other first-last mile solutions without the use of a private
vehicle. The study notes that a location of interest for a future Mobility Hub is the Downtown Transit
Center.
OTHER PLANNED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Replace CAD/AVL and Automatic Passenger Counters
SLO Transit uses computer-aided dispatch/automatic vehicle location (CAD/AVL) provided by a third-
party vendor that integrates on-board technology and a real-time passenger information system. The
automatic passenger counting (APC) system, which is installed on the 19 SLO Transit vehicles. is part of
the CAD/AVL system. The SLO Transit Innovation Study places a high priority on replacing the CAD/AVL
and APC systems to incorporate more state-of-the-art technology. The capital improvement program
includes funding in FY 2027/28 to replace the system on all SLO Transit fixed-route buses. There may be
an opportunity to procure systems jointly with RTA, which has a CAD/AVL technology contract that
expires in May 2026.
Enhance Real-time Passenger Information
A real-time passenger information system provides bus arrival times and bus locations to the public on a
website, smart-phone application, real-time digital display signs at bus stops, and the on-board stop
annunciators. This is commonly integrated into the CAD/AVL software package. As noted above, the SLO
Transit Innovation Study sets a high priority for the replacement of the CAD/AVL system for SLO transit.
An important reason for this is for SLO Transit’s passengers to be able to fully rely on a reliable state-of-
the-art real-time information system to assist with daily travel planning on SLO Transit.
Page 139 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 101
Chapter 9
SLO TRANSIT FINANCIAL CONDITIONS
INTRODUCTION
This chapter focuses on existing financial conditions (including fare considerations) and presents “base
case” financial forecasts. This information is used as the basis for specific financial plans to support
system enhancements.
PROJECTED OPERATING EXPENDITURES AND REVENUES
Table 22 presents the projected FY 2025-26 operating costs which were used to analyze service
alternatives in Chapter 7. The total operating budget is projected to be $5.7 million with $2.6 million of
this amount representing fixed costs (costs that do not increase if service levels increase). Purchased
transportation costs (per hour costs) amount to $1.9 million and mileage-related costs such as fuel and
maintenance total to around $1 million.
Table 22 presents projected operating expenses for the seven-year planning period. An inflation
escalator of three percent was applied to FY 2025-26 costs. Also presented in Table 23 is the projected
operating revenue for SLO Transit. These figures are based on the City of San Luis Obispo FY 2024-25
Supplemental Budget, historical growth, and SLOCOG projections. As presented, there is sufficient
operating revenue available throughout the planning period, if public transit services were to continue
as is (status quo). In fact, during the early years of the planning period, there is a surplus of around
$600,000 potentially available to implement some of the service alternatives discussed in Chapter 7 or
alternatively to fund capital projects.
CAPITAL REVENUES
Recurring capital revenues are presented at the bottom of Table 23. These figures are based on the City
of San Luis Obispo FY 2024-25 budget and SLOCOG forecasts. Recurring revenue sources such as FTA
5307 funds are projected to amount to around $3.7 million annually.
SLO Transit capital expenditures are discussed in greater detail in Chapter 8. Total capital plan
expenditures from Chapter 8 are compared to projected capital revenues in Table 23. As shown,
sufficient funding is available for vehicle replacement and charging infrastructure projects, particularly in
the latter years of the planning period when fewer capital projects are planned.
Page 140 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 102
OTHER FUNDING SOURCES
In recent years, funding sources such as grants, tax credits, and incentives have become available to
assist local jurisdictions with transitioning to a Zero-Emission fleet. These sources would add to the
capital revenue estimates above. One example is the Hybrid and Zero-Emission Truck and Bus Voucher
Incentive Project (HVIP). Administered by CARB, this program aims to accelerate the adoption of
cleaner, more efficient trucks and buses by providing fleets based in California with vouchers when they
purchase zero-emission buses. The amount of the voucher depends on vehicle weight class, type of use,
and whether or not it is in a disadvantaged community. For a large transit vehicle purchase, a transit
agency could receive around a $150,000 voucher.
Table 22: SLO Transit Operating Costs
Expenditures and Obligations
Projected FY
2025-26
Vehicle
Service Hours
Vehicle
Service Miles Fixed
Staffing $345,108 $345,108
Other Contract Services $169,680 $169,680
Purchased Transportation $3,856,773 $1,980,814 $222,045 $1,653,914
Fuel $365,000 $365,000
Maintenance $355,775 $355,775
Other Operating Expenditures $144,931 $144,931
CalPERS ADP $12,555 $12,555
Transfers Out $474,427 $474,427
RTA, SLOCOG, and other Off-the-top
contributions from the TDA $0
Total Operating Costs $5,724,249 $1,980,814 $1,087,751 $2,655,684
Annual Service Quantity 38,000 398,400
Cost per Unit by Variable (Cost Model) $52.13 $2.73 $2,655,684
Source: City of SLO 2023-25 Financial Plan Supplement
Cost Variable
Page 141 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 103
Table 23: SLO Transit Revenues vs Expenditures
FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32
Operating Revenues
Passenger fare revenue(1)$260,000 $265,200 $275,900 $292,800 $316,900 $349,900 $394,000
Cal Poly Transit Agreement (2)$750,000 $750,000 $772,500 $772,500 $772,500 $795,675 $795,675
Interest $32,815 $22,648 $43,017 $43,000 $43,000 $43,000 $43,000
Transportation Development Act (TDA) - Local
Transportation Fund (LTF) (3)$2,000,000 $2,024,000 $2,048,300 $2,072,900 $2,097,800 $2,123,000 $2,148,500
Transportation Development Act (TDA) - State
Transit Assistance (STA) (3)$725,000 $725,000 $725,000 $725,000 $725,000 $725,000 $725,000
Other State Grants $8,722 $8,722 $8,722 $8,700 $8,700 $8,700 $8,700
FTA 5307 Preventative Maintenance (3)$210,765 $214,980 $219,280 $223,700 $228,200 $232,800 $237,500
FTA 5307 Operating(3)$2,357,125 $2,440,400 $2,512,250 $2,594,900 $2,676,700 $2,745,263 $2,822,763
Total Operating Revenue $6,344,427 $6,450,950 $6,604,969 $6,733,500 $6,868,800 $7,023,338 $7,175,138
Available Operating Balance $0 $620,178 $1,175,128 $1,707,197 $2,185,597 $2,611,597 $2,998,834
Status Quo Operating Expenditures $5,724,249 $5,896,000 $6,072,900 $6,255,100 $6,442,800 $6,636,100 $6,835,200
Balance $620,178 $1,175,128 $1,707,197 $2,185,597 $2,611,597 $2,998,834 $3,338,772
Capital Revenues
FTA 5307 (Capital)(3)$2,984,435 $4,503,627 $4,109,525 $4,091,994 $4,054,653 $4,005,601 $3,928,101
State of Good Repair(2)$0 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000
Capital Fund Balance -- $124,635 $2,334,361 $4,664,586 $7,135,979 $9,569,133 $13,452,333
Total Capital Recurring Revenue $2,984,435 $4,631,261 $6,446,886 $8,759,579 $11,193,633 $13,577,733 $17,383,434
Capital Plan Expenditures Status Quo $2,859,800 $2,296,900 $1,782,300 $1,623,600 $1,624,500 $125,400 $126,600
Capital Balance with no Discretionary Funding $124,635 $2,334,361 $4,664,586 $7,135,979 $9,569,133 $13,452,333 $17,256,834
Source: FY 2024-25 Supplemental Budget
Note 1: Passenger fares escalated at the SLOCOG projected city population growth rate of 1% annually.
