HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-13-2026 MTC Agenda Packet
Mass Transportation Committee
AGENDA
Wednesday, May 13, 2026, 2:30 p.m.
Council Hearing Room, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo
The Mass Transportation Committee holds in-person meetings. Zoom participation will not be
supported. Attendees of City Council or Advisory Body meetings are eligible to receive one hour of
complimentary parking; restrictions apply, visit Parking for Public Meetings for more details.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT:
Public Comment prior to the meeting (must be received 3 hours in advance of the meeting):
Mail - Delivered by the U.S. Postal Service. Address letters to the City Clerk's Office at 990
Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, 93401.
Email - Submit Public Comments via email to advisorybodies@slocity.org. In the body of your
email, please include the date of the meeting and the item number (if applicable). Emails will not
be read aloud during the meeting.
Voicemail - Call (805) 781-7164 and leave a voicemail. Please state and spell your name, the
agenda item number you are calling about, and leave your comment. Verbal comments must be
limited to 3 minutes. Voicemails will not be played during the meeting.
*All correspondence will be archived and distributed to members, however, submissions received
after the deadline may not be processed until the following day.
Public Comment during the meeting:
Meetings are held in-person. To provide public comment during the meeting, you must be
present at the meeting location.
Electronic Visual Aid Presentation. To conform with the City's Network Access and Use Policy,
Chapter 1.3.8 of the Council Policies & Procedures Manual, members of the public who desire
to utilize electronic visual aids to supplement their oral presentation must provide display-ready
material to the City Clerk by 12:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. Contact the City Clerk's
Office at cityclerk@slocity.org or (805) 781-7114.
Pages
1.CALL TO ORDER
Chair Figueroa will call the Regular Meeting of the Mass Transportation
Committee to order.
2.PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
At this time, people may address the Committee about items not on the agenda.
Persons wishing to speak should come forward and state their name and
address. Comments are limited to three minutes per person. Items raised at this
time are generally referred to staff and, if action by the Committee is necessary,
may be scheduled for a future meeting.
3.CONSENT
Matters appearing on the Consent Calendar are expected to be non-
controversial and will be acted upon at one time. A member of the public may
request the Mass Transportation Committee pull an item for discussion. The
public may comment on any and all items on the Consent Agenda within the
three-minute time limit.
3.a CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES - MARCH 11, 2026, MASS
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MINUTES
5
Recommendation:
To approve the Mass Transportation Committee Minutes of March 11,
2026.
4.BUSINESS ITEMS
5.COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
5.a SLO TRANSIT UPDATE 9
Recommendation:
Receive the SLO Transit Update for May 2026 and provide comment on
the discussion items as necessary
5.b MICROTRANSIT PILOT PROGRAM FEASIBILITY STUDY 15
Recommendation:
Provide comment on the Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility
Study discussion item; and
1.
Receive and File the Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility
Study Final Report.
2.
6.ADJOURNMENT
The next Regular Meeting of the Mass Transportation Committee meeting is
scheduled for July 8, 2026, at 2:30 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room at City
Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo.
LISTENING ASSISTIVE DEVICES are available -- see the Clerk
The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible
to the public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate
alternative formats to persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who
requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting
should direct such request to the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7114 at least
48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications Device for the
Deaf (805) 781-7410.
Service Complaints: Complaints regarding bus service or routes are to be
directed to the customer service line at (805) 594-8090. Reports of
complaints/commendations are available to the public upon request.
Agenda related writings or documents provided to the Mass Transportation
Committee are available for public inspection on the City’s website:
https://www.slocity.org/government/mayor-and-city-council/agendas-and-
minutes. Meeting recordings may be found on the City’s website:
https://opengov.slocity.org/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=60984
Page 4 of 78
1
Mass Transportation Committee Minutes
March 11, 2026, 2:30 p.m.
Council Hearing Room, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo
Mass Transportation
Committee Members
Present:
Member Michaela Crampton (Technical Rep), Member Matthew
Duffy (Disability Community Rep), Member Hans Hershberger
(Business Rep), Member Audrey Lariz (Alternate), Member
Stone Ramage, Vice Chair Marlene Cramer (Cal Poly Rep),
Chair David Figueroa (At-Large Rep)
MTC Members Absent: Member Robin Kisinger (Senior Rep)
City Staff Present: Mobility Services Business Manager Alexander Fuchs,
Recording Secretary Melody Monroe, Transportation Manager
Luke Schwartz, Transportation Planner/Engineer Justin Wong
_____________________________________________________________________
1. CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Mass Transportation Committee was
called to order on March 11, 2026, at 2:31 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room at
City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, by Chair Figueroa.
2. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Public Comment:
None
--End of Public Comment--
3. PRESENTATION
Provided an update on the Annual Advisory Body Recruitment process and noted
upcoming MTC vacancies.
4. CONSENT
4.a CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES - JANUARY 14, 2026, MASS
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MINUTES
Page 5 of 78
2
Motion By Member Duffy
Second By Member Crampton
To approve the Mass Transportation Committee Minutes of January 14,
2026.
Ayes (6): Member Crampton, Member Duffy, Member Hershberger,
Member Ramage, Vice Chair Cramer, and Chair Figueroa
Abstained (1): Member Lariz
Absent (1): Member Kisinger
CARRIED (6 to 0)
5. BUSINESS ITEMS
6. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
6.a 2026 PAVING PROJECT UPDATE
Received information on the 2026 Paving Project and provided comment
on discussion on the item as necessary.
6.b SLO TRANSIT UPDATE
Mobility Services Business Manager Alex Fuchs provided updates on the
following:
• Fiscal Year 2025-26 Ridership
• Request for Proposals for Transit Operation and Maintenance
Services
• Electric Charging Infrastructure Project
• Routes 1B, 2A/B, and the Trolley Resume Normal Service
• Farmers' Market Trolley Extended Hours and Free Rides
• Open-Loop Payment System Update
7. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 3:50 p.m. The next Regular Meeting of the Mass
Transportation Committee is scheduled for May 13, 2026, at 2:30 p.m. in the
Council Hearing Room at City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo.
Page 6 of 78
3
_________________________
APPROVED BY MASS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE: XX/XX/202X
Page 7 of 78
Page 8 of 78
Item 5.a
Mass Transportation Committee
Agenda Report
For Agenda of: 5/13/2026
Item Number: 5.a
FROM: Alexander Fuchs, Mobility Services Business Manager
Phone Number: (805) 783-7877
E-mail: afuchs@slocity.org
SUBJECT: SLO TRANSIT UPDATE FOR MAY 2026 MEETING
RECOMMENDATION
Receive the SLO Transit Update for May 2026 and provide comment on the discussion
items as necessary
DISCUSSION
Transit Operation and Maintenance Services Contract Award
On April 21, 2026, Council approved award of the transit operation and maintenance
services contract to MV Transportation. Staff’s recommendation to award the contract to
MV Transportation was based on the thorough review and selection process which
included evaluation and scoring of proposals for overall quality and completeness,
responses to interview questions, cost comparison, and reference checks.
MV Transportation is the largest privately owned provider of contracted transit operations
and maintenance services in the United States delivering services for more than 100
public agencies including 20 in the State of California. The company manages turnkey
transit services including scheduling, dispatch, workforce management, and preventative
and predictive maintenance. A significant portion of their portfolio consists of small to mid -
sized systems similar to SLO Transit’s service profile.
Following approval of the contract award, the City and MV Transportation have executed
an agreement which incorporates implementation of certain Short-Range Transit Plan
(SRTP) recommendations including reinstatement of service s to pre-pandemic levels,
increased Route 4A/4B frequency during the academic year, and operation of “B” Routes
on the weekends. Additional SRTP recommendations will be implemented later in the
contract term, subject to the availability of funding, vehicle s, and staffing.
The City and MV Transportation representatives are coordinating on start -up and
transition activities in preparation for the July 1, 2026, service commencement. Key
transition activities include vehicle and facility inspections, outreach to the Teamster’s
Local Union and represented employees (drivers, dispatch, and road supervisors), and
the compilation of operational information. Completing these activities is crucial to ensure
a smooth transition and minimize the risk of disruption of services.
Page 9 of 78
Item 5.a
Tap2Ride System Launch
The open-loop payment system, now branded as Tap2Ride, is currently being
implemented across the SLO Transit and San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority
(RTA) fleets. A “soft launch” of Tap2Ride began on May 4, 2026. Initial communications
during the soft launch were intentionally limited because several minor inconsistencies in
payment verification were discovered during the quality assurance testing phase of
implementation. For now, the system is being promoted on the SLO Transit’s webpage
and onboard using bus cards shown in Figure 1 below. Once staff confirms that these
payment verification issues have been resolved, outreach efforts will ramp up and include
a press release, social media posts, print flyers, community partner engagement, and
other promotional efforts.
Figure 1 - Tap2Ride On-Bus Promotion
New Mobile App – The Transit App
The City has completed its transition to Connexionz’s new Computer-Aided Dispatch and
Automatic Vehicle Location (CAD/AVL) system. The SLO Transit mobile application,
which was provided by the prior CAD/AVL provider, is no longer supporting live bus
tracking data. Static information like bus schedules, routes, and rider alerts will continue
to be supported on the application while riders transition to other sources of real-time
information. Real-time information is now supported on Google Maps, Connexionz’s live
map (see Figure 2) hosted on SLO Transit’s webpage, and other third-party applications.
Page 10 of 78
Item 5.a
Figure 2 - Connexionz Live Map
The Transit App is one of the most widely used third-party mobile applications for trip
planning and real-time bus information. Staff is currently working on an agreement with
the Transit App that would provide SLO Transit riders with full access to the application’s
premium features at no cost. Staff anticipates completing the partnership by the end of
May with broader promotion beginning in June. QR Codes linking to the Transit App are
already included on all public facing SLO Transit materials as well as on the webpage.
Although real-time information is available through multiple platforms, staff encourages
riders to use the Transit App for their trip planning and bus tracking needs.
New Text Alert System – RideText
One of the features included with Connexionz’s CAD/AVL system is RideText, a
subscription-based text messaging services that provides riders with real-time transit
information, such as arrival times, detour alerts, and service updates . Riders can
subscribe to RideText alerts directly from their phone by texting “SLO Sub Alerts” to
22827. After confirming subscription, riders will receive all alerts posted by SLO Transit
via text message, providing a simpler way to receive timely service information without
opening an app or visiting the website.
RideText also provides real-time arrival predictions for individual bus stops. Riders can
text “SLO” and the posted bus stop number to 22827. For example, texting “SLO 1000”
returns the estimated arrival times for all routes that serve that particular stop (in this case
the Downtown Transit Center). To support rollout of the stop-specific arrival feature, bus
Page 11 of 78
Item 5.a
stop signage displaying stop numbers will need to be installed so riders know which
number to text. Staff plans to begin installation this fall at the 10 highest -ridership stops,
with expansion to all stops over the following year.
EV Bus Deployment and Charging Infrastructure Update
In January 2026, construction began on the second phase of charging infrastructure
improvements at SLO Transit’s operations and maintenance facility. As of the end of April,
groundwork has been completed and the charging equipment installed. Staff is now
awaiting ChargePoint to install the power modules and inspect the wiring. Once those
final steps are complete, the charging stations can be commissioned and placed into
service.
With the charging infrastructure project nearing completion and the new CAD/AVL system
now operational, the six battery-electric buses delivered last spring have entered revenue
service. Figure 3 is a photo one of the new buses serving the Performing Art Center bus
stop on Cal Poly’s campus. The buses have generally performed well, with only minor
HVAC issues that Gillig has addressed promptly. Once the new charging stations are
commissioned, the older diesel buses are expected to be retired from the fleet.
The City also took delivery of two additional battery-electric buses in March and April
2026. Before these buses can enter revenue service, third -party systems including
CAD/AVL equipment and the Tap2Ride payment devices must be installed and tested.
Staff currently anticipates placing these buses into service this fall.
Figure 3 - New Electric Bus on Cal Poly Campus
National Public Works Week
Held annually during the third full week of May, National Public Works Week (May 17-23,
2026) recognizes the often unseen work performed by staff to maintain and improve
public infrastructure like streets, water, and sanitation. This year’s theme is “Rooted in
Page 12 of 78
Item 5.a
Service, Powered by Community” (see Figure 4). As part of the annual Public Works
Week celebration, staff for public agencies throughout the San Luis Obispo region attend
the Thursday night Farmers’ Market (May 21, 2026). SLO Transit staff, along with other
City Public Works and Utilities staff, will be in attendance to engage with the public, hand
out informational and promotional items, and celebrate recent and upcoming successes
of our agency.
