The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04/03/1991, C-12 - RESULTS OF SLO TRANSIT'S ANNUAL UNMET NEEDS HEARING I��I1��IuIIIIIIIIII�IIUIII MEETING GATE; Cl"' or san lois oBispo ITEM NUMB COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT -/ FROM: Ken Hampian, Assistant City Administrative Officer Prepared by: . Harry Watson, Transit Manager SUBJECT: Results of SLO Transit's Annual Unmet Needs Hearing CAO RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Receive a correspondence from the Mass Transportation Committee summarizing comments made by residents as a part of the City's Annual Unmet Transit Needs Hearing. 2. Refer the comments to staff for consideration as part of the Short Range Transit Plan. DISCUSSION: Annually the City's Mass Transportation Committee (MTC) holds an "Unmet Transit Needs" hearing. The purpose of the hearing is to receive public comment so the City can better meet the needs of City residents with the SLO Transit fixed route bus system. The MTC hearings are designed to work in concert with those held at a regional level by the San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council (SLOACC) . The regional hearings are mandated by the State as part of the implementation of the Transportation Development Act (TDA) . Any transit needs that are determined "reasonable to meet" become mandates upon the individual transit providers.. SLOACC can withhold TDA funding from any claimant, such as the City, until those mandates are met. An example is that SLO City was mandated to repair our wheelchair lifts last year and had we not, TDA funding would have been withheld. The SLOACC hearing findings were made at their March meeting and there were no mandates upon SLO Transit. The MTC asks that the results of the City's hearings be considered with the recommendations resulting from the Short Range Transit i Plan which is currently nearing completion. The MTC also asks that through the budget process, SLO Transit fill as many of the service requests as possible. The Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) referred to above, will be out in draft form in later March. The document will be presented to the MTC along with their holding public hearings after which it will be presented to the City Council. FISCAL IMPACT: The referral of the City's Unmet Transit Needs Hearing comments for consideration during the SRTP process in itself will have no fiscal impact. However, several of the recommendations, if ultimately adopted through the SRTP process, would have significant costs C-lam- � ►I�IIIflppll � f city of san tins oBispo 11111111 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Page Two Council Agenda Report associated with them. As a practical matter, SLO Transit will not be able to financially accommodate all of the requested service enhancements. In this regard, it should be noted that the SLOACC concluded that certain services requested in San Luis Obispo were "not reasonable to meet" due to financial considerations. A copy of the SLOACC findings is attached. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Memorandum to City Council from Mass Transportation Committee Chairman 2 . Excerpt of SLOACC Hearing Results \HEAR I • 72- .-OZ- March 12 , 1991 MEMORANDUM TO: City Councilmembers FROM: Joe Risser, Chairman, Mass Transportation Committee SUBJECT: City Unmet Transit Needs Hearing On February 6, 1991 the Mass Transportation Committee held its annual Unmet Transit Needs Hearings for SLO Transit. On behalf of the Committee as a whole, as Chairman, I wish to call your attention to a digest summary of ridership testimony presented at our meeting. The testimonies presented here are the results of the 19 people that showed up for the hearing, 13 phone in requests, 5 written requests, and a summary of comments made during an onboard survey conducted last spring which asked for unmet transit need input in which over 900 responses were submitted. A summary and consolidation of the requests most commonly made were: 1. Shorter headways be provided in all service areas in the City with a minimum level 1/2 hour service. 