Note 2: Based on City Budget
Note 3: Assumes FTA 5307 is used to pay for half of total operating expenses minus fare revenues. Total FTA 5307 projected at SLOCOG annual growth rate.
Note 4: If microtransit pilot is successful and City decides to operate their own vehicles for the service.
Page 142 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 104
Page 143 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 105
Chapter 10
FARE ALTERNATIVES
SLO TRANSIT FARE STRUCTURE OVERVIEW
As discussed in Chapter 2 SLO Transit’s fare structure is as follows:
One Way Fares
SLO Transit offers one-way general public fares of $1.50 for the general public and $0.75 for seniors and
persons with disabilities. The City recently launched a pilot program to extend 50 percent discount fares
to K-12 students. Children under 5 (up to two children per fare-paying adult) also ride for no charge.
Through the regional VIP pass, passengers eighty years and older can ride all fixed-route bus systems for
free in the County.
Multi-Ride Passes
One-day passes are available for local in-network routes for $3.25, or 2.2 times the one-way trip fare.
The Regional Day Pass and 31-Day Pass options discussed in the RTA section include SLO Transit. SLO
Transit also sells 3, 5, and 7-day passes for local routes at $7.00, $12.00, and $15.00, respectively. No
discount rate is available for those passes. Additionally, the organization sells 16 ride passes for the price
of $24.00 offering a savings of $6.00 compared to paying individual one-way fares. A 15-ride pass is
available to seniors, persons with disabilities, and K-12 students at a 50% discount. Thirty-one day
passes are also available for local routes only, at the price of $40.00 for the general public, $25.00 for K-
12 students with ID, $11.25 for 15-ride for seniors, persons with disabilities, and K-12, and $20.00 for
seniors (ages 65 – 79), persons with disabilities, and Medicare cardholders with ID.
SLO Transit Peer Fare Review
As part of the San Luis Obispo Joint Short Range Transit Plan peer analysis, a fare comparison is included
to gauge the SLO Transit fare levels relative to other similar transit agencies. The same peer systems (as
used in the general peer analysis) were used to analyze the fares within SLO Transit.
SLO Transit Analysis
On SLO Transit, regular one-way fares are $1.50 and discounted fares are $0.75. As shown in Table 24,
the average regular one-way fare among the SLO Transit peer systems is $1.44 (slightly below SLO
Transit) and the average peer discounted fare is $0.75. For both SLO Transit and the peer average, the
discounted fare is 50% lower than the original fare. Terre Haute Transit Utility (THTU), Billings
Metropolitan Transit, and the City of Bowling Green are the three transit agencies with higher fares than
SLO Transit.
Information on the pass options for SLO Transit and the peer systems is also presented in Table 24. All of
the transit systems reviewed offer a day pass with the exception of THTU. The peer average price for a
day pass is $3.25, which matches SLO Transit’s day pass price.
Page 144 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 106
The majority of systems include multi-ride punch passes in their fare structure. All of the peer systems
provide multiple-day passes, including 10-day, 35-day, monthly, and semester passes. The peer monthly
(including 30-35 day) passes range from $25.00 - $45.00, averaging at $35.75. SLO Transit’s local
monthly pass cost of $40.00 exceeds the peer average.
FARE STRATEGIES
Comparison of RTA and SLO Transit Fares
RTA regional routes, Paso Robles local routes, South County Transit local routes, and SLO Transit’s
combined services create a cohesive transit network within San Luis Obispo County. While routes are
well-connected across providers with ample transfer opportunities, the fare structures differ a bit. A
summary of each provider's fare structure is illustrated in Table 24.
The base fare is $1.50 for all services with the exception of RTA’s regional routes ($1.75 to $3.25).
Another notable difference is the fact that RTA and Paso Robles routes do not have day pass options
specific to those services, whereas South County and SLO Transit do. Simplifying and unifying fare
Table 24: SLO Transit Fare Structure Peer Analysis
Regular
Fare
Discount
Fare
%
Discount
Day
Pass
Punch
Pass
Multiday
Pass
Day Pass
Fare (Reg)
Monthly Pass
Fare (Reg)
City of Pocatello - Pocatello
Regional Transit (PRT)$1.00 $0.50 50% Y 40-ride monthly $2.00 $25.00
Pueblo Transit System (PT) $1.25 $0.60 52% Y 22-ride 35-day $3.75 $44.00
10-day
30-day
Terre Haute Transit Utility
(THTU)$1.75 $0.85 51% N 14-ride 31-day -- $45.00
semester
monthly
Billings Metropolitan Transit
(Billings MET Transit)$2.00 $1.00 50% Y 10-ride monthly $4.00 $28.00
4-ride
9-ride
Bloomington-Normal Public
Transit System $1.25 Free 100% Y -- monthly $3.00 $40.00
Average Peer Fare $1.44 $0.72 50% -- -- -- $3.25 $35.75
SLO Transit $1.50 $0.75 50% Y
15 ride
16-ride
3-day
5-day
7-day
31-day
$3.25 -
$5.50 $40.00
Source: Websites of respective transit agencies
City of St. George (SunTran) $1.00 $0.50 50%
The City of Bowling Green
(GOBG)$2.00 $1.00 50% Y $40.00
$2.50 $30.00
monthly $5.00
Y 10-ride
One-Way Fares Fare Media Types Offered Pass Costs
Northern Arizona
Intergovernmental Public
Transit Authority (NAIPTA)
$1.25 $0.60 52% Y -- $2.50 $34.00
Page 145 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 107
structures across this largely cohesive transportation network would allow riders to easily make multi-
ride pass purchase decisions and reduce the workload on administrative staff.
Simplify Day Pass Options
Multi-day passes which provide a discounted price to the cost of buying one-trips rides are a good
incentive to encourage ridership. As indicated above, SLO Transit offers 1, 3, 5, 7, and 31-day passes.