Figure 4 - 2026 Nation Public Works Week Poster
Page 13 of 78
Page 14 of 78
Item 5.b
Mass Transportation Committee
Agenda Report
For Agenda of: 5/13/2026
Item Number: 5.b
FROM: Alexander Fuchs, Mobility Services Business Manager
Phone Number: (805) 783-7877
E-mail: afuchs@slocity.org
Prepared by:Emily McBride, Transit Intern IV
SUBJECT: MICROTRANSIT PILOT PROGRAM FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL
REPORT
RECOMMENDATION
1. Provide comment on the Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study discussion
item; and
2. Receive and File the Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study Final Report.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
This report summarizes the Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study, compiled and
written by Transit Intern, Emily McBride. The report covers Policy Context, Existing
Conditions, Microtransit Overview, Community Engagement, Service Alternatives, Pilot
Program Implementation recommendations, and Funding Sources. The scope of work for
this project is intended to inform the procurement process for implementing a Microtransit
pilot program. Attachment A is a final draft of the Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility
Study for the Committee’s consideration. Staff recommends that the Mass Transportation
Committee provide comment on the item, as necessary, and receive and file the
Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study final report.
POLICY CONTEXT
As part of the City’s strategic planning process for the 2025-2027 Financial Plan, a set of
Major City Goals were established for the two-year fiscal period. Under the Major City
Goal category of Infrastructure and Sustainable Transportation, action item 5 states:
“Support and maintain policies aimed at expanding mass transportation and public
transit.” The City’s Circulation Element of the General Plan (2014) established
transportation mode-split objectives. The Circulation Element calls for 12 percent of trips
within the City to be made by transit by the year 2035. The City’s Climate Action Plan
(CAP 2020) outlined steps for reaching community-wide carbon neutrality by 2035.
Pursuant to this goal, the CAP established an intermediary mode split benchmark of 8
percent of trips made by transit, by 2030.
Page 15 of 78
Item 5.b
The Transit Innovation Study recommended pursuing Microtransit as a service
enhancement, and the Short-Range Transit Plan (SRTP 2025) outlined potential
alternatives to provide this service. The 2026 Community Climate Action Plan Progress
Report, presented to Council in April 2026, recommended further analysis of Microtransit
and potential inclusion of Microtransit in the 2027 Climate Action Plan update.
BACKGROUND
A Microtransit Pilot Program was first recommended in the City of San Luis Obispo’s
Transit Innovation Study (TIS). A key recommendation in the TIS was to pursue
Microtransit as a transportation service enhancement (recommendation 7.2). Specific
recommendations from the TIS including pursuit of Microtransit service were incorporated
in the Short-Range Transit Plan update (SRTP 2025). The SRTP recommends
implementing a two-year Microtransit pilot program in Fiscal Year (FY) 2027-28 that would
operate in the late evening (10:00 p.m. to 12:00 a.m., daily).
The Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study further analyzes operational and service
elements not addressed in the SRTP and is intended to inform the procurement process
for implementing a Microtransit pilot program. Scope did not include analyzing the use of
Microtransit as a replacement for under-performing fixed route service.
On January 14, 2026, a Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study Session was held at
a regularly scheduled Mass Transportation Committee meeting. The item covered the
background sections of the report, as well as initial alternatives for discussion and
comment by the committee members and the public. The comments were considered
during the refinement of the service alternatives and during the community partner
outreach that followed the study session.
Definition of Microtransit
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) defines Microtransit as a technology-enabled
service that uses multi-passenger vehicles to provide on-demand services with
dynamically generated routing within a designated service area. For the purpose of this
study, a simplified definition was used: Microtransit is an on-demand transportation
service that uses multi-passenger vehicles within a designated service area.
Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study Elements
Existing Conditions
Existing Conditions were covered extensively in the January 2026 Study Session meeting
item and a high-level summary is also provided below.
Transit coverage: Coverage gaps were identified based on geographic location,
and times when there is little to no service. There are limited fixed -route services
during early mornings (before 6:00 a.m.) and late evenings (after 8:00 p.m.). On
Page 16 of 78
Item 5.b
weekends, only “A” routes operate1, meaning specific types of trips may be hard
to make.
Demand-response transit: There are multiple demand-response transit options
currently available to residents; however, all of them serve specific populations
limiting use of these services by the general public. All these services also require
pre-booking at least 24 hours in advance, which can be inconvenient for riders
using the service.
Regional Transportation: Departures and arrivals via rail, bus, and plane occur
throughout the day from the San Luis Obispo Train Station and San Luis Obispo
County Airport. Arrivals and departures from these locations early in the morning
and late evening are common, which is when SLO Transit operates limited service
or no service at all.
Relevant Studies: SLO Transit Short-Range Transit Plan and SLOCOG’s Unmet
Transit Needs Study (2024-2025)
Microtransit Overview
Microtransit is an on-demand transportation service that uses multi-passenger vehicles
within a designated service area. Riders can request a trip through a mobile app or by
calling a dispatcher, and routes are created in real time ba sed on rider requests. It could
be thought of as a ‘community shuttle’ public service.
Service Model refers to the design and approach of how Microtransit is provided within a
given community. The three service models relevant to SLO Transit are the three models
below:
Zone-Based with Point-Point (Anywhere-to-Anywhere Service - Within a Zone):
Riders can request a trip between almost any two places within a defined service
area.
Zone-Based with External Nodes (Anywhere-to-Anywhere with Key Destinations
Outside the Area): This works like the anywhere-to-anywhere service within the
main service area but also includes select destinations outside the area.
Zone-Based with Service Hubs (Key Destinations Service): Trips connect riders to
a set of popular community destinations, like transit centers, shopping areas,
medical offices, community centers, or downtown. A trip can either start anywhere
in the zone and end at a service hub or start at a service hub and end anywhere
in the zone.
1 The Short-Range Transit Plan includes a recommendation to begin operation of “B” Routes on weekends beginning
in FY 2026-27. This recommendation has been incorporated into the new transit operation and maintenance services
contract recently awarded by the City to MV Transportation, Inc.
Page 17 of 78
Item 5.b
Operational Models refers to the logistics, mechanisms, and technology used to deliver
Microtransit. The two common operational models can be described as Software as a
Service (SaaS) and Turnkey.
Software as a Service is where the software used to manage the Microtransit
service provided by third-party through a contract while the vehicles are owned by
the agency, and drivers and dispatchers are employed by the agency.
Turnkey2 is a model which is publicly regulated but privately operated. A transit
agency enters an agreement with a third-party to provide the technology, vehicles,
and employees.
Operational Costs: An industry-standard metric used to assess the cost of providing
transit service is cost per vehicle per revenue hour. Based on a review of multiple
agencies operating turn-key Microtransit, the average cost of $109 per vehicle per
revenue hour.
Fares: Most agencies choose to offer discounts on Microtransit fares to those riders who
qualify for fixed-route discount passes like seniors and people with disabilities. Fares for
Microtransit service provided by agencies in California range from free, to $2 -$6 per ride.
Fare collection often occurs through a mobile application, though Microtransit vehicles
can be equipped with fareboxes to allow for cash payment upon boarding.
Equity and Access: Microtransit can provide a more accessible transit network in a variety
of ways. It can function as a supplement to existing paratransit, by providing a m ore
flexible and on-demand form of transportation for riders with disabilities. Additionally, it
can provide another option to those with limited mobility and/or access to vehicles, like
seniors, youth, or those who don’t own a car.
Community Engagement
Public outreach efforts are summarized in the Outreach section of the report. Thus far,
four in-person pop-up events have been held to educate the public about Microtransit and
promote the Microtransit survey. Certain transit-oriented groups were targeted f or
outreach: seniors at the San Luis Obispo Senior Citizens Center, students and Cal Poly,
and transit riders at the Downtown Transit Center. Results of Microtransit survey were
covered in the January 2026 meeting item, and are detailed in the Community
Engagement Section of Attachment A.
Service Alternatives
The following operational element assumptions were developed and applied to the
service alternatives. These are elements were determined based on recommendations in
the SRTP, established industry trends, and relevancy to San Luis Obispo.
2 This is the model recommended in the SRTP as it limits the need for initial capital investment in
vehicles or operational resources and can be deployed quickly
Page 18 of 78
Item 5.b
Operational Model: Turnkey operational model
Pilot Length: A two-year pilot
Service Model: Two alternatives are zone-based, while one alternative is zone-
based with service hubs.
Fares: $3 (Discounted by 50% for eligible groups)
Vehicles: It is recommended that electric vehicles (EVs) are used, as this advances
the City’s greenhouse gas emission goals. It is also recommended important that
an ADA accessible vehicle is available during service.
Geographic Coverage: All of SLO Transit service area
Service Name: The name “Hopper” was picked as an example of a playful name
which elicits the idea of being able to get from one place to the next, anywhere in
the city.
Service Alternatives Comparison
Three service alternatives are provided as service options for a Microtransit pilot program.
The alternatives are based on a synthesis of service gaps and transit needs, based on
the assumption that a Microtransit Pilot should serve those existing n eeds. The service
gaps and transit needs are discussed in detail in the Existing Conditions section of the
report. The identified service gaps and needs are the following:
1. Additional evening and weekend service when fixed route is limited
2. Additional service to the San Luis Obispo County Airport and San Luis Obispo
Train Station, particularly in the early morning
3. Increased service mid-day to supplement existing door-to-door service for seniors
and others without vehicle access.
Ridership and Cost Analysis
Ridership and cost analysis were developed using a transit analysis software called
Remix. This software was provided as a complimentary 6 -month subscription by the
technology company Via Transportation, Inc. (Via). Via provides software and operations
services to public transit agencies including Microtransit services. Remix describes their
ridership prediction model as being “developed based on hundreds on on -demand zones
around the world.” Additional factors considered in their ridership predictions incl ude
population, demographics, housing, jobs, worker demographics, car ownership,
walkability, and key points of interest. Figures 1 through 3 below provide high -level
information about each alternative including annual cost and ridership estimates. See
Attachment A for further details on service analysis of each alternative.
Page 19 of 78
Item 5.b
Figure 1 - Alternative 1: Evening Service
Figure 2 - Alternative 2: Morning Service
Page 20 of 78
Item 5.b
Figure 3 - Alternative 3: Weekend Service
Each service alternative addresses a different service gap that was identified through the
existing conditions assessment and the public engagement elements of the study. Tables
1 and 2 allow for quick-glance comparison of the alternatives and can be used as a tool
for identifying which option will be selected. Attachment A includes in -depth analysis of
each alternative.
Table 1: Service Alternatives Summary Comparison
Alternative 1:
Evening Hopper
Alternative 2:
Morning Hopper
Alternative 3:
Weekend Hopper
Geographic Coverage City-wide City-wide City-wide
Service Window Late Night
(8pm – 12:30am)
Early Morning
(4am - 8am)
All Day
(8am - 8pm)
Days of Week Monay - Sunday Monday - Sunday Saturday - Sunday
Service Delivery Model Zone-based
point-to-point
Zone-based point-
to-point
Zone-based
With Service Hubs
Estimated Trips per Year 12,134 16,178 13,867
Estimated Operational
Cost $589,700 $524,200 $561,600
Page 21 of 78
Item 5.b
Table 2: Service Alternatives Benefits and Considerations
Alternative 1:
Evening Hopper
Alternative 2:
Morning Hopper
Alternative 3:
Weekend Hopper
Benefits
Provides connections to
the Airport and Train
Station during a time of
arrivals and departures
when fixed route is not
operating. Evening service
can provide rides to
downtown SLO businesses
and restaurant for staff and
customers.
Provides connections to
the Airport and Train
Station during a time of
arrivals and departures
when fixed route is not
operating.
Provides increased
weekend service when “B”
routes do not operate.
Service hub model
decreases likelihood of
conflict with fixed route
service because rides are
more restricted.
Considerations
Staffing late shifts may be
challenging. Potential for
high demand as it serves
as an evening time low-
cost alternative to other
demand-response options
like Uber and Lyft. High
demand can cause
increased wait times.
Staffing short and early-
morning shifts may be
challenging. Though this
service was requested by
the public as part of
various outreach efforts, it
has potential to have low
demand due to very early
morning hours.
Has potential to pull
ridership from fixed route
as service window is the
same as fixed route.
Additionally, there is
potential to conflict with the
planned implementation of
“B” routes on weekends.