2 . That service hours be extended community wide. 3 . That more peak hour service be provided to our existing a.m. tandem bus service and the addition of p.m. tandem bus service. 4 . That routing and headways be structured so as to improve ontime performance. 5. That weekend service be offered community wide. 6. That airport service be provided for both travelers and employment. 7. That additional routes be added to lessen the 45 minute travel time now necessary from Cal Poly to Los Osos Valley Road. Page Two City Councilmembers - B. That Cuesta service both day and evening be provided with at least hourly headway. (This may be a request to the Regional System. ) The Committee would ask that these requests be considered through the Short Range Transit Plan that is currently in progress. MTC.ne S1 r\4cc 11IVMfr i Naas Fi I\1a NGS UNMET NEEDS BREAKDOWN OF REQUESTS JANUARY, 1991 Unmet Needs, Reasonable to Meet # REQUESTS TOT GAP CMNTY FEASI- TIMIN EQUIT DUPLIC- COST TOTAL RECOMMENDATION REQ SUPPOR BILITY ATION EFFECT SCORE 1 South County Subsidized ta1a, (Dial A Ride) 108 4 5 4 4 2 3 4 26 REASONABLE 2 Increased Frequency (Eves. & Weekends) SLO/Paso service 21 3 4 4 4 3 3 4 25 REASONABLE 3 Service between Santa Maria/SLO 7 4 4 4 4 2 3 3 24 REASONABLE 4 Evening Service Cuesta (agency request) 5 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 25 REASONABLE 5 CIP service increase 4 3 3 4 4 2 4 4 24 1 REASONABLE Evaluated Requests, Not Reasonable to Meet 6 Bike Racks on all buses 11 2 4 4 3 3 4 1 3 23 NOT REASONABLE 7 SLO downtown/Airport 7 4 4 3 2 3 4 3 23 REFERRED 8 Increased Avila/Diablo Canyon Service (agency) 6 4 3 3 4 3 4 3 24 NOT REASONABLE 9 More buses during peak hrs. on SLOTRANSIT 1 4 1 4 1 3 1 2 1 41 3 1 3 41 23 1 REFERRED Requests Referred To Appropriate Agency 10 More Direct Service Between Cal Poly/Los Osos 5 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 19 REFERRED 11 Evening Service Throughout 4 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 20 1 REFERRED 12 Pedestrian Mall Downtown SLO 4 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 12 NOT A NEED 13 Additional Buses to Cal Poly 4 4 1 3 2 1 4 3 1 2 • 3 21 REFERRED 14 Reverse Commute between SLO/Paso Robles 4 4 2 3 3 3 4 2 21 REFERRED 15 Evening Service-SLOTRANSIT 11 4 4 2 3 2 4 2 21 REFERRED 16 SLO Dial-A-Ride 10 4 4 2 3 2 3 3 21 1 NOT REASONABLE 17 SLOTRANSIT Weekend service 9 3 3 2 3 2 4 33 21 REFERRED 18 Increase Frequency on SLOTRANSIT 8 2 4 2 4 2 2 3 19. REFERRED 19 Increased Cuesta Service 6 3 4 3 4 2 1 2 1 3 21 REFERRED UNMET-NEEDS CATEGORIZED BY REQUEST No. of # ADDITIONAL ROUTES AND FREQUENCY Requests 1 Increase frequency SLO/South County 1 2 Shell Beach/SLO service along Higuera daily 1 3 North Coast/Cuesta service at midday A.M. and P.M. 1 4 Increase frequency Los Osos/SLO 2 5 Increase Frequency between Cayucos/Morro Bay 1 6 Increase frequency throughout system 3 7 Increase frequency between Morro Bay/SLO 3 8 Grand Ave.(AG) corridor service (AG to beach) 3 9 Service Morro Bay/Airport 2 10 More comprehensive county-wide transit 2 11 Increase Santa Margarita service 2 12 Increase service for Atascadero/Morro Bay . 2 13 Modify all SLO routing 2 14 Increase frequency SLO/Morro Bay 2 15 More frequent service SLO/Cambria 2 16 Service between Los Osos and Madonna Plaza 1 17 North County/Cuesta Direct (agency request) 1 18 North Coast/SLO Direct 1 19 Increased Frequency between North Coast/SLO 1 20 Nipomo service via HWY 101 1 21 SLO County Country Club service 1 22 Frequent headways during commuter hrs. 1 23 Increased frequency SLO/South County 1 24 Increased service to Prado Rd. in SLO 1 25 Santa Margarita Recreation service 1 26 Shandon service 1 27 San Miguel connection 3 28 Cambria/Templeton bus 1x/week 1 29 Creston services 1 x/week 1 No.of # RAIL SERVICE Requests 1 Additional Coast Starlight service both ways 1 2 Additional stops for Amtrak 1 3 Commuter rail 2