Having too many fare options can be confusing to passengers as well as complicate the accounting
process. A review of passes sold in Fiscal Year 2022-23 indicates that less than one percent of boardings
are made with a five-day to seven-day pass. Eliminating these options simplifies the fare structure and
makes riding public transit a little less complicated.
Expand Downtown Access Program (DAP) for SLO Transit
The City of San Luis Obispo currently provides free passes on SLO Transit for all persons employed in the
downtown area who request a pass and fill out an application form which can be auto-renewed
annually. This program was implemented in response to paid parking downtown. The qualifying area of
employment locations is shown in Figure 24 and is loosely defined by Peach Street on the north, Toro
Street on the east, Pismo Street on the south, and Carmel Street on the west. The SLO Transit Innovation
Study (Arcadis IBI Group, 2023) identified several areas for potential expansion of the downtown access
pass area. Two such areas were evaluated as part of this SRTP study, as also shown in Figure 24:
x An eastern extension from the downtown area to encompass all areas south of US 101, west of
San Luis Obispo Creek, and north of Pismo Street.
x A southern extension from the downtown area to encompass all the area south of Pismo Street,
west of the Union Pacific Railroad and north of High Street. This includes the Railroad District.
The existing DAP program participants account for a total of 4,624 annual boardings. Based on the
impacts of free-fare programs in other communities, it is estimated that 40 percent of these boardings
are due to the free pass program while 60 percent would have ridden anyway. The existing DAP
program therefore generates approximately 1,850 boardings per year that would not otherwise have
occurred. US Census data for 2021 defined through a Work Area Profile Analysis using the “onthemap”
online tool (onthemap.ces.census.gov) indicates that the existing DAP area includes 5,245 employees
while the eastern area has 1,528 employees and the southern area has 855 employees. Assuming these
additional employees make use of the free pass program at the same rate as those in the existing DAP
area, expansion in the eastern area would add approximately 500 new passenger-trips per year, while
the southern area would add 300 riders per year (or a total of 800 for both). The additional passes
would cost on the order of $1,700 for the eastern area and $1,100 for the southern area, or a total of
$2,600 for both.
The existing DAP passes are funded through the Parking Enterprise Fund up to $20,000 annually. New
funding sources would be needed beyond that amount to offset the cost of additional passes for
employees in the additional areas, or existing funding (such as general funds) could be used.
Page 146 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 108
Page 147 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 109
NEW FARE TECHNOLOGY
Cal-ITP Open-Loop Contactless Fare Payment System
Recent years have seen a surge in the use of contactless payment technologies, including transit fares.
Studies have found that accepting contactless payments has lowered expenses for transit agencies and
increased ridership. Both RTA and SLO Transit currently use the Token Transit App for fare payment. This
app-based technology removes the need for passengers to go to specified locations to purchase tickets.
Tickets are validated electronically, allowing the transit agencies to collect important data on ridership
and boardings while also taking pressure off the already busy drivers. For passengers, the Token Transit
app is free. Transit agencies must purchase on-bus validators and pay approximately annual software
fees (the RTA pays approximately $18,000 per year), and transit agencies enter into an agreement with
Token Transit allowing Token Transit to retain a certain percentage of fares purchased through the app
up to a set limit. There is also a per transaction fee which is paid by the transit agency.
The California Integrated Travel Project (Cal-ITP) is helping transit agencies to procure contactless
payment technology. This technology can accept both agency-specific passes and contactless bank card
payments and digital wallets. The benefits of contactless fare payment are improved ridership through
ease of use (no need to look for $1.50) and faster boarding. This strategy can help with fare “fairness”
and equity objectives when contactless fare payment is paired with fare capping. Transit fare capping is
a fare payment model that sets a maximum amount a rider pays for fares over a specific period, such as
a day, week, or month. Once this cap is reached, the rider doesn’t pay for additional trips taken during
that period. The rider is also charged as you go, eliminating the need to pay for the full cost of a monthly
pass in advance. One final advantage for RTA and SLO Transit is that, over the long term, the transit
operators could curtail or even discontinue the use of the Genfare registering fareboxes. Some transit
agencies that have implemented the Cal-ITP program have set a goal of a fully cashless fare system,
including Monterey-Salinas Transit (2027). This would reduce the staff time needed for the fare counting
process as well as the increasing cost of maintenance for the complicated and occasionally unreliable
Genfare validating fareboxes.
In order to maintain a fare payment option for unbanked passengers, transit agencies could offer a
reloadable card, which could be obtained at the transit agency office or specific outlets. Transit agencies
could also continue to accept cash using a manual farebox, allowing the more costly Genfare fareboxes
to be phased out.
Cal-ITP and the California Department of General Services have collaborated to establish six Master
Service Agreements that allow public transit providers to purchase contactless payment hardware and
software directly from vendors rather than through competitive bidding. These Master Service
Agreements can be utilized by transit providers in California. The Cal-ITP program has also negotiated
lower credit card processing fees, which comprise an ever-growing proportion of transit agency
operating costs as more and more riders use credit cards to pay for their rides. SLOCOG has taken the
lead in procuring and implementing a regionwide contactless fare payment system using SB 125 funds. It
is estimated this project will cost on the order of $2.6 million over five years and includes “buy-down” of
fare levels to encourage restoration of pre-pandemic ridership.
Page 148 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 110
A nearby adopter of open-loop contactless fare payment with fare capping (procured through Cal-ITP) is
Monterey Salinas Transit (MST). General public passengers can ride anywhere on the MST system for $2
for 2 hours. Beyond the 2-hour mark, there is a $6.00 cap for the day, a weekly cap of $20.00, and a
monthly cap of $70.00. The $2 for 2 hours eliminates the need to both tap on and tap off for a two-hour
period in order to be charged the correct fare. Once a passenger taps on a bus, they will only be charged
$2 until they tap on after that two-hour period. The quantitative impacts of applying a $2 for 2-hour fare
structure to RTA routes is discussed above and presented in Table 23.
Page 149 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 111
Chapter 11
TRANSIT PLAN RECOMENDATIONS
The General Plan sets the objectives for the mode splits (the proportion of all trips made by transit) by
2030 and a 12 percent transit mode split by 2035. In 2016, the transit mode split in San Luis Obispo was
calculated at 7 percent. At this time systemwide SLO Transit Ridership was around 1.2 million. In FY
2022-23, systemwide ridership was 515,000 or 57 percent lower. Since 2016, owning an automobile has
become cheaper and COVID has changed travel patterns with more opportunities to work or learn from
home. The service plan elements recommended in this short-range transit plan will increase ridership
by 33 percent over base case scenario, bringing the city closer to the transit mode split objectives. The
implementation of all plan elements will increase SLO Transit’s operating budget by 35 percent or $2.4
million by the end of the planning period. Given the City’s goals, this short-range transit plan assumes
the availability of additional revenue sources beyond amounts recuring historically for operating
purposes.