Pilot Program Implementation
Microtransit is an inherently data-rich transit service due to the tech platform used by
operators to dispatch and route vehicles; and the rider platform used to request rides. The
aggregated data can inform two key elements of a Microtransit pilot program :
performance metric monitoring, and an iterative pilot design. Established performance
metrics (see Table 3 for proposed metrics) create a framework to monitor if the pilot
program is meeting agreed upon standards for service performance. An iterative pil ot
design allows staff to modify the service based on performance metrics and other travel
data to create a Microtransit service which best meets rider needs. The Study provides a
list of selected performance metrics and outlines key elements of an iterative pilot design.
Table 3 - Proposed Performance Metrics
Metric Description Recommendation
Operating
Effectiveness Passenger Trips per Vehicle Revenue Hour Calculated after final service
design.
Wait Time
How long a rider waits from when they
request a ride to when the vehicle picks
them up.
90% of trips within 20 minutes.
Cost Efficiency Cost per Vehicle Revenue Hour Not to exceed $100
Total Passenger
Boardings
Total number of passengers served during
a specific period.
Calculated after final service
design.
Customer
Satisfaction
Customer Rating is the selected metric for
measuring customer satisfaction.
+ 90% overall customer
satisfaction rating.
Page 22 of 78
Item 5.b
Funding Microtransit Service
There are various sources of transit funding in California that can cover some or all
operational and capital costs associated with operating a Microtransit service. The Low
Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) can be used for both operating and capital
expenses and is a state funded program administered by the regional planning agency.
LCTOP funding is competitive, locally apportioned, and can provide up to 100% of funding
for a microtransit program.
Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) provides funds to cover capital
expenses and is a state funded program administered by the regional planning agency.
TIRCP is a competitive, locally apportioned funding source which can cover up to 100%
of costs. A final common funding source in California is Clean Mobility Options (CMO)
which provides funds to incre4ase access to clean transportation options, with a focus on
disadvantaged and low-income residents. CMO, which is funded by the California Air
Resources Board, covers planning, design, and pilot programs for microtransit. This
funding source is competitive, and project based – covering up to 100% of project cost.
ATTACHMENTS
A - Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study, Final Report
Page 23 of 78
Page 24 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
1
Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
April 29, 2026
Emily McBride
City of San Luis Obispo
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................... 4
Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 6
Background ...................................................................................................................................6
Policy Context ................................................................................................................................6
Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................ 7
Transit Network .............................................................................................................................7
Fixed Route System .............................................................................................................................................. 7
Service Coverage .................................................................................................................................................. 8
Key Takeaways .................................................................................................................................................... 11
Demand-Response Transit ............................................................................................................ 11
Key Takeaways .................................................................................................................................................... 12
Cal Poly Mustang Shuttle: Grocery Shuttle .................................................................................... 12
Regional Transportation ............................................................................................................... 13
Key Takeaways .................................................................................................................................................... 13
Relevant Study Findings ............................................................................................................... 14
San Luis Obispo Coalitfon of Governments (SLOCOG) 2024/2025 Unmet Transit Needs Study ........................ 14
Short Range Transit Plan .................................................................................................................................... 15
Microtransit Overview ......................................................................................................... 17
Operations Overview ................................................................................................................... 17
Service Models ............................................................................................................................ 18
Service Model Key Terms ................................................................................................................................... 19
Operational Models ..................................................................................................................... 20
Interaction with Existing Transit Services ...................................................................................... 20
Fixed Route ......................................................................................................................................................... 20
Paratransit .......................................................................................................................................................... 21
Cost and Fares .............................................................................................................................. 21
Page 25 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
2
Operatfonal Costs ............................................................................................................................................... 21
Fares ................................................................................................................................................................... 22
Equity and Access ........................................................................................................................ 23
Case Studies ................................................................................................................................ 23
Santa Barbara Municipal Transit District – The Wave Microtransit .................................................................... 23
Santa Maria Regional Transit– SMRT Micro ....................................................................................................... 24
Sacramento Regional Transit – SacRT Flex ......................................................................................................... 26
City of Whittier - Whittier Cruiser ...................................................................................................................... 26
Community Engagement ..................................................................................................... 28
Outreach Events ........................................................................................................................... 28
Pop-Up Events .................................................................................................................................................... 28
Map Actfvity ....................................................................................................................................................... 29
Survey ......................................................................................................................................... 31
Survey Results .................................................................................................................................................... 31
Stakeholder Meetings .................................................................................................................. 36
Community Partner Outreach ....................................................................................................... 37
Outreach Meetfng .............................................................................................................................................. 37
Mass Transportation Committee Study Session ............................................................................. 37
Committee Feedback ......................................................................................................................................... 38
Service Alternatives ............................................................................................................. 38
Operational Elements ................................................................................................................... 38
Service Alternatives ..................................................................................................................... 39
Alternative 1: The Evening Hopper ................................................................................................................... 40
Alternative 2: The Morning Hopper .................................................................................................................. 42
Alternative 3: The Weekend Hopper................................................................................................................. 44
Alternatives Comparison .............................................................................................................. 46
Pilot Program Implementation ............................................................................................. 46
Performance Metric Monitoring ................................................................................................... 46
Iterative Pilot Design .................................................................................................................... 48
Funding Microtransit Service ............................................................................................... 50
References ........................................................................................................................... 51
Additional Resources ........................................................................................................... 51
Appendix A: Public Outreach – Complete Comments ............................................................ 52
Comments from Microtransit Survey ............................................................................................ 52
Page 26 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
3
Table of Tables
Table 1: Inventory of regional transportation and common connection times 13
Table 2: Inventory of cost per vehicle revenue hour for various U.S. based Microtransit services. 22
Table 3: Inventory of Microtransit fares at various agencies in the U.S. 22
Table 4: Santa Barbara Case Study 23
Table 5: Santa Maria Case Study 25
Table 6: SacRT Case Study 26
Table 7: City of Whittier Case Study 26
Table 8: Service Alternative 1 overview 41
Table 9: Service Alternative 1 cost and ridership estimates 41
Table 10: Service Alternative 2 overview 43
Table 11: Service Alternative 2 cost and ridership estimates 43
Table 12: Service Alternative overview 45
Table 13: Service Alternative 3 cost and ridership estimates 45
Table 14: Service Alternative Comparison Table 46
Table 15: Recommended performance metrics 47
Table 16: Common Microtransit funding sources in California 50
Table of Figures
Figure 1: SLO Transit Service Map 8
Figure 2 - SLO Transit Weekday Service by Route and by Hours 9
Figure 3 - SLO Transit Weekend Service by Route and by Hours 9
Figure 4: SLO Transit service area displaying 1/4 mile walkshed in pink 10
Figure 5 – San Luis Obispo Transit Needs Index. Source: 2025 SRTP 16
Figure 6: Microtransit Basics 17
Figure 7 - SBMTD Microtransit Zones & Pick-up/Drop-off Points. Source: SBMTD. 24
Figure 8: SMRT Microtransit Zone (entire light shaded area). Source: SMRT 25
Figure 9: City of Whittier Microtransit Zones & Pick-up/Drop-off Points. Source: City of Whittier. 27
Figure 10 - Mapping Activity at Cal Poly Pop-up Event 29
Figure 11: Heat map illustrating points of interest collected during outreach map activity. 30
Figure 12: Service Alternative 1 - Evening Hopper 40
Figure 13: Service Alternative 2 - Morning Hopper 42
Figure 14: Service Alternative 3 - Weekend Hopper 44
Page 27 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
4
Executfve Summary
Microtransit is an on-demand transportatfon service that uses multf-passenger vehicles within a
designated service area. Riders can request a trip through a mobile app or by calling a dispatcher,
and routes are created in real tfme based on rider requests. As recommended in the 2025 Short
Range Transit Plan (SRTP) as a mechanism to help the City reach its mode-shift goals and increase
transit ridership, the study of Microtransit is contfnued through this report.
Gaps in transit service within the City are relevant in designing a Microtransit pilot program that
will best serve residents. The key service gaps identffied through an existfng conditfons study are
late evenings, early mornings, and weekends. These service needs are reinforced by community
feedback collected through transit planning efforts by the City and San Luis Obispo Council of
Governments.
Community outreach conducted during this project connected with residents, transit riders,
local stakeholders, and the City’s community partner organizatfons. Broadly, people expressed
interest in Microtransit as a transportatfon optfon in the City. Emphasis was made on
affordability, and access to the San Luis Obispo County Airport and San Luis Obispo Train
Statfon. Additfonally, a repeated theme was interest in a Microtransit service during tfmes of
day when there is little to no fixed-route service. Many community members expressed an
interest in Microtransit because it would increase their access to important services like medical
appointments, grocery shopping, or efficient transportatfon to work.
As a highly flexible form of transit, there are many elements – from service design to
operatfonal model, which need to be chosen for a Microtransit pilot. It is recommended that a
Microtransit pilot program in the City operates as a zoned-based service, allowing riders to pick
their origin and destfnatfon, or select a key service hub. A turnkey operatfonal model, as
recommended by the SRTP, will allow the City to contract with a Microtransit operator that will
provide vehicles, software, and manage the service. Due to Microtransit’s data-rich nature, an
iteratfve pilot program is recommended. This means that over the course of the recommended
two-year pilot period, the service should be reassessed at key milestones and improved or
modified based on ridership trends.
Three service alternatfves, based on established transit gaps in the City, are presented in below
in Table 1. The SRTP recommends implementfng a Microtransit pilot program startfng in FY 27-
28. These alternatfves are presented as optfons which fill existfng transit gaps in the City and
would be a good fit for a pilot program.
Page 28 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
5
Table 1: Executive summary - Alternative Comparison Table
Alternative 1:
Evening Hopper
Alternative 2:
Morning Hopper
Alternative 3:
Weekend Hopper
Geographic Coverage City-wide City-wide City-wide
Service Window Late Night
(8pm – 12:30am)
Early Morning
(4am - 8am)
All Day
(8am - 8pm)
Days of Week Monay - Sunday Monday - Sunday Saturday - Sunday
Service Delivery Model Zone-based
point-to-point
Zone-based point-
to-point
Zone-based
With Service Hubs
Estimated Trips per Year 12,134 16,178 13,867
Estimated Operational Cost $589,700 $524,200 $561,600
Page 29 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
6
Introductfon
Background
A Microtransit Pilot Program was first recommended in the City of San Luis Obispo’s Transit
Innovatfon Study (TIS). A key recommendatfon in the TIS was to pursue Microtransit as a
transportatfon service enhancement (recommendatfon 7.2). Specific recommendatfons from
the TIS including pursuit of Microtransit service were incorporated in the Short-Range Transit
Plan update (SRTP 2025). The SRTP recommends implementfng a two-year Microtransit pilot
program in Fiscal Year (FY) 2027-28 that would operate in the late evening (10:00 p.m. to 12:00
a.m., daily). The Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study further analyzes operatfonal and
service elements not addressed in the SRTP and presents service alternatfves to inform the
development of a two-year pilot program prior to launch.
Policy Context
As part of the City’s strategic planning process for the 2025-2027 Financial Plan, a set of Major
City Goals were established for the two-year fiscal period. Under the Major City Goal category
of Infrastructure and Sustainable Transportatfon, actfon item 5 states: “Support and maintain
policies aimed at expanding mass transportatfon and public transit.” The City’s Circulatfon
Element of the General Plan (2014) established transportatfon mode-split objectfves. The
Circulatfon Element calls for 12 percent of trips within the City to be made by transit by the year
2035. The City’s Climate Actfon Plan (CAP 2020) outlined steps for reaching community-wide
carbon neutrality by 2035. Pursuant to this goal, the CAP established an intermediary mode split
benchmark of 8 percent of trips made by transit, by 2030. The Transit Innovatfon Study
recommended pursuing Microtransit as a service enhancement, and the Short-Range Transit
Plan (SRTP 2025) outlined potentfal alternatfves to provide this service. The 2026 Community
Climate Actfon Plan Progress Report, presented to Council in April 2026, recommended further
analysis of Microtransit and potentfal inclusion of Microtransit in the 2027 Climate Actfon Plan
update.
➢ Climate Action Plan (2020): Connected Community Action 4.3 Explore additfonal
innovatfve transit optfons in the 2024 SRTP (e.g., on demand deviated routes, electric
fleet expansion, Microtransit, Bus Rapid Transit, and Transit Signal Priority).
➢ Transit Innovation Study (2022) Recommendation 7.2 Pursue Microtransit Mobility
Services - In additfon to traditfonal fixed-route service improvements, there are several
opportunitfes to implement on-demand mobility or fixed-route Microtransit that may
help supplement current service and further expand ridership.
Page 30 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
7
Existfng Conditfons
This sectfon details the existfng transit conditfons in the City of San Luis Obispo. The Transit
Network portfon covers the current transit availability in the City including fixed route, demand -
response service, rail, airline, and intercity bus. The Relevant Study Findings portfon summarizes
informatfon from the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) Unmet Transit Study
and the SLO Transit Short Range Transit Plan.
Transit Network
Fixed Route System
SLO Transit operates eight fixed routes year-round - four numbered routes running
bidirectfonally. “A” routes run in clockwise directfon, while “B” routes run in a counterclockwise
directfon. Due to the significant populatfon increases when Cal Poly is in session, SLO Transit
operates at higher levels of service during the academic year (September to June, known as
“Academic Service”). Cal Poly is transitfoning to a semester calendar beginning fall 2026 which
means SLO Transit’s Academic Service will begin mid-August to align with change. Cal Poly will
also switch to a year-round academic schedule startfng in the 2028-2029 year, and at that tfme
SLO Transit plans to move to operatfng academic service year-round. Currently, during summer,
SLO Transit operates a non-academic schedule which provides slightly reduced service across all
routes.
In additfon to year-round fixed routes, SLO Transit operates one tripper route (Laguna Tripper),
one express route (6X from Cal Poly to Downtown), and a promotfonal Trolley in Downtown San
Luis Obispo. Historically, operatfons have also included a San Luis Tripper, serving San Luis
Obispo High School, and a Highland Tripper serving the Cal Poly campus. These Tripper services
were suspended during the pandemic and have yet to be restored.
Page 31 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
8
Figure 1: SLO Transit Service Map
Service Coverage
As this study addresses potentfal service additfons beginning in Fiscal Year (FY) 2027-28, the
informatfon regarding SLO Transit’s service coverage will be based on SLO Transit’s Academic
Service schedule. Higher frequencies are offered during the Academic Service schedule, as
students attending Cal Poly represent a large portfon of SLO Transit ridership (roughly 60
percent). Plans to transitfon to year-round academic service levels will begin in FY 2028-29, as
Cal Poly plans to transitfon to a year-round academic schedule on that same tfmeline.
Throughout the 7-day week, there are two distfnct service schedules: weekday service and
weekend service. During the weekdays, all eight fixed routes operate, with the “A” routes
operatfng during a larger service window compared to “B” routes. On weekends, only the “A”
Page 32 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
9
routes operate, with a shorter service window compared to the weekdays. Figures 2 and 3
illustrate the service coverage throughout the day for weekday and weekend service.
Figure 2 - SLO Transit Weekday Service by Route and by Hours
Figure 3 - SLO Transit Weekend Service by Route and by Hours
Page 33 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
10
SLO Transit’s service boundary encompasses the City, Cal Poly campus, and the San Luis Obispo
County Airport. In Figure 4 below, a one quarter mile walkshed1 buffer was overlaid on each bus
stop serviced by SLO Transit. Figure 3 illustrates that a large percentage of the residentfal area of
the City are within walkable distance of a bus stop. Based on SLO Transit’s standard for service
coverage, the 2025 SRTP estfmated that two-thirds of residents live within walking distance of a
bus stop.
Figure 4: SLO Transit service area displaying 1/4 mile walkshed in pink
`
1Walkshed is an area reachable from a specified point. One quarter mile is a transit industry standard when looking
at access to transit. On average, this distance can be covered by foot in 10 minutes, and areas that fall within this
boundary are considered a ‘walkable’ distance to and from a bus stop.
Page 34 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
11
Key Takeaways
There are locatfons and tfme windows within SLO Transit’s service boundary that have less
service than others. In relatfon to distance to stops, 34 percent of the populatfon lives further
than one quarter mile from a bus stop according to the SRTP analysis, which may be too far for
some people. Additfonally, some residents may live in areas where service doesn’t start as early
or run as late as they may need. Finally, with only “A” routes operatfng on the weekends,
specific types of trips may be hard to make. This can include cross-town travel or travel a short
distance but, in a counterclockwise directfon (the type of trip typically served by “B” routes). As
described in the SRTP, it is planned to have “B” routes operate on the weekends beginning FY
2026-27, which will improve coverage and service on the weekends but may not address all
weekend transportatfon needs
Demand-Response Transit
There are multfple public demand-response transit services available within the City which are
not operated by SLO Transit. Demand-response transit is defined as flexible, shared transit that
operates without a schedule in response to customer needs. These services include Runabout
Paratransit, Senior Go!, Veterans Express Shuttle, and Dial-a-Ride. These services provide either
door-to-door or curb-to-curb on-demand transit to certain populatfon groups. The tables below
provide a descriptfon of the service including the target audience if applicable, the fare, booking
method, and availability of the service.
Runabout Paratransit
Description Operated by the San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (RTA),
Runabout is San Luis Obispo County’s Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) paratransit program which provides ADA complementary service.
As a regional provider, this service provides the ADA complementary
service for the City of San Luis Obispo. Riders must be ADA certified to
qualify for Runabout service. Pick up and drop-offs are provided within ¾
miles of regular bus routes.
Fare Double the regular one-way fixed route bus for the same trip distance
(Between $2.50 - $11.00).
Booking At minimum, reservations must be made one day in advance and can be
made up to 7 days in advance. Reservations are made by phone.
Availability 7 days a week
Page 35 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
12
Senior Go!
Description Operated by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG).
Available to all seniors (age 65+) in San Luis Obispo County. Up to eight
rides per month are available. Service is door-to-door or curb-to-curb.
Fare Based on distance, starting at $2.50 for up to 5 miles.
Booking Reservations must be made 2-3 days in advance. Reservations are made
by phone.
Availability Monday – Friday 9:00am – 5:00pm
Veterans Express Shuttle
Description Operated by Ride-On Transportation. Available for veterans, providing
rides from their homes to local veteran’s clinics. Service is door-to-door
and offered to veterans with disabilities or veterans with no other means
of transportation. One ride per month, per rider based on current
funding.
Fare $3 each way
Booking Reservations must be made 2-3 days in advance. Reservations made by
phone or on Ride-On’s website.
Availability 7 days a week, 6:30am – 5:00pm
Key Takeaways
Though there are multfple demand-response transit optfons currently available to residents of
San Luis Obispo, all of them serve a specific populatfon and require pre-booking at least 24
hours in advance which can be inconvenient for riders using the service.
Cal Poly Mustang Shuttle: Grocery Shuttle
At the beginning of Cal Poly’s winter quarter in 2025, ASI, in partnership with Campus Health
and Wellbeing, launched a pilot grocery store shuttle. The shuttle takes students from campus
to various grocery stores in San Luis Obispo. This service highlights a need on the Cal Poly
campus for cross-town transit to essentfal services not easily accessible by the SLO Transit
routes currently serving campus.
Cal Poly Grocery Shuttle
Description Operated by Cal Poly and funded through a partnership between Campus
Health and Wellbeing, Associated Students Inc., and Ride-On Transportation
which operates the Mustang Shuttle on campus. The service provides direct
service from campus to various grocery stores in the City of San Luis Obispo.
Fare Free to Cal Poly students with valid PolyCard
Route Three distinct routes provide direct service to different grocery store
locations in the City.
Availability Fridays and Sundays during the academic year, 10:00am – 4:00pm
Page 36 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
13
Regional Transportation
First-mile / last-mile connectfvity involves the short distance to connect people to longer transit
trips. This can include connectfons to intercity buses, like Greyhound, and regional and
interstate rail, like Amtrak. Though not as common - connectfvity to airports can also be
considered a first mile / last-mile connectfon. Table 2 outlines common arrival and departure
tfmes of regional transportatfon from the San Luis Obispo County Airport, located at 975 Airport
Drive, and the San Luis Obispo Train Statfon, located at 1011 Railroad Avenue.
Table 2: Inventory of regional transportation and common connection times
Location Type of Service Notes on arrival/departure patterns
San Luis Obispo County
Airport Flights
High flight volume windows:
Departures - 5:00am-7:30am
Departures / Arrivals – 11:00am – 2:30pm
San Luis Obispo Train
Station
Rail Service (Coast
Starlight)
Departure – 6:00am (SB)
Arrival – 9:00pm (Return)
San Luis Obispo Train
Station
Rail Service
(Pacific Surfliner)
Arrival – 3:25pm (SB), 2:45pm (NB)
Departure – 3:35pm (SB), 3:05pm (NB)
San Luis Obispo Train
Station Amtrak Bus
6-10 buses / day
Southbound departures – morning-midday
Northbound departures - afternoon
Arrivals – midday
San Luis Obispo Train
Station Greyhound Bus
1-2 buses / day
Departures – morning and evening
Arrivals – midday
San Luis Obispo Train
Station Flix Bus
2-4 buses / day
Demand-response service provides higher
service levels during busy times
Departures – morning and afternoon
Arrivals - midday
Key Takeaways
Departures and arrivals via rail, bus, and plane occur throughout the day from the San Luis
Obispo Train Statfon and San Luis Obispo County Airport. Air and train travel is frequent early in
the morning and late evening when SLO Transit operates limited service or no service at all.
Page 37 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
14
Relevant Study Findings
San Luis Obispo Coalitfon of Governments (SLOCOG) 2024/2025 Unmet Transit
Needs Study
Each year, SLOCOG performs an Unmet Transit Needs study. The purpose of the study is to
ensure that any unmet transit needs which are found reasonable to meet are met before
Transportatfon Development Act (TDA) funds expended for non-transit uses.
The three requests listed below were determined to be an unmet need by SLOCOG’s criteria
(criteria listed beneath each item). The items are deemed relevant to the implementatfon of a
Microtransit pilot program due to meetfng SLOCOG’s criteria and multfple community member
requests.
1. Unmet Need: Better transit services to the San Luis Obispo Airport and more frequent
express bus services from the airport to San Luis Obispo and back.
Number of Requests: 5
Criteria Met: Fills gap in service, current need, and service expansion
Relevancy to Microtransit: Describes need for increased service to a specific
point of interest.
2. Unmet Need: Increase the frequency of SLO Transit busses
Number of Requests: 3
Criteria Met: Fills gap in service, current need, and service expansion
Relevancy to Microtransit: Describes a need for increased service across all
operatfonal hours.
3. Unmet Need: Run the B-Routes on weekends
Number of Requests: 6
Criteria Met: Fills gap in service, current need, and service expansion
Relevancy to Microtransit: Describes a need during a partfcular tfme (weekends).
4. Unmet Need: Senior Go/Senior Shutte on Sundays
Number of Requests: 7
Criteria Met: Fills gap in service, current need, and service expansion
Page 38 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
15
Relevancy to Microtransit: Describes a need during a partfcular tfme (weekends).
Though the Senior Go service is not operated by SLO Transit, it is a service
provided within the boundaries of the City.
Key Takeaways
A high number of respondents requested express or shuttle service, including specifically to the
SLO Airport. Additfonally, increased service on the weekends was requested by multfple
residents.
Short Range Transit Plan
The 2025 Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) provided detailed assessments and recommendatfons
for improvement of SLO Transit’s service. The relevant demographic takeaways from the plan
are highlighted below.
Key Takeaways:
There are multfple findings in the SRTP relevant to the development of a Microtransit pilot.
Demographic analysis found that from 2020-2030, the number of ‘mature retfrees’ (75-84 years
old) is predicted to grow 61%. As seniors are known to use transit at a higher rate than the
overall populatfon, this will mean an increased demand for transit optfons in the City into the
next decade. It is noted that Cal Poly is planning to increase enrollment an additfonal 5,000
students by 2035, with an increase in on -campus residents from 8,000-15,000. This increase in
on-campus residents may mean an increase in demand for transportatfon optfons from Cal Poly
Students. A Transit Needs Index shows that the highest need areas of the City are downtown
and the southern-central area. Figure 5 shows a map from the SRTP of the Transit Needs Index.
Page 39 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
16
Figure 5 – San Luis Obispo Transit Needs Index. Source: 2025 SRTP
Page 40 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
17
Microtransit Overview
The Federal Transit Administratfon (FTA) defines Microtransit as a technology-enabled service
that uses multf-passenger vehicles to provide on-demand services with dynamically generated
routfng within a designated service area. For the purpose of this study, a simplified definitfon
will be used: Microtransit is an on-demand transportation service that uses multi-passenger
vehicles within a designated service area. Riders can request a trip through a mobile app or by
calling a dispatcher, and routes are created in real tfme based on rider requests. It could be
thought of as a ‘community shuttle’ public service.