PLAN ASSUMPTIONS
x Forecasts of annual operating and administrative costs were developed as presented in Table
25, “Base case” or “status quo” operating and administrative cost forecasts were estimated
based on the City of SLO 2023-25 Financial Plan Supplement. An annual inflation escalator of
three percent was applied to FY 2025-26 costs to project operating costs for each year of the
planning period.
x Ridership and corresponding fare revenue for each SRTP element was estimated as presented in
Table 26. The “base case” ridership represents service levels as of the summer of 2024.
Ridership is assumed to grow at a rate of 2 percent annually. This reflects both the projected
population growth rate of 1 percent annually, an increase in college enrollment, and a
continued post-covid increase in ridership.
SERVICE PLAN
Ridership, operating costs, and fare revenue estimates for SLO Transit service plan elements for SLO
Transit are shown in Tables 26 and 27 and described below. The reader is encouraged to review the
Alternatives Chapter for more detailed information on how each plan element was developed. Figure 25
presents all plan elements graphically.
Page 150 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 112
Table 25: SLO Transit Short Range Transit Development Plan Operating Costs
Plan Element FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 2029-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32
Base Case Operating Cost 1
Marginal Operating Costs $3,068,565 $3,160,600 $3,255,400 $3,353,100 $3,453,700 $3,557,300 $3,664,000
Fixed Costs $2,655,684 $2,735,400 $2,817,500 $2,902,000 $2,989,100 $3,078,800 $3,171,200
Total $5,724,249 $5,896,000 $6,072,900 $6,255,100 $6,442,800 $6,636,100 $6,835,200
Plan Costs
Reinstate Pre-COVID Routes (6X, Highland
Tripper and SLO Tripper)2 $45,100 $46,400 $47,800 $49,200 $50,700 $52,200 $53,800
Increase Route 4A/4B Frequency During the
Academic Year
$39,900 $41,100 $42,300 $43,600 $44,900 $46,300 $47,600
Operate B Routes on Weekends Year Round
- 7:45 AM - 8:00 PM $0 $424,200 $436,900 $450,000 $463,500 $477,400 $491,800
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch -
45 Minute Headways $496,300 $511,200 $526,600 $542,400 $558,600 $575,400 $592,700
Provide Academic Service Levels Year-
Round $0 $0 $0 $207,900 $214,100 $220,500 $227,100
New Avila Ranch Direct Route -- 60 Minute
Headway $0 $423,200 $435,900 $449,000 $462,400 $476,300 $490,600
Late Night Microtransit Pilot - 10 PM to
Midnight, 7 days/week, Academic Year $0 $0 $171,000 $176,100 $181,400 $186,800 $192,400
Total Service Plan Costs $581,300 $1,446,100 $1,660,500 $1,918,200 $1,975,600 $2,034,900 $2,096,000
Total Operating Cost $6,305,549 $7,342,100 $7,733,400 $8,173,300 $8,418,400 $8,671,000 $8,931,200
Note 2: Route 6X implemented in September 2024.
Source: LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
Note 1: Base Case (status quo) costs based upon FY 2024-25 City of SLO Supplemental Budget, excluding capital. Assumes 3% annual inflation rate for the planning period.
Page 151 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 113
Table 26: SLO Transit Short Range Transit Plan Ridership and Fare Revenue (1/2)
FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 2029-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32
Annual Ridership
Base Case 574,100 585,582 597,294 609,240 621,424 633,853 646,530
Service Plan Elements
Reinstate Pre-COVID Routes (6X, Highland
Tripper and SLO Tripper)2 15,900 16,200 16,500 16,900 17,200 17,600 17,900
Increase Route 4A/4B Frequency During the
Academic Year 8,100 8,300 8,400 8,600 8,800 8,900 9,100
Operate B Routes on Weekends Year Round
- 7:45 AM - 8:00 PM 0 40,400 41,200 42,000 42,900 43,700 44,600
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch -
45 Minute Headways 65,000 66,300 67,600 69,000 70,400 71,800 73,200
Provide Academic Service Levels Year-
Round 0 0 0 17,300 17,600 18,000 18,400
New Avila Ranch Direct Route -- 60 Minute
Headway 0 35,500 36,200 36,900 37,700 38,400 39,200
Late Night Microtransit Pilot - 10 PM to
Midnight, 7 days/week, Academic Year 0 0 7,400 7,500 7,700 7,800 8,000
Subtotal Impact of Plan Service Elements 89,000 166,700 177,300 198,200 202,300 206,200 210,400
Impact of Fare Strategies
Expansion of Downtown Access Program 800 800 800 800 900 900 900
Total Ridership 663,900 753,082 775,394 808,240 824,624 840,953 857,830
Page 152 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 114
Table 26: SLO Transit Short Range Transit Plan Ridership and Fare Revenue (2/2)
FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 2029-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32
Fare Revenues (Passenger Revenues)
Base Case $260,000 $265,200 $275,900 $292,800 $316,900 $349,900 $394,000
Service Plan Elements
Reinstate Pre-COVID Routes (6X, Highland
Tripper and SLO Tripper)2 $6,298 $6,424 $6,553 $6,684 $6,817 $6,954 $7,093
Increase Route 4A/4B Frequency During the
Academic Year
$600 $600 $600 $600 $600 $700 $700
Operate B Routes on Weekends Year Round
- 7:45 AM - 8:00 PM $0 $16,200 $16,500 $16,900 $17,200 $17,600 $17,900
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch -
45 Minute Headways $65,100 $66,400 $67,700 $69,100 $70,500 $71,900 $73,300
Provide Academic Service Levels Year-
Round $0 $0 $0 $6,900 $7,000 $7,200 $7,300
New Avila Ranch Direct Route -- 60 Minute
Headway $0 $35,600 $36,300 $37,000 $37,800 $38,500 $39,300
Late Night Microtransit Pilot - 10 PM to
Midnight, 7 days/week, Academic Year $0 $0 $11,500 $11,800 $12,000 $12,300 $12,500
Subtotal Impact of Plan Service Elements $71,998 $125,224 $139,153 $148,984 $151,917 $155,154 $158,093
Impact of Fare Modifications
Total Fare Revenue $331,998 $390,424 $415,053 $441,784 $468,817 $505,054 $552,093
Source: LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
Page 153 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 115
Page 154 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 116
Reinstate Pre-COVID Routes (6X, Highland Tripper, and SLO Tripper)
The first step to increasing ridership and improving service for SLO City residents and students is to
reinstate routes suspended during the pandemic. Route 6X was recently reintroduced. It is also
recommended that the Highland Tripper and SLO Tripper are reinstated in FY 2025-26. These services
provide additional runs during peak periods for SLO High School and Cal Poly students. It is estimated
that reinstating these pre-COVID Routes (including Route 6X) will increase ridership by around 15,900
annually (FY 2025-26) for an increase in operating costs over base case of $45,100 annually (FY 2025-26).