Public transit agencies choose to implement Microtransit for a variety of reasons. Use cases
typically fall into three categories: providing first-mile / last-mile connectfons to fixed route-
services, expansion of service coverage/hours, or replacing underperforming fixed routes. This
chapter details specific service delivery types, how Microtransit can complement other transit
optfons, and a selectfon of case studies of peer citfes.
Operations Overview
Microtransit is an on-demand, flexible, and shared form of public transportatfon. Vehicles used
as part of a Microtransit program can range anywhere from Americans with Disabilitfes Act
(ADA)-accessible minivans, passenger vehicles, to small busses – with the carrying capacity
ranging from 4 – 15 riders. Often, these vehicles are electric to help advance the operatfng
agency’s greenhouse gas emission reductfon goals.
Riders request Microtransit services primarily through a smartphone applicatfon, though
booking by phone call is also available. How long a rider waits for a ride is determined by
demand throughout the system, but agencies can set a maximum allowable wait tfme as a
success metric, often 30 minutes. Once a rider is picked up, onboard technology dynamically
routes the vehicle. This dynamic routfng allows for efficient trips between riders’ origin and
destfnatfon, while picking up other riders along the way. Figure 6 illustrates the basics of
requests a ride through a Microtransit service.
Figure 6: Microtransit Basics
Page 41 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
18
Service Models
Service model refers to the design and approach of how Microtransit is provided within a given
community. Assuming Microtransit service meets the elements defined above (on-demand,
flexibly routed, and shared), the differentfatfng element is the travel pattern and stop type. Due
to the flexibility of the technology-enabled routfng of Microtransit, many variatfons of can be
created to fit the community’s transportatfon needs. The three models relevant to the City of
San Luis Obispo are: Zone-Based, Point-to-Point, Zone-Based with External Nodes, and Point
Deviatfon.
Zone-Based with Point-Point (Anywhere-to-
Anywhere Service - Within a Zone): Riders can
request a trip between almost any two places
within a defined service area. Pickups and
drop-offs may happen at nearby corners, the
curb, or right at your door, depending on the
locatfon.
Page 42 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
19
Zone-Based with External Nodes (Anywhere-
to-Anywhere with Key Destfnatfons Outside
the Area): This works like the anywhere-to-
anywhere service within the main service
area, but also includes select destfnatfons
outside the area, such as an airport or major
hub, where riders can be picked up or
dropped off.
Zone-Based with Service Hubs (Key
Destfnatfons Service): Trips connect riders to
a set of popular community destfnatfons, like
transit centers, shopping areas, medical
offices, community centers, or downtown. A
trip can either start anywhere in the zone
and end at a service hub or start at a service
hub and end anywhere in the zone.
Service Model Key Terms
o Virtual Stop: pick-up/drop-off limited to specific stops, often designated along higher
traffic through streets. Though these types of stops require riders to walk, agencies can
determine a maximum walking distance to balance convenience for riders and
operatfonal efficiency.
o Door-to-door: pick-up/drop-off occurs at the doorstep of the locatfon requested.
Page 43 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
20
o Curb-to-curb: service where pick-up/drop-off occurs at the curb of the locatfon
requested. This can also occur at the nearest cross-street intersectfon.
o Shared Ride / Pooled Trip: multfple passengers sharing the same vehicle as they are
routed to their individual destfnatfons.
Operational Models
Operatfonal model refers to the logistfcs, mechanisms, and technology used to deliver
Microtransit. The two common operatfonal models can be described as Software as a Service
(SaaS) and Turnkey.
o Software as a Service is a model where Microtransit operatfons are publicly
regulated and operated. A transit agency partners with a vendor to provide on-board
routfng and customer-facing smartphone applicatfon technology. Vehicles are owned
by the transit agency, and drivers and dispatchers are employees of the transit
agency.
o Turnkey is a model which is publicly regulated but privately operated. A transit
agency enters an agreement with a private company that provides not only
technology, but vehicles, drivers, and dispatchers as well. In some cases, agencies
will opt for two different providers: one for technology and one for operatfons
(vehicles and drivers).
o This is the model recommended in Short-Range Transit Plan for the City’s pilot
program, as it limits investment in capital and operational resources and can
be deployed quickly
Interaction with Existing Transit Services
Fixed Route
While fixed route services operate on a set schedule and specified route, Microtransit is flexible
and dynamically routed to fit the riders’ needs. Microtransit can serve as a first-mile / last-mile
solutfon for residents by providing rides to and from fixed-route bus stops. Additfonally,
Microtransit can provide a transit optfon during tfmes when fixed route services are not
operatfng, like early morning and late evening.
When designing Microtransit service zones, it is important that it provides a complement to
fixed-route services. To prevent drawing riders from fixed route, some agencies implement the
following operatfonal/service elements:
Page 44 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
21
o Design Microtransit service zones so they do not duplicate the service corridors of
fixed-route services.
o Use technology-based tools which can prohibit riders from booking a ride that could
be taken by fixed route. Such tools can instead prompt riders to use the fixed-route
service.
o Limit the overlap between fixed-route service hours and Microtransit service hours
Paratransit
Paratransit is a service that provides individual, demand-response transit services to people
with disabilitfes. This service is offered as a comparable service to fixed routes in accordance
with the American with Disabilitfes Act, for those unable to use fixed route services. Most
paratransit services require booking at least 24 hours in advance by phone. Unlike paratransit ,
which requires pre-booking, Microtransit service can provide an immediate on-demand transit
optfon for people with disabilitfes.
Comingling: This is when a fixed-route provider integrates their preexistfng paratransit service
with Microtransit. Transit agencies can contract with a single on-demand operator or operate in-
house. Comingled services provide paratransit as a comparable service during all fixed -route
operatfonal hours and additfonally provide Microtransit during designated tfmes and in
designated zones. For some agencies, this shared service can be more cost effectfve than
providing or contractfng separate paratransit and Microtransit services.
Cost and Fares
Operatfonal Costs
Public transit is usually funded through a combinatfon of federal, state and local funding,
combined with fare revenues. In general, on-demand transit provides a significantly lower
farebox recovery (the percent of the operatfon cost covered by fares), due to the lower average
passenger trips per hour. An industry-standard metric used to assess the cost of providing
transit service is cost per vehicle per revenue hour. The average cost to operate a turn-key
Microtransit service is $109 per vehicle per revenue hours based on a review of multfple transit
agencies. The agencies inventoried were selected based on availability of operatfonal cost
informatfon, see in Table 3.
Page 45 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
22
Table 3: Inventory of cost per vehicle revenue hour for various U.S. based Microtransit services.
Agency /
Service Location Cost per Vehicle
Revenue Hour Type of Source
L.A. Metro Los Angeles County, CA $102 Performance Report
Lextran Lexington, Kentucky $95 Feasibility Study
SacRT Sacramento, CA $138 Performance Report
BRITE Central Shenandoah
Valley, VA $80 Feasibility Study
Breeze
OnDemand Sarasota County, FL $132 Regional Transit
System NTD Analysis
Average Cost $109
Fares
Fares for Microtransit can be established based on agency goals. To align with the goal to
increase transit ridership in the City, fares should be an accessible price. Additfonal
consideratfons are fiscal responsibility and comparison to private and subsidized demand-
response optfons in the area. Most agencies choose to offer discounts on Microtransit fares to
those riders who qualify for fixed-route discount passes like seniors and persons with
disabilitfes. Fares for Microtransit service provided by agencies in California range from free, to
$2-$6 per ride. Fare collectfon most often occurs through a mobile applicatfon, though
Microtransit vehicles are often equipped with fareboxes to allow for cash payment upon
boarding.
Table 4: Inventory of Microtransit fares at various agencies in the U.S.
Agency Location Fare
Santa Barbara Municipal Transit District Santa Barbara, CA $3
North County Transit District San Diego, CA $2.50
L.A. Metro Los Angeles, CA $2.50
Sacramento Regional Transit Sacramento, CA $2.50
Redding Area Bus Authority Redding, CA $2
Santa Maria Regional Transit Santa Maria, CA Currently free, $6
planned fare
City of Whittier Whittier Cruiser $3
Sacramento Regional Transit Sacramento County,
CA $2.50
Page 46 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
23
Equity and Access
Microtransit can provide a more accessible transit network in a variety of ways. It can functfon
as a supplement to existfng paratransit, by providing a more flexible and immediately on-
demand form of transportatfon for riders with disabilitfes. Additfonally, it can be a transit optfon
to those with limited mobility and/or access to vehicles, like seniors, youth, or those who don’t
own a car. In a technical assistance brief from the Natfonal Center on Aging and Disability
Transportatfon Center tftled Microtransit Accessibility, key consideratfons are presented for
planning for an equitable Microtransit service. Below are the three consideratfons from the
report:
o Is the average wait tfme between ride request and pickup about the same as for
those who use wheelchairs or other mobility devices vs. riders who do not?
o Is the app to book and track rides accessible to screen-readers, meetfng accessibility
standards?
o Are the Microtransit drivers trained to assist riders with disabilitfes that are both
apparent and hidden?
Case Studies
Santa Barbara Municipal Transit District – The Wave Microtransit
Santa Barbara Metropolitan Transit District (SBMTD) launched ‘The Wave,’ a Microtransit
program serving the Goleta and University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB) area in May of
2025. The Wave was launched as a one-year pilot program, and serves a Microtransit zone, with
additfonal drop-off locatfons including Santa Barbara Airport. Similar to the relatfonship
between SLO Transit and Cal Poly, SBMTD and UCSB have an agreement which allows students
to ride the fixed-route buses for free. In the case of SBMTD’s agreement with the university, the
agreement does not include Microtransit services, so students are required to pay the standard
fare of $3 per ride.
Table 5: Santa Barbara Case Study
Santa Barbara Municipal Transit District – The Wave
Hours of Operation 10 am – 6 pm
Tuesday through Sunday
Fare Regular Fare: $3. Discount pass holders: $1.50
Booking Method Mobile App or Phone Call
Service Delivery Model Zone-Based with external Nodes
Operational Model Turnkey
Page 47 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
24
Figure 7 - SBMTD Microtransit Zones & Pick-up/Drop-off Points. Source: SBMTD.
Key Takeaways
Relevancy to San Luis Obispo: The Wave demonstrates how an agency can use Microtransit to
serve the area surrounding a university in additfon to an airport on the edge of town.
o Zone-Based with External Nodes: Combines two Microtransit zones with additfonal drop-
off / pick-up locatfons including UCSB and Santa Barbara Airport
o Service agreement with UCSB does not include rides on the Wave – students must pay
full price.
Santa Maria Regional Transit– SMRT Micro
Santa Maria Regional Transit (SMRT) launched the SMRT Micro service in September 2024. The
service is designed to provide a transit optfon to residents in the evening when fixed route does
not operate. Initfally, the service was offered on the weekdays, and a year later weekend service
was added. In conversatfon with SMRT staff, it was noted that an important feature of the
service is that it is door-to-door, which provides convenience and safety to riders using the
service in the evening.
Page 48 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
25
Table 6: Santa Maria Case Study
Santa Maria Regional Transit – SMRT Micro
Hours of Operation 8:30 pm – 10:30 pm
Monday through Sunday
Fare Currently: Free
Planned fare: $6 / ride. Discount pass holders: $3 / ride.
Booking Method Mobile App or Phone Call
Service Delivery Model 24 square-mile operation zone
Operational Model In-house operations
Figure 8: SMRT Microtransit Zone (entire light shaded area). Source: SMRT
Key Takeaways
Relevancy to San Luis Obispo: SMRT Micro is an example of how a transit agency can use
Microtransit to fill a service gap in the evenings.
o The service was launched during the weekdays but now includes weekends. The highest
demand is stfll on weekdays.
Page 49 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
26
o Fare structure provides half-off discount to all discount pass holders (i.e. seniors, riders
with disabilitfes). SMRT compared fixed route fares with private on-demand ride costs
(Uber, Lyft) to find a fare that was reasonable for riders.
Sacramento Regional Transit – SacRT Flex
Sacramento Regional Transit launched SacRT Flex in January 2025. This service replaced a
previous pilot that was deemed not fiscally feasible by SacRT due to grant funding ending. This
new service – SacRT Flex – is a Microtransit service that is limited in availability to eligible riders.
Eligibility is open to persons of low-income, seniors, and those with disabilitfes. Minors aged 13-
17 with low-income parents can register as well.
Table 7: SacRT Case Study
Sacramento Regional Transit – SacRT Felx
Hours of Operation 7 am – 7 pm
Monday through Friday
Fare Regular fare: $2.50
Booking Method Mobile App or Phone Call
Service Delivery Model Zone-Based
Operational Model Turnkey
Key Takeaways
Relevancy to San Luis Obispo: This case study serves as an example of how an agency may
contfnue to offer a Microtransit service on a more limited basis when pilot funding expires.
o An initfal proposal to provide vouchers to ride-hailing companies like Uber and Lyft to
eligible customers was cancelled. Community feedback emphasized that such a model
would limit accessibility to those with disabilitfes or service animals.
City of Whittier - Whittier Cruiser
The Whittier Cruiser is a pilot program in the City of Whittier. The service utflizes small electric
passenger vehicles and provides rides within a single designated zone within the city. To
accommodate groups, group fares are capped at $6, with an individual fare costfng $3 .
Table 8: City of Whittier Case Study
City of Whittier – Whittier Cruiser
Hours of Operation 10 am – 10 pm
Wednesday through Sunday
Fare $3
Booking Method Mobile App
Service Delivery Model Zone-Based
Operational Model Turnkey
Page 50 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
27
Key Takeaways
Relevancy to San Luis Obispo: The Whittier Cruiser is an example of a pilot service in a city
which covers a limited geographic area and has potentfal to expand.
o All-electric vehicles provide a zero-emissions Microtransit service, but do not have
wheelchair accessibility.
o The feasibility study was funded by the developer of a new neighborhood, and the
Cruiser provides service to this neighborhood and the surrounding area.
Figure 9: City of Whittier Microtransit Zones & Pick-
up/Drop-off Points. Source: City of Whittier.
Page 51 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
28
Community Engagement
Outreach for the Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study was based on the City’s Public
Engagement and Notfcing Manual, and the communicatfon objectfve for this study is
collaboration with the public. This is reflected in survey materials and pop-up events which
asked community members to describe where and how they would want a Microtransit pilot
program implemented in the City. Five outreach elements comprised the community
engagement for this project. These outreach elements included pop-up events, a Microtransit
survey, stakeholder meetfngs, a study session with the City’s Mass Transportatfon Committee,
and outreach to community partner organizatfons. The goal of the outreach effort was to better
understand what service delivery model and operatfonal parameters will best serve the
community’s needs.
Outreach Events
Pop-Up Events
Pop-up style outreach events were held to promote a Microtransit survey and answer questfons
about Microtransit. Seventy-three total survey responses were received as a product of these
pop-ups. Beyond survey responses, numerous community members partfcipated at the pop-up
by having discussions about Microtransit and interactfng the with mapping actfvity. It is
estfmated that 100 total engagements were made across these events. The pop-ups were held
at the following locatfons:
Downtown San Luis Obispo Transit Center -October 10, 2025
San Luis Obispo Senior Center October 21 & 22, 2025
Cal Poly Campus October 22, 2025
Page 52 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
29
Map Actfvity
A mapping actfvity collected informatfon from partfcipants about points of interest throughout
SLO Transit’s service area. Forty-eight individuals took part in the actfvity. Partfcipants were
asked to place a green pin where they would start a Microtransit trip and a red pin where they
would be dropped off. Figure 10 shows partfcipants taking part in the mapping actfvity. Figure
11 is a heat map of points of interest collected at all the pop-ups combined. This heat map
illustrates patterns of where partfcipants were interested in travelling to with Microtransit. It
can be seen on the heat map that downtown, Cal Poly campus, and the Madonna shopping, and
the San Luis Obispo County Airport area are all popular points of interest
Figure 10 - Mapping Activity at Cal Poly Pop-up Event
Page 53 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
30
Figure 11: Heat map illustrating points of interest collected during outreach map activity.
Page 54 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
31
Survey
An eight-questfon survey was created to gauge interest in Microtransit. The survey provided an
overview of Microtransit and asked questfons about how residents would use the service if it
was available. A total of 102 survey responses were received. Four pop-up events, listed above,
were held to promote the survey and encourage partfcipatfon. Additfonally, the survey was
promoted via fliers posted on board City busses and promoted through email communicatfons
with Community Partner Organizatfons.
It is important to note the results of this survey reflect the needs of residents who are likely
more transit-dependent than the overall populatfon of the city. This is due to the survey being
promoted at pop-ups meant to reach people more likely to be transit dependent: seniors at the
San Luis Obispo Senior Citfzens Center, college students and Cal Poly, and transit riders and the
Downtown Transit Center.
Survey Results
Question: Do you have reliable access to a
personal vehicle?
Of respondents surveyed, 52% of
respondents did not have access to a reliable
personal vehicle. The 2023 Census American
Communitfes Survey indicates that only 7% of
households in the City of San Luis Obispo do
not have a vehicle available. The difference in
access to a personal vehicle between
respondents and residents indicates that,
respondents were more likely to be transit dependent. This is likely due to the survey being
promoted at pop-ups where populatfons of high transit ridership can be found: the Downtown
Transit Center, the San Luis Obispo Senior Citfzen’s Center, and Cal Poly San Luis Obispo.
48%52%
Yes
No
Page 55 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
32
Question: What forms of transportation do you currently use to travel around the City? (Select
all that apply)
Respondents were prompted to select all that apply. The mode of transportatfon selected by
most respondents was walking, followed by bus, personal vehicle, ride-hailing, and finally
biking. As indicated in the response above, many respondents rely on modes of transportatfon
other than personal vehicles.
Question: If Microtransit was an option, would you utilize this service?
Nearly all respondents – 99% - expressed interest in
using Microtransit if it was available as an optfon
(responding either “yes” or “maybe”).
44
64 69
18
36
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Personal
Vehicle
Bus Walking Biking Ride
Hailing
Services
(Taxi, Uber,
Lyft, ect.)
Re
s
p
o
n
s
e
T
o
t
a
l
73%
26%
Yes No Maybe
Page 56 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
33
Question: Which types of trips would you utilize Microtransit for? (Select all that apply)
Respondents were prompted to select all that apply. Responses to this questfon indicate that
many respondents would use Microtransit to access essentfal services as well as recreatfon and
leisure actfvitfes. Though several respondents indicated they would utflize Microtransit for
commutfng, this was the least common response.
Question: Would you use Microtransit to
connect to bus routes in the City of San Luis
Obispo (SLO Transit) or Regional Transit (RTA)?
More than half of respondents indicated they
would use Microtransit to connect to other
existfng transit services (64%). Additfonally,
26% said they would be consider (“maybe”)
using Microtransit for such connectfons. This
result indicates a high interest in using
Microtransit as a first-mile / last-mile
connectfon for transit within the City.
36
27
78 74
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Re
s
p
o
n
s
e
T
o
t
a
l
Commuting to work
Commuting to school
Accessing essential
services (groceries,
medical appointments,
ect.)
Accessing recreation or
leisure activities
(arts & entertainment /
parks & open space)
64%14%
26%
Yes No Maybe
Page 57 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
34
Question: When during the week would you most likely use Microtransit?
When asked when during the week they would
most likely use Microtransit, many
respondents indicated they would use the
service throughout the week. Those indicatfng
either weekends or weekdays were split
almost evenly, representfng 22% and 19%,
respectfvely. These results indicate no clear
preference between weekend and weekday
service.
Question: What time of day would you most likely use Microtransit? (Select all that apply)
Early
Morning:
Before 8am
Morning: 8am
-12pm
Afternoon:
12pm -6pm
Evening:
6pm -9pm
Late Evening:
After 9pm
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Nu
m
b
e
r
o
f
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
s
22%
19%
59%
Weekdays
Weekends
Both Weekdays and Weekends
Page 58 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
35
Respondents were prompted to select all that apply. Many people selected all tfme windows,
but the results indicate that mid-day service (between 12:00pm and 6:00pm) had the highest
number of responses with a slight preference for late evening service compared to early
morning service. It is important to note this is during operatfonal hours of SLO Transit fixed-
route service.
Selected Comments
Below are a selectfon of comments representfng a range of feedback from the comment sectfon
of the survey. Overall, respondents expressed interest in Microtransit while also voicing
concerns about cost. The full selectfon of survey comments can be found in Appendix A.
This sounds like an awesome project. I hope that it comes to fruition. I do not own a
personal vehicle and commute primarily by foot, so having more transportation options
would be very helpful.
I commute from Los Osos to SLO, and the bus stop isn't near my work. Even with the SLO
Transit. During the day when I have meetings or appointments that I need to get to in
SLO it’s hard to because of the timing of the bus routes. I would like to commute by bus,
rather than drive but it’s just so inconvenient when I need to get around for work
meetings etc.
LOVE THIS! I gave up my car 5 years ago to be more ecofriendly living in SLO, but Uber is
expensive, when buses aren’t running.
Especially on weekends when the 4B and 3B busses don’t run it’s really hard to get home
I work for a Supported Employment Program where a major barrier to employment is
transportation. My people have had to not accept employment because the work hours
fall outside the regular scheduled RTA services. Micro transit services will improve their
quality of life and is necessary for them to work.
I do work when the busses don't work. It takes 1 hour and 10 minutes to get to work
I am 87 yrs... Be 88 in May 2026. drive only days now. Will stop driving in spring 2026.
would like door to door service to dr. apt, errands, evening concerts at PAC
Would love to see, only one question about it, how much would it be for students and
seniors?
Page 59 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
36
Stakeholder Meetings
Stakeholder meetfngs were held throughout the development of this report to discuss the
Microtransit Pilot Program. Through conversatfons with the various stakeholders listed below,
feedback and recommendatfons were collected.
Takeaways from stakeholder meetings:
o San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (RTA)
o The City of Morro Bay considered implementfng Microtransit, and it was too
costly for their situatfon.
o It was recommended that a turn-key operatfon would be the most effectfve way
to pilot Microtransit in the City.
o San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG)
o It was discussed that transit-dependent populatfons should be considered when
developing a pilot program.
o Noted that often Microtransit programs are funded through consolidatfng low-
performing fixed routes.
o City’s Office of Sustainability
o It was recommended the pilot program is designed to be iteratfve so it can evolve
based on demand throughout the course of the pilot.
o San Luis Obispo County Airport Office of Sustainability
o There is high demand for transit optfons to and from the airport, especially
during the early morning hours when fixed route does not operate.
o Visit SLOCAL
o In a Destfnatfon Management Strategy SLOCAL was part of developing, first-
mile/last-mile transportatfon was a recommendatfon. The group has since then
focused in on on-demand transportatfon optfons from the San Luis Obispo
County Airport.
o Based on feedback they received from a survey of travelers at the San Luis
Obispo County Airport that Visit SLOCAL was part of, there is high demand for on-
demand transit optfons from the airport.
o If an evening alternatfve is selected, it was recommended that it operated untfl
12:30am or later, to accommodate travelers arriving on the late night flights
which get in at midnight.
Page 60 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
37
Community Partner Outreach
Community partner organizatfons help City staff connect with specific stakeholders and groups
in the City. During the spring, community partner organizatfons were contacted by email, and
provided a link to the Microtransit Survey to share with their clients. One organizatfon, CAPSLO,
reached out for more informatfon, and a meetfng was held to answer questfons and learn more
about the needs of the community CAPSLO serves at 40 Prado Homeless Services Center.
The following community partner organizatfons were contacted during the Spring outreach
phase:
Lumina Alliance, Race Matters, SLO GALA, Transitions Mental Health Association, SLO Disabled
Veterans, SLO County UndocuSupport, San Luis Coastal Unified School District, Latino Outreach
Council, and SLO People’s Kitchen.
Outreach Meetfng
Below are the key takeaways from meetfng held with the community partner organizatfon
which requested more informatfon about the Microtransit Pilot Program.
CAPSLO / 40 Prado
Many clients of 40 Prado cannot afford fixed route, so operatfng this as a free service
would be ideal
Many clients do have access to cell phones, but there are also phones available for client
use during the day
Weekends and holidays when fixed route does not operate are vital to increase transit
service
Important locatfons to serve: San Luis Obispo County Probatfon Department, San Luis
Obispo County Drug and Alcohol Services, Community Health Centers locatfons, French
and Sierra Vista Hospitals
During tfmes when warming and cooling centers are actfvated, this would be a great
service to connect unhoused people with these resources.
If the service cannot be offered for free it would be great to have vouchers that could be
distributed to clients in need, like the 1-ride bus passes provided to 40 Prado by the City.