This service plan element meets both productivity and cost-effectiveness performance standards. Two
additional vehicles will be required for maximum service with the implementation of this alternative.
Increase Route 4A/4B Frequency During the Academic Year
The Transit Innovation Study identified increasing frequency on fixed routes as a high priority. Route 4 is
the most popular SLO Transit service, particularly with Cal Poly students. Route 4A is projected to
provide upwards of 152,000 passenger-trips in FY 2025-26, and Route 4B is projected to provide 70,000
passenger-trips. Increasing service frequency during peak travel periods on Route 4 would likely further
benefit ridership and improve connectivity between downtown and Cal Poly.
As part of this service plan element, SLO Transit should increase service frequency on weekdays during
the academic year by adding two new runs on Route 4A departing the Government Center at 8:30 AM
and 9:15 AM. In the afternoons, two additional runs on Route 4B, which operates in the
counterclockwise direction, should be implemented which depart the Government Center at 4:15 PM
and 5:00 PM. The alternatives performance analysis showed that this plan element will cost around
$5.00 per additional trip served and will improve overall productivity in terms of passenger-trips per
vehicle hour.
Increasing the frequency of Route 4A/4B is anticipated to increase ridership by 8,100 passenger-trips
over base case while increasing operating costs by $39,900 annually. Implementation is recommended
for the next fiscal year (FY 2025-26). One additional vehicle will be required for maximum service.
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch – 45 Minute Headways
At full buildout, the San Luis Ranch development along Madonna Road will include a total of 604
dwelling units. This includes 299 high-density housing units, 34 affordable housing units, and 83
medium-density units, all of which have a higher potential to generate transit ridership. The higher-
density residential development is concentrated along Madonna Road and is already served by SLO
Transit. Under an agreement with Cal Poly, up to 300 students will soon be living in this area. The
nearest existing stops to the high-density area are located along Madonna Road within a reasonable 5-
minute walk distance.
To better serve the San Luis Ranch development, SLO Transit should revise Routes 2A and 2B by
traveling along Froom Ranch Way between Dalido Drive and Los Osos Valley Road, rather than Madonna
Road, as shown in Figure 22 and 25. While Route 2 service to the stops near Madonna/Oceanaire would
be eliminated, these stops would still be served by Route 3 (which currently generates 88 percent of the
ridership at these stops). This would increase the length of Route 2A by 0.8 miles while cutting 0.1 miles
Page 155 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 117
from Route 2B, respectively. Route 2 also has a significant on-time performance issue, with 40 percent
of Route 2A runs operating more than 15 minutes late and 11 percent of Route 2B runs operating more
than 15 minutes late (during a survey conducted in October 2023). To address the on-time performance
issue and the longer route mileage, the revised Route 2A and 2B should operate on a 90-minute cycle
length (time for one bus to make a round trip) instead of 60 minutes. In order to maintain semi-frequent
headways reasonable for an urbanized area, a second bus should be added to both 2A and 2B so as to
provide 45-minute headways.
An additional 66,300 one-way passenger-trips are estimated with the implementation of this plan
element in FY2025-26. Operating costs will increase by approximately $500,000 annually. Two more
vehicles will be required.
Other factors to consider with this plan element include capacity at the Downtown Transit Center and
transfers between SLO Transit Routes. With the increase in frequency of Route 2 from hourly headways
to 45-minute headways, capacity at the Downtown Transit Center will be exceeded at certain times
(assuming the schedules are maintained which maximize timed transfers between routes). Appendix G
includes a series of tables showing when SLO Transit and RTA buses overlap at the Downtown Transit
Center. Over the short-term, buses could overflow onto Palm Street until funding for a larger transit
center can be secured.
According to onboard surveys, common transfer patterns for Route 2 passengers include:
x Route 2A to Route 1A
x Route 2A to Route 4A
x Between Route 2A and Route 2B
x Route 3A to Route 2A
These transfer patterns should be taken into consideration when finalizing schedules.
Operate B Routes on Weekends Year-Round – 7:45 AM to 8:00 PM
The four counterclockwise B routes do not operate on weekends. As a result, service is limited to the
large one-way A routes. While the fact that some key corridors are served by more than one A route
(such as DTC – Foothill Boulevard or DTC – Madonna Road) still provides some direct bi-directional
service, other trips can require a long travel time around the majority of the one-way A loop. Operating
all four B routes on Saturdays and Sundays (as well as holidays on which weekend service is provided)
would incur an annual operating cost of $424,200 and increase ridership by 40,400. This cost estimate
takes into account the additional costs associated with revising Route 2 to serve San Luis Ranch.
Provide Academic Year Service Levels Year-Round
Cal Poly administration has indicated plans to expand class offerings and associated student activity
levels in the summer. Additionally, Cal Poly will be switching to a semester based academic calendar in
FY 2028-29. Currently, SLO Transit operates a higher level of service during the academic year when
student ridership is greatest. Providing that higher level of service year-round not only addresses Cal
Page 156 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 118
Poly schedule changes but provides the community as a whole with more frequent public transit service.
This alternative met the cost-effectiveness performance standard in the alternatives analysis.
As shown in the Plan Tables, this plan element would increase ridership by 16,600 annually with an
associated operating cost increase of $195,900. No additional fleet would be required. This option also
has the benefit of providing more consistent year-round driver schedules, which has the potential to
increase driver retention. This plan element is slated for implementation in FY 2028-29.
New Avila Ranch Direct Route – 60 Minute Headway
Avila Ranch is a mixed-use residential/neighborhood commercial development under development
along the north side of Buckley Road in southern San Luis Obispo. At buildout, it will include a total of
720 units, consisting of 125 higher-density units (24 units to the acre), 494 medium-density units (up to
20 units to the acre), and 101 lower-density units (7 units to the acre) as well as a small 15,000 square
foot neighborhood commercial center.
As development is constructed for Avila Ranch, a new route should be implemented specifically to serve
the development. As shown in Figure 19 and 25, this route would use the existing Route 2 alignment
south from downtown along South Higuera Street and make a clockwise loop around Suburban Road,
Eastwood Lane, the extension of Ventura Drive, the extension of Horizon Lane, Buckley Road, and
Vachelli Lane before returning north on South Higuera Street.
In addition to providing service to Avila Ranch, this option has the benefit of doubling service along the
South Higuera Street corridor which has substantial ridership (roughly 2.5 times the ridership along the
Broad Street corridor along Routes 1A/1B). This route also could serve the Elks Lane/Prado Road loop off
of S. Higuera Street currently served by Route 2A, thereby reducing running time and improving the on-
time performance of Route 2A. Note that serving this loop in the northbound direction would require a
traffic signal at Elks Lane / S. Higuera Street to allow buses to reliably turn onto S. Higuera Street
northbound.