Mass Transportation Committee Study Session
On Wednesday, January 14th a study session item a was presented at the Mass Transportatfon
Committee meetfng about the status of the Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study. The
item covered the background sectfons of the report, as well as initfal alternatfves for discussion
by the committee.
Page 61 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
38
Committee Feedback
Committee feedback was based on initfal service alternatfves presente d, which can be found in
the agenda packet for the January 14, 2026, Mass Transportatfon Committee meetfng. The
alternatfves focused on evening service, morning service, or weekend service. The following are
the key takeaways from the committee discussion:
An evening service should overlap with the last hour or so of the fixed route service and
run past midnight.
Preference for either early morning or late evening service, over weekend service. They
concurred that ideally both morning and evening service could be operated during the
pilot.
Highlighted that Microtransit is a great resource for those with disabilitfes, especially for
those who currently pay for private demand-response services like Uber or Lyft late at
night when fixed route does not operate
The weekend service was least preferred, because it had the potentfal to overlap greatly
with fixed route once B routes are implemented on the weekend.
Service Alternatfves
This sectfon outlines Operatfonal Elements and Service Alternatfves for a Microtransit pilot
program.
Operational Elements
Below are the operatfonal elements that all recommended Service Alternatfves share. These
elements were established based on recommendatfons in the SRTP, established industry best
practfces, and relevancy to San Luis Obispo.
o Operational Model: A turnkey model is the assumed operatfonal model for all
alternatfves, as recommended in the SRTP. A turnkey model means that the City
entering a contract with a Microtransit service provider for operatfons
throughout the pilot period. This provider supplies vehicles, software, and
employs staff (drivers and dispatchers) needed to operate the program. As
discussed further in the Pilot Program Implementation sectfon, the agreement
should include stfpulatfons which allow SLO Transit’s staff to access ridership and
operatfonal data and modify the service design throughout the course of the
pilot period.
Page 62 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
39
o Pilot Length: A two-year pilot is assumed for all alternatfves, as recommended by
the SRTP. This length of pilot allows residents to become familiar with the
service, and for the service to evolve over tfme based on rider needs.
o Service Model: Two alternatfves are zone-based, while one alternatfve is zone-
based with service hubs.
o Fares: One-way trips are recommended to have a fare of $3 per trip, which is
double the cost of the regular fixed-route fare on SLO Transit. Accessibly priced
fares allow all residents to utflize Microtransit as a service. It is recommended
that current SLO Transit pass-holders (Seniors, riders with disabilitfes, and K-12
students) receive a discount on the established fare. Additfonally, it is
recommended Cal Poly students pay full fare, as the Microtransit Pilot Program
will provide a service outside of the intuitfonal agreement with Cal Poly.
o Vehicles: It is recommended that electric vehicles (EVs) are used, as this
advances the City’s greenhouse gas emission goals. The landscape of EVs suitable
for Microtransit is currently evolving, and specifically the availability of ADA
accessible EVs. It is important to ensure that the Microtransit fleet has an ADA
accessible vehicle always operatfng during service.
o Geographic Coverage: For each of the proposed alternatfves, geographic
coverage encompasses the entfrety of the SLO Transit service area.
o Service Name: The name “Hopper” was picked as an example of a playful name
which elicits the idea of being able to get from one place to the next, anywhere
in the city.
Service Alternatives
Three service alternatfves are provided as service optfons for a Microtransit pilot program. The
alternatfves are based on a synthesis of service gaps and transit needs, based on the
assumptfon that a Microtransit Pilot should serve those existfng needs. The service gaps and
transit needs are discussed in detail in the Existing Conditions sectfon of the report.
The identffied service gaps and needs are the following:
1. Additfonal evening and weekend service when fixed route is limited
2. Additfonal service to the San Luis Obispo County Airport and San Luis Obispo
Train Statfon, partfcularly in the early morning
3. Increased service mid-day to supplement existfng door-to-door service for
seniors and others without vehicle access.
Page 63 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
40
Ridership and Cost Analysis
Ridership and cost analysis were developed with the use of the transit analysis software Remix.
This software was provided as a complimentary 6-month subscriptfon by the technology
company Via Transportatfon, Inc. (Via). Via provides software and operatfons services to public
transit agencies including Microtransit services. Remix describes their ridership predictfon
model as being “developed based on hundreds on on-demand zones around the world.”
Additfonal factors considered in their ridership predictfons include populatfon, demographics,
housing, jobs, worker demographics, car ownership, walkability, and key points of interest.
Alternative 1: The Evening Hopper
This alternatfve is similar to the alternatfve recommended in the Short Range Transit Plan
(SRTP). The changes to this alternatfve include operatfng Monday through Sunday and having
slightly extended hours as recommended by the Mass Transportatfon Committee. Additfonally,
the SRTP called for this service to run on an Academic Schedule – this alternatfve is for year-
round operatfon as SLO Transit will move to year-round service startfng in 2028. This is a point-
to-point zoned based model with one external hub at the San Luis Obispo Airport.
Figure 12: Service Alternative 1 - Evening Hopper
Page 64 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
41
Key Benefits: Fills an existfng service gap when fixed route service is limited. The coverage area
is City-wide, so it will be equally accessible. Provides connectfons to regional transit like the San
Luis Obispo County Airport and San Luis Obispo Train Statfon. Evening service can provide rides
to downtown SLO businesses and restaurant for staff and customers.
Considerations: Staffing late shifts may be challenging. Potentfal for high demand as it serves as
an evening tfme low-cost alternatfve to other demand-response optfons like Uber and Lyft. High
demand can cause increased wait tfmes.
Ridership and Cost Estimates
The following Ridership and Operatfonal Cost Estfmates were calculated with the transit
planning software Remix. The software utflizes data from hundreds of existfng demand-response
services in combinatfon with demographic and economic data to estfmate ridership.
Operatfonal cost is calculated using the base cost of $90 per vehicle hour which is based on the
combinatfon of case studies from this report and Remix’s cost estfmate.
Service Overview: Table 9 lists the key service elements for Alternatfve 1: Evening Hopper as
calculated in Remix.
Table 9: Service Alternative 1 overview
Vehicles at
Peak
Rides per
Vehicle Hour
Base Cost per
Vehicle
Revenue Hour
Average
Wait Time
Average Trip
Distance
4 Vehicles 1.9 rides $90 20 Minutes 3.9 miles
Ridership and Cost: Table 10 shows the operatfonal cost and ridership estfmates calculated in
Remix.
Table 10: Service Alternative 1 cost and ridership estimates
Daily Yearly
Operational Cost $1,620 $589,700
Ridership 34 12,134
Vehicle Hours (Number of vehicles in
service x hours of service) 18 6,552
Page 65 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
42
Alternative 2: The Morning Hopper
This alternatfve is presented to address the need for service early in the morning before fixed
route operates. This is a point-to-point zoned based model with one external hub at the San Luis
Obispo Airport.
Figure 13: Service Alternative 2 - Morning Hopper
Key Benefits: Fills an existfng service gap, when fixed route service is limited. The coverage area
is City-wide, so it will be equally accessible. Provides connectfons to regional transit like the San
Luis Obispo County Airport and San Luis Obispo Train Statfon.
Considerations: Staffing early shifts may be challenging. Though this service was requested by
the public as part of various outreach efforts, it has potentfal to have low demand due to very
early morning hours.
Page 66 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
43
Ridership and Cost Analysis
The following Ridership and Operatfonal Cost Analysis were calculated with the transit planning
software Remix. The software utflizes data from hundreds of existfng demand-response services
in combinatfon with demographic and economic data to estfmate ridership. Operatfonal cost is
calculated using the base cost of $90 per vehicle hour which is based on the combinatfon of
case studies from this report and Remix’s cost estfmate.
Service Overview: Table 11 lists the key service elements for Alternatfve 2: Morning Hopper as
calculated in Remix.
Table 11: Service Alternative 2 overview
Vehicles at
Peak
Rides per
Vehicle Hour
Base Cost per
Vehicle
Revenue Hour
Average
Wait Time
Average Trip
Distance
4 Vehicles 2.8 rides $90 20 Minutes 3.6 miles
Ridership and Cost: Table 12 shows the operatfonal cost and ridership estfmates for Alternatfve
2: Morning Hopper calculated in Remix.
Table 12: Service Alternative 2 cost and ridership estimates
Daily Yearly
Operational Cost $1,440 $524,200
Ridership 44 16,178
Vehicle Hours (Number of vehicles in
service x hours of service) 16 5,824
Page 67 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
44
Alternative 3: The Weekend Hopper
This alternatfve provides service City-wide, Friday through Sunday, with service hubs allowing
point-to-anywhere service. This means rides must either start or end at these service hubs.
Though not as flexible for riders, this service model can increase efficiency and decrease waitfng
tfmes. The service window covers the same tfme fixed route operates on weekends.
Figure 14: Service Alternative 3 - Weekend Hopper
Key Benefits: Provides increased weekend service. The coverage area is City-wide, so it will be
equally accessible. Service hub model decreases likelihood of conflict with fixed route service
because rides are more restricted.
Considerations: Has potentfal to pull ridership from fixed route as service window is the same as
fixed route. Additfonally, there is potentfal to conflict with the planned implementatfon of “B”
routes on weekends.
Ridership and Cost Estimates
The following Ridership and Operatfonal Cost Analysis were calculated with the transit planning
software Remix. The software utflizes data from hundreds of existfng demand-response services
in combinatfon with demographic and economic data to estfmate ridership. Operatfonal cost is
Page 68 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
45
calculated using the base cost of $90 per vehicle hour which is based on the combinatfon of
case studies from this report and Re mix’s cost estfmate.
Service Overview: Table 13 lists the key service elements for Alternatfve 3: Weekend Hopper, as
calculated in Remix.
Table 13: Service Alternative overview
Vehicles at
Peak
Rides per
Vehicle Hour
Base Cost per
Vehicle
Revenue Hour
Average
Wait Time
Average Trip
Distance
4 Vehicles 2.2 rides $90 20 Minutes 3.9 miles
Ridership and Cost: Table 14 shows the operatfonal cost and ridership estfmates for Alternatfve
3: Weekend Hooper, as calculated in Remix.
Table 14: Service Alternative 3 cost and ridership estimates
Daily Yearly
Operational Cost $5,400 $561,600
Ridership 133 13,867
Vehicle Hours (Number of vehicles in
service x hours of service) 60 6,240
Page 69 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
46
Alternatives Comparison
Each of these service alternatfves to pilot a Microtransit service in the City provide service
during a known service gap. These alternatfves are intended to be a jumping off point for the
design of a pilot in the future. Upon selectfon of a Microtransit service provider, more detailed
estfmates can be generated, and service designs refined to meet specific goals. Table 15 shows
the key elements of each three alternatfves together to allow for comparison. The following
sectfons discuss important performance metrics used to measure Microtransit service, and key
features of designing an iteratfve pilot program.
Table 15: Service Alternative Comparison Table
Alternative 1:
Evening Hopper
Alternative 2:
Morning Hopper
Alternative 3:
Weekend Hopper
Geographic Coverage City-wide City-wide City-wide
Service Window Late Night
(8pm – 12:30am)
Early Morning
(4am - 8am)
All Day
(8am - 8pm)
Days of Week Monay - Sunday Monday - Sunday Saturday - Sunday
Service Delivery Model Zone-based
point-to-point
Zone-based
point-to-point
Zone-based
With Service Hubs
Estimated Trips per
Year
12,134 16,178 13,867
Estimated Operational
Cost
$589,700 $524,200 $561,600
Pilot Program Implementatfon
Microtransit is an inherently data-rich transit service due to the tech platiorm used by operators
to dispatch and route vehicles; and the rider platiorm used to request rides. The aggregated
data can inform two key elements of a Microtransit pilot program: performance metric
monitoring, and an iterative pilot design. Established performance metrics create a framework
to monitor if the pilot program is meetfng agreed upon standards for service performance. An
iteratfve pilot design allows staff to modify the service based on performance metrics and other
travel data to create a Microtransit service which best meets rider needs.
Performance Metric Monitoring
Performance metrics are a tool to measure whether a transit service is meetfng or exceeding
the operatfng objectfves established at the beginning of the pilot program and in a manner that
best serves residents and contributes to City transportatfon and climate actfon goals. In the case
of the Microtransit Pilot Program, performance metrics should be used to determine if
Microtransit service is providing acceptable levels of service to residents.
Page 70 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
47
Table 16, below, defines the 5 performance metrics selected for the Microtransit Pilot Program.