As this route is not a one-way loop, only one additional bus would be needed to serve Avila Ranch with
hourly headways. Assuming service is provided over the same span as the existing Route 2A span,
annual operating costs would be increased by $435,900, while ridership would be increased by 36,200.
This plan element is planned for FY 2026-27. However, it should not be implemented until warranted by
development of Avila Ranch.
Late Night Microtransit Pilot – 10 PM to Midnight, 7 days/week, Academic Year
Microtransit was also identified in the Transit Innovation Study as a long-term priority for the City of San
Luis Obispo. Through the use of microtransit technology and phone apps, it is possible for a passenger to
request a ride “on-demand” within certain areas and certain times. The benefit of microtransit is that it
is not limited to a set route with set stops, but rather passengers can be picked up at their curb and
dropped off at the curb of their destination. This allows homes on the outlying edges of neighborhoods
to be served more directly or for passengers to make cross-town trips without transferring. The
disadvantage of microtransit is that if there is high demand for service, there could be a 30-minute or
longer wait for a ride. Passengers who depend on public transit to travel to work or appointments at
Page 157 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 119
specific times may find microtransit less convenient, as a ride may not be available at the time they need
it.
Microtransit has been successful in areas that are not easily served by a fixed route, low productive fixed
routes, or during the evenings and weekends, when there is less demand. Generally, SLO Transit Routes
are very productive and therefore, it is not cost-effective to replace the fixed routes with on-demand
microtransit. However, the option of microtransit in the evening, when demand is typically lower, is
recommended for consideration in FY 2027-28. Later evening service was the top requested service
improvement during the SLO Transit onboard survey effort.
SLO Transit services are not available past 11 PM, and only Routes 3 and 4 operate this late during the
academic year. The general geographic extent of a potential city-wide late-night microtransit service
area is displayed in Figures 17 and 25. As part of this plan element, microtransit would be available
between 10 PM and midnight during the academic year using three vans. Around 7,400 additional
passenger-trips could be expected for an annual operating cost of around $171,000 annually. It is
reasonable to charge a higher fare for microtransit than fixed route services. A general public fare of
$4.00 with corresponding discounts for qualifying passenger-trips is recommended.
Microtransit should initially be implemented as a one-to-two-year pilot program. Three vans will need to
be procured, if the current contractor is used. Alternatively, some areas have had success in procuring a
separate contractor who specializes in microtransit to operate as a “turnkey” service. Under this
scenario, the City would not have to purchase new vehicles or the microtransit software, as it would be
included in the total cost of the contract.
If microtransit proves to be a successful form of public transit in San Luis Obispo, the city could consider
expanding service to an all-day, city-wide microtransit service. A ballpark cost estimate for an expanded
microtransit program would be on the order of $1.7 million annually if operated from 6 AM to 10 PM.
Ridership generated from other similar microtransit programs operated by California transit operators
indicates a potential demand of 75,400 trips annually from an all-day city-wide microtransit program.
With this level of demand, up to five vehicles would be required to operate the service at peak times
while maintaining a wait time of around 30 minutes.
The fare agreement with Cal Poly, would not apply to microtransit. Therefore, students would be
encouraged to continue to use the more cost-efficient fixed route, as it is free to them. This leaves
microtransit available for trips which are more difficult and lengthy via fixed routes. The danger of
microtransit is that the curb-to-curb/on-demand aspect can make the service quite popular. If more
vehicles are added to meet the increased demand, costs will begin to rise significantly.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Transit services require ongoing capital investment in facilities and vehicles. Capital investments in both
vehicles and passenger facilities can attract additional riders while improving the quality of service and
safety of existing riders. Of note, California’s Innovative Clean Transit regulation will go into effect during
the plan period, requiring SLO Transit to transition to zero-emission buses (ZEBs).
Page 158 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 120
Fleet Replacement
Transit vehicles must be regularly replaced to maintain a safe and reliable fleet. The SLO Transit Asset
Management Plan sets a target to allow no more than 50% of the revenue vehicle fixed route fleet to
exceed the FTA-defined useful life. As the vehicle procurement process can take multiple years, transit
agencies must identify their vehicle needs well in advance. A detailed fleet replacement table is
presented in Chapter 8. In summary, SLO Transit has ordered eight BEB vehicles in FY 2025-26 to replace
old diesel vehicles. During this planning period, an additional two BEB vehicles will be ordered.
Additionally, SLO Transit plans to refurbish six diesel buses (including the double-decker). This is
consistent with CARB rules and the ZEV Rollout Plan. This results in a net addition of one fixed-route bus.
This will allow for the transition to battery electric buses while charging infrastructure is being
developed. It is anticipated that some buses will need to charge during the day, requiring more buses to
be available for service. Fleet replacement will cost on the order of $4.5 million during the seven-year
planning period.
Fleet Additions
The plan elements described above will require six more fixed-route vehicles for maximum service.
Currently, 11 vehicles are required for maximum service. The SLO Transit fleet consists of 17 vehicles
presently, not including the trolley and double-decker bus. SLO Transit has already purchased 8 new BEB
vehicles which will arrive sometime next year. Instead of replacing older vehicles with the new BEB’s,
five of the existing vehicles will be kept in the active fleet and refurbished during the planning period.
This will bring the fleet up to a total of 22 vehicles. In order to maintain an appropriate spare ratio of 25
percent for the fixed route fleet, SLO Transit should have 21 vehicles. Therefore, SLO Transit does not
need to purchase new fixed route vehicles in order to implement service plan elements.
SLO Transit does not own vans which would be suitable for the microtransit pilot. If microtransit service
is successful in San Luis Obispo, the City should purchase at least three new vans toward the end of the
planning period. This is reflected in the financial plan table below.
Other Capital Improvements
Table 20 in Chapter 8 presents a seven-year capital improvement plan for all items outside of revenue
fleet replacement. This includes bus yard improvements, technology, bus stop improvements, BEB
charging infrastructure, and rehabilitation of the Downtown Transit Center.
This seven-year capital improvement program totals $6 million and will be funded primarily through the
SB 125 program and Federal Transit Administration grants.
Long Term Plan for Relocated Transit Center
The SLO Transit Innovation Study includes the concept of Mobility Hubs, which brings together public
transit, bikeshare, carshare, scooter share, and other first-last mile solutions without the use of a private
vehicle. The study notes that a location of interest for a future Mobility Hub is the Downtown Transit
Center.
Page 159 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 121
The 2016 SRTP noted that SLOCOG was leading an effort to construct a new enhanced transit center on
Higuera Street between Santa Rosa Street and Toro Street. In 2012 the Coordinated Downtown San Luis
Obispo Transit Center Study recommended a facility consisting of up to 16 bus bays, indoor/outdoor
passenger waiting areas, driver break areas, restrooms and a transit information counter. The larger
transit center would allow for more buses to be able to pulse in and out of the transit center which
would enable enhanced route timing coordination. Currently SLO Transit has 5 bus bays. There are
multiple times of day when five buses are waiting at the transit center. With full implementation of this
transit plan (particularly changes to Route 2) additional bus bays will be required. In 2017 the SLO City
Council adopted the Downtown Concept Plan which also envisions a relocated transit center on Higuera
Street between Santa Rosa Street and Toro Street. In November of 2023 the SLO City Council approved
the purchase of a property in this block on the northwest corner of Higuera Street and Toro Street (1166
Higuera Street). This is the same property identified in the 2012 Coordinated Downtown San Luis Obispo
Transit Center Study as the preferred alternative to advance into environmental review (Alternative 6).
Initially this site is envisioned for parking. A transit center would require using the northern part of
Higuera Street which is currently striped for parking and a bike lane and was previously one of three
one-way travel lanes and parking.
Project development for a relocated transit center would need to involve close coordination between
the City of SLO and RTA along with SLOCOG. This would include the development of joint funding
applications, environmental clearance, design, project phasing and construction. A key feature not fully
envisioned in the 2012 study is the addition of bus charging at bus bays. This will be important to
support the transition to a BEB fleet by both SLO Transit and RTA. This capital plan recommends moving
forward with the joint relocation of the transit center in downtown with RTA.
FARE CHANGES
This SRTP does not recommend a fare increase for SLO Transit. SLO Transit fares are currently in line or
above other peer agencies and a fare increase would not be consistent with the goals of the City Council
to increase the transit mode split. Two fare strategies are recommended to encourage use of the transit
system:
x Expand Downtown Access Program (DAP) – This provides free passes on SLO Transit for all
people employed in the downtown area. The qualifying area should be extended to include all
areas south of US 101, west of San Luis Obispo Creek, and north of Pismo Street. A southern
extension from the downtown area encompasses all the area south of Pismo Street, west of the
Union Pacific Railroad, and north of High Street. This includes the Railroad District. (Figure 24).
x Simplify Day Pass Options – Simplify the fare structure by eliminating the five and seven-day
passes.
x Cal-ITP Open-Loop Contactless Fare Payment System – Continue to work with SLOCOG on the
implementation of fare payment technology which allows users to use any credit card/debit
card/phone (open-loop) to pay for their bus trip.
Page 160 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 122
FINANCIAL PLAN
Table 27 presents the 5-Year Operating and Capital Financial Plan for SLO Transit. Assuming use of
reserve funds from the federal American Rescue Plan (ARPA) and flat growth of FTA funds after FY 2025-
26, the service plan is funded through the planning period.
As shown in the table, sufficient revenue is available for planned capital projects including vehicle
replacement and purchase with discretionary FTA grant funding. There is a small deficit in FY 2025-26
without discretionary grant funding. However, by the end of the planning period, it is anticipated that
there will be a surplus of capital funds on the order of $2.7 million. This surplus could be put towards a
new relocated transit center, replacing the refurbished buses with EV’s and other charging
infrastructure.
As SLO Transit transitions to a zero-emission fleet, there are other potential funding sources available
for electric vehicles. The Hybrid and Zero-Emission Truck and Bus Voucher Incentive Project (HVIP),
administered by CARB, provides around $120,000 vouchers for large transit vehicle purchases. This
program can help mitigate the cost between diesel and electric vehicles.
Page 161 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 123
Table 27: SLO Transit Financial Plan (1/2)
Reserve
Funds FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32
Operating Revenues
Passenger fare revenue(1)$260,000 $265,200 $275,900 $292,800 $316,900 $349,900 $394,000
Cal Poly Transit Agreement (2)$750,000 $750,000 $772,500 $772,500 $772,500 $795,675 $795,675
Interest $32,815 $22,648 $43,017 $43,000 $43,000 $43,000 $43,000
Transportation Development Act (TDA) - Local
Transportation Fund (LTF) (3)$2,000,000 $2,024,000 $2,048,300 $2,072,900 $2,097,800 $2,123,000 $2,148,500
Transportation Development Act (TDA) - State
Transit Assistance (STA) (3)$725,000 $725,000 $725,000 $725,000 $725,000 $725,000 $725,000
Other State Grants $8,722 $8,722 $8,722 $8,700 $8,700 $8,700 $8,700
FTA 5307 Preventative Maintenance(3)$210,765 $214,980 $219,280 $223,700 $228,200 $232,800 $237,500
FTA 5307 Operating(3)$2,647,775 $3,163,450 $3,342,500 $3,554,000 $3,664,500 $3,762,713 $3,870,763
FTA 5307 Carryover $5,528,005
ARPA Operating Assistance $2,701,956 $2,701,956 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Operating Revenue $9,337,033 $7,174,000 $7,435,219 $7,692,600 $7,856,600 $8,040,788 $8,223,138
Available Operating Balance $0 $3,031,484 $2,863,384 $2,565,203 $2,084,503 $1,522,703 $892,490
Status Quo Operating Expenditures $5,724,249 $5,896,000 $6,072,900 $6,255,100 $6,442,800 $6,636,100 $6,835,200
SRTP Plan Elements $581,300 $1,446,100 $1,660,500 $1,918,200 $1,975,600 $2,034,900 $2,096,000
Balance $3,031,484 $2,863,384 $2,565,203 $2,084,503 $1,522,703 $892,490 $184,428
Potential funding source
Page 162 of 987
SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
SLO Transit Page 124
Table 27: SLO Transit Financial Plan (2/2)
Reserve
Funds FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32
Capital Revenues
FTA 5307 (Capital)(3)$2,693,785 $2,338,356 $1,903,983 $1,744,077 $1,668,803 $1,586,048 $1,477,998
State of Good Repair(2)$0 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000
Capital Fund Balance -- -- $44,456 $169,139 $292,616 $339,919 $1,428,567
Total Capital Recurring Revenue $2,693,785 $2,341,356 $1,951,439 $1,916,216 $1,964,419 $1,928,967 $2,909,566
Discretionary Grant Funding $1,033,040 $572,880 $300,000
Capital Plan Expenditures Status Quo $2,859,800 $2,296,900 $1,782,300 $1,623,600 $1,624,500 $125,400 $126,600
New Vehicles Required for SRTP Plan4 $375,000
Capital Balance with no Discretionary Funding -$166,016 $44,456 $169,139 $292,616 $339,919 $1,428,567 $2,782,966
Capital Balance with Discretionary Funding $867,025 $44,456 $742,019 $292,616 $339,919 $1,728,567 $2,782,966
Source: FY 2024-25 Supplemental Budget
Note 1: Passenger fares escalated at the SLOCOG projected city population growth rate of 1% annually.
Note 2: Based on City Budget
Note 3: Assumes FTA 5307 is used to pay for half of total operating expenses minus fare revenues. Total FTA 5307 projected at SLOCOG annual growth rate.
Note 4: If microtransit pilot is successful and City decides to operate their own vehicles for the service.
Page 163 of 987
Page 164 of 987
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2025 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING SAN LUIS OBISPO (SLO)
TRANSIT’S FY 2026-30 SHORT-RANGE TRANSIT PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo (City) operates the San Luis Obispo (SLO)
Transit system and the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo is SLO Transit’s
governing board; and
WHEREAS, the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) requires
transit agencies that receive federal funding through the region’s Federal Transportation
Improvement Plan (FTIP) program to prepare and adopt a Short-Range Transit Plan
every five years; and
WHEREAS, in June 2023, San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (RTA)
released a Request for Proposals for a joint Short-Range Transit Plan update for both
RTA and SLO Transit; and
WHEREAS, in September 2023, RTA executed an agreement with LSC
Transportation Consultants, Inc., for the joint Short-Range Transit Plan update; and
WHEREAS, on July 16, 2024, the City Council held a Study Session to receive a
presentation on the progress to date, to provide direction on which service alternatives to
include in the plan update, and provide direction to staff to return with a draft plan for
Council’s review; and
WHEREAS, on January 8, 2025, the Mass Transportation Committee, at a
regularly scheduled meeting, recommended to Council the inclusion of service, fare, and
program changes in the Short-Range Transit Plan update; and
WHEREAS, on February 25, 2025, the City Council conducted a public hearing at
a regularly scheduled meeting and received a presentation on the administrative draft of
SLO Transit’s Short-Range Transit Plan, considered public testimony of interested
parties, the minutes from the Mass Transportation Committee meeting, and directed staff
to make necessary changes to the plan and return on April 15, 2025 with a final plan for
adoption; and
WHEREAS, LSC Transportation Consultants provided a final Short-Range Transit
Plan on March 18, 2025, which is herein referred to as the 2026 -30 Short-Range Transit
Plan; and
WHEREAS, at a regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council on April 15, 2025,
the City Council found that the draft Short-Range Transit Plan is consistent with the
policies of the General Plan, the Climate Action Plan, and the Climate Action, Open
Space, and Sustainable Transportation Major City Goal of the 2023-25 Financial Plan.
Page 165 of 987
Resolution No. _____ (2025 Series) Page 2
R ______
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo does hereby authorize the adoption of SLO Transit’s 2026-30 Short-Range
Transit Plan as follows:
SECTION 1. Environmental Review. The California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) does not apply to the recommended actions in this report, because the action
does not constitute a “Project” under CEQA Guidelines Section 15378. Tasks carried out
as part of the implementation of the Short-Range Transit Plan adoption must comply with
state and local laws including environmental review or finding of exemption.
SECTION 2. Constraints. The Short-Range Transit Plan is a fiscally constrained
document. Adoption of the plan in no way commits the Council or the City to the
implementation of the service, fare, and program change recommendations contained
within the plan.
Page 166 of 987
Resolution No. _____ (2025 Series) Page 3
R ______
SECTION 3. Approval. The City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo does
hereby adopt the 2026-30 Short-Range Transit Plan as recommended by the Mass
Transportation Committee.
Upon motion of Council Member ___________, seconded by Council Member
___________, and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this ______ day of __________ 2025.
___________________________
Mayor Erica A. Stewart
ATTEST:
______________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the
City of San Luis Obispo, California, on ______________________.
___________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
Page 167 of 987
Page 168 of 987
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2025 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FARE RATES FOR SAN LUIS
OBISPO (SLO) TRANSIT
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo (City) operates the San Luis Obispo (SLO)
Transit system and the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo is SLO Transit’s
governing board; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considers changes to and approves SLO Transit’s
fare rates; and
WHEREAS, on January 23, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11473
(2024 Series) approving a pilot program expanding fare options for K-12 students to
include a discounted 15-Ride pass, effective February 1, 2024; and
WHEREAS, the pilot program is in effect until June 5, 2025, unless otherwise
further modified by Resolution of Council; and
WHEREAS, K-12 student fare and pass sales have increased since the
implementation of the pilot program demonstrating an ongoing need for discounted
student pass options, and SLO Transit continues to maintain its 20% minimum farebox
recovery ratio as required by the Transportation Development Act; and
WHEREAS, on January 8, 2025, the Mass Transportation Committee, at a
regularly scheduled meeting, recommended to Council the inclusion of service, fare, and
program changes as presented in the administrative draft of the Short-Range Transit Plan
including a recommendation to maintain existing fare rates and to eliminate the 5-Day
and 7-Day passes; and
WHEREAS, on February 25, 2025, the City Council held a public hearing at a
special meeting and received a presentation on the administrative draft of SLO Transit’s
Short-Range Transit Plan, considered public testimony of interested parties and the
minutes from the Mass Transportation Committee meeting, and directed staff to make
necessary changes to the plan and return on April 15, 2025 with a final plan for adoption;
and
WHEREAS, on March 12, 2025, the Mass Transportation Committee, at a
regularly scheduled meeting, recommended that the City Council adopt a Resolution
formalizing the K-12 discount pass program; and
WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on April 15, 2025, the City Council considered
the proposed changes to SLO Transit’s fare rates.
Page 169 of 987
Resolution No. _____ (2025 Series) Page 2
R ______
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Resolution No. 10784 (2017 Series) is hereby rescinded; and
SECTION 2. Effective June 1, 2025, SLO Transit’s fare types and rates are hereby
adopted as set forth in and incorporated herein as Exhibit A.
Upon motion of Council Member ___________, seconded by Council Member
___________, and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________ 2025.
___________________________
Mayor Erica A. Stewart
ATTEST:
______________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the
City of San Luis Obispo, California, on ______________________.
___________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
Page 170 of 987
Resolution No. _____ (2025 Series) Page 3
R ______
EXHIBIT A
Fare Type Proposed Rate
Regular $1.50
Senior/Disabled/K-12 Student $0.75
VIP (Seniors 80+) $0.00
Children (under 5) $0.00
Pass Type Proposed Rate
31-Day Regular $40.00
31-Day Student (K-12) $25.00
31-Day Senior/Disabled $20.00
16-Ride Regular $24.00
15-Ride Senior/Disabled/K-12 Student $11.25
3-Day $7.00
1-Day $3.25
Regional Day Pass $5.50
EFFECTIVE JUNE 1, 2025
Page 171 of 987
Page 172 of 987