These performance metric definitfons were adapted from the Natfonal Center for Applied
Transit Technology guidebook for transit providers tftled On Demand Transit and Microtransit:
Where and Why and represent best practfces regarding measuring performance.
The standards are based on an industry scan of performance reports, feasibility studies, and the
initfal metrics provided in the Short-Range Transit Plan. Certain performance metrics can be
defined prior to the service design being chosen, while others can only be defined after service
design is completed. For the metrics that require service design, details on the metric are
provided in place of a specified standard.
If a Microtransit pilot is pursued, it is recommended that each standard is revisited with the
selected service provider. Microtransit service providers have access to modelling software
which can provide in-depth analysis of service potentfal and costs.
Table 16: Recommended performance metrics
Metric Description Recommendation
Operating
Effectiveness
Passenger Trips per Vehicle Revenue
Hour is the selected metric to measure
operational effectiveness. The metric
measures how many passengers are
served during a single hour of operation
by a single vehicle in service.
Calculated after service
design.
Research indicates this metric
can vary greatly depending
on demographics, service
window, and other factors. In
collaboration with the
Microtransit service provider,
this metric should be
established prior to
implementation but after the
service design is selected.
Wait Time Wait time measures how long a rider
waits from when they request a ride to
when the vehicle picks them up. This
metric is important to monitor, as it
impacts customer experience. Increased
demand can increase wait times, and
adding vehicles is the key way to
decrease these wait times. The metric of
wait time must balance the customer
experience with the cost of operating
additional vehicles.
90% of trips within 20
minutes.
Based on analysis done in
Remix, a 20-minute wait time
strikes a balance of operating
a reasonable number of
vehicles - which directly
impacts cost - and the
customer experience.
Page 71 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
48
Cost Efficiency
Cost per Vehicle Revenue Hour measures
the dollar cost to operate a single vehicle
for the span of one service hour.
Not to exceed $100
An industry scan found a
wide range of Cost per
Vehicle Revenue Hour, from
below $30 to exceeding $120.
Recent pilots in California,
combined with estimates
within the Remix planning
software, indicate that
current trends point towards
$90 - $100 per Vehicle
Revenue Hour to operate
Microtransit.
Total Passenger
Boardings
Total Passenger Boardings represents
the total number of passengers served
during a specific period. Over the length
of the pilot, this metric can be used to
assess if the number of riders served is
adequately contributing to the City’s
mode shift goals.
Calculated after service
design.
This number varies based on
the service alternative
selected because it is
impacted by number of
vehicles operating, total
service hours, and service
delivery model.
Customer
Satisfaction
Customer Rating is the selected metric
for measuring customer satisfaction.
Customer Ratings can be collected
through the booking app. Customers can
be prompted upon completion of their
ride to rate their experience.
Rating system may vary
depending on provider but
should equate to 90%
customer satisfaction.
Additionally, software should
allow customers to leave
comments.
Iterative Pilot Design
During the two-year pilot, performance metrics and aggregated travel data can be used to
improve the service through data-driven adjustments based on ridership patterns. It is
recommended that an iterative pilot design is explicitly described as part of the procurement
process for a Microtransit services provider. Upon completfon of the pilot, the data could also
be used to design a permanent Microtransit service that best meets resident needs, while
increasing transit mode-share. Additfonally, Microtransit travel data has the potentfal to provide
insight into travel needs which can be addressed through improvements to fixed-route service.
Described below are key consideratfons for the design of an iteratfve Microtransit pilot program.
Access to data: SLO Transit staff should have access to ridership and performance data through
a dashboard-type interface which allows real-tfme monitoring of the service. Daily and weekly
Page 72 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
49
service data can provide early insight into the utflizatfon of the service. Over longer periods of
tfme, travel patterns can be analyzed to improve service.
Monthly performance reports: Monthly performance reports should be provided to City staff.
These reports should provide analysis of Microtransit performance and provide insight into
travel patterns. Ready-made reports will allow staff to stay up to date with performance of the
pilot and easily share this informatfon within the community.
Six-month service improvement intervals: Through real-tfme monitoring and monthly
performance reports, travel patterns may reveal that improvements to the service design are
needed. Set service improvement intervals should be established with the Microtransit service
operator as part of the operatfons agreement. A six-month service improvement interval is
recommended, as it is a long enough period to allow for adoptfon of the service throughout the
community. If changes are made, the six-month interval allows for new trends and patterns to
be established while stfll allowing for multfple modificatfons to be made over the course of the
two-year pilot period.
Page 73 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
50
Funding Microtransit Service
The table below describes three common funding sources in the State of California for
Microtransit pilots and services.
Table 17: Common Microtransit funding sources in California
Name Description Administering
Agency Eligible uses Funding
Mechanism
Low Carbon
Transit
Operations
Program
(LCTOP)
Provides funds to cover
operating and capital
expenses to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions
and improve mobility, with
a priority on serving
disadvantaged
communities
State funded
program and
administered by
regional
planning agency
(i.e. SLOCOG)
Caltrans, in
Coordination
with the
California Air
Resources Board
Operating
(limited to 5-
years) and
capital
expense
Competitive
funding source,
provides up to
100% funding,
locally apportioned
Transit and
Intercity Rail
Capital
Program
(TIRCP)
Provides funds to cover
capital expenses to
improve and modernize
transit in California and
reduce greenhouse gas
emissions, vehicle miles
travelled, and congestion
State funded
program and
administered by
regional
planning agency
(i.e. SLOCOG)
Capital
expenses
Competitive
funding source,
provides up to
100% funding,
locally apportioned
Clean Mobility
Options
(CMO)
Provides funds for
community-driven mobility
projects which increase
access to clean
transportation options
including on-demand
transit services, with a
focus on disadvantaged
communities and low-
income residents.
California Air
Resources Board
(CARB)
Needs
assessments,
service
design, and
pilot projects
(capital and
operating
expense).
Competitive,
project-based
funding source, up
to 100% funding,
no local
apportionment
Page 74 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
51
References
California Department of Transportatfon. (2023). Exploring Microtransit adoption and impacts
on transportation access: Guidance report. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-
media/programs/research-innovatfon-system-informatfon/documents/final-reports/exploring-
Microtransit-adoptfon-dor-guidance.pdf
Natfonal Center for Applied Transit Technology. (2023). On-demand transit and Microtransit:
Where and why? https://n-catt.org/guidebooks/on-demand-transit-and-Microtransit-where-
and-why/
Xing, Y., Pike, S., Waechter, M., DeLeon, G., Lipatova, L., Handy, S. L., & Wang, Y.
(2024). Exploring Microtransit adoption and its impacts on transportation access for
underserved populations (Research Report UCD-ITS-RR-24-44). Instftute of Transportatfon
Studies, University of California, Davis; Natfonal Center for Sustainable
Transportatfon. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/research-innovatfon-system-
informatfon/documents/final-reports/exploring-Microtransit-adoptfon-dor-guidance.pdf
Additfonal Resources
Federal Transit Administratfon. (2020). Mobility performance metrics (MPM) for integrated
mobility and beyond (FTA Report No. 0152). U.S. Department of Transportatfon.
Liezenga, A. M., Verma, T., Mayaud, J. R., Aydin, N. Y., & van Wee, B. (2024). The first mile
towards access equity: Is on-demand Microtransit a valuable additfon to the transportatfon mix
in suburban communitfes? Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 24, 101071.
Hansen, T., Walk, M., Tan, S., & Mahmoudzadeh, A. (2021). Performance measurement and
evaluatfon framework of public Microtransit service. Transportation Research Record, 2675(12),
201–213.
Hu, L., & Schneider, R. J. (2025). Panacea or band-aid? First-/last-mile connectfon in public
transit systems. Journal of the American Planning Association, 91(2), 278–285.
Pike, S., & Waechter, M. (2025). Microtransit (Policy brief). University of California, Davis.
Hyland, M. F., Pike, S., Hu, S., Berkel, J., Xing, Y., Saha, R., Vander Veen, G., & Yang, D.
(2024). Integrating Microtransit service with traditional fixed-route transit costs more but
greatly improves access to jobs (Policy brief). University of California Instftute of Transportatfon
Studies.
Page 75 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
52
Appendix A: Public Outreach – Complete Comments
Comments from Microtransit Survey
- I look forward to utilizing this service
- It would be extremely helpful, thank you
- seems like it would help a lot of students out
- I like the idea, only if it is affordable
- I do work when the busses don't work. It takes 1 hour and 10 minutes to get to
work
- thank you
- WONDERFUL IDEA!
- seems like a great idea, I would use this frequently for smaller trips or to areas
with limited bus service
- I avoid coming downtown whenever possible I would be more inclined to do so if
I did not have to think about parking.
- love that it would be phone accessible. Weekend bus service is lacking in areas.
Would it be door to door? Great program - much needed
- I am glad you are doing this
- I am 87 yrs.. Be 88 in may 2026. drive only days now. Will stop driving spring
2026. would like door to door service to dr. apt, errands, evening concerts at
PAC
- I see a time in the future when I may not always be able to drive. I did get the
free bus pass (for over 80) in case I need it
- Cost ??
- suggest short hoppers like LA Dash
- we have very poor service need more bus stops and shelter at bus stops
- service should be updated by the city, we need more stops for the elderly, and
please keep the price low!
- Coordination with Blues Baseball games would be nice for seniors and families
both. Pickups could be made at several locations in SLO where parking is
available, churches, parks, shopping centers
- There are many seniors that live near me that no longer have a car or can walk. I
live near French park and Microtransit program would be helpful for them for
medical appointments or going to Cal poly performances, airport, blues games,
senior center or groceries. Busses take too long to access and difficult to get to
them somethings. thank you for considering our input
- Like availability door to door without having to reserve ahead
Page 76 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
53
- Primarily I would use this service to go back and forth to the airport a few times a
year.. Occasionally to a dr. appointment
- I love public transport
- I think this would be great for getting a ride to the SLO Airport and to deter drunk
driving
- I love how accessible it is!
- Would love to see, only one question about it, how much would it be for students
and seniors?
- I answered these questions with my MIL and other elders in mind. Some elders
live in Assisted Living and can use facility provided transportation, but others live
"independently" and are on a budget. Some would like to go to the gatherings at
Meals That Connect but can't access transportation. GoGoGrandparent can be
useful but gets expensive.
I am interested in what inspired the pilot program and what plans you are
forming. Thank you.
- I work for a Supported Employment Program where a major barrier to
employment is transportation. My people have had to not accept employment
because the work hours fall outside the regular scheduled RTA services. Micro
transit services will improve their quality of life and is necessary for them to work.
- This sounds like an awesome project. I hope that it comes to fruition. I do not
own a personal vehicle and commute primarily by foot, so having more
transportation options would be very helpful.
- Sign me up!! Thanks for reaching out!!
- Microtransit would be the solution to a transportation predicament that are
peculiar to those like myself that got my life together late. Often as it is currently
public transit is very limited in helping me
- Mentally challenged (cptsd) outer appearance does not show a significant look
so it’s hard to see a metal health indicator to separate me from the crowd or
discriminate me. But I have to identify myself which at times flusters me and
triggers and puts me into trauma often times making me loose items, forgetting
things and putting myself into danger where others on the bus that may be
criminal can take advantage of me and target me for bigger crimes later!!( rape,
Id fraud etc. following me home)
- I firmly think it’s a good idea and would help many financially underprivileged
members of North and South counties.
- I hope this plan will increased access to the Prado Center. Routes for the
unhoused are limited and don't exist on Holidays.
- I see several potential benefits in having a Microtransit program in SLO,
depending on the costs. I am aware that some residents spend less at local
businesses and/or access services less because of not wanting to drive in traffic,
Page 77 of 78
Final Microtransit Pilot Program Feasibility Study
Emily McBride | City of San Luis Obispo
54
road construction, narrow streets, or inclement weather. With the cost of gas,
insurance, and car maintenance already high and still rising, plus distracted
drivers, changes to intersections (e.g.: traffic circles), and parking issues
(availability, 'daylighting' law), locals have reasons to find driving themselves to
be too much hassle or too confusing, risky, or stressful. This would also help
locals who can't afford to drive a car, whether they own one or not, and provide a
better option for those with health issues, for whom it may be unsafe to walk to
the bus stop, or to possibly wait for the bus during cold or rainy weather. Thank
you for collecting residents' input through this survey!
- This would be a great asset to our community.
- I would like to see a shuttle system also so I can do all my errands getting off and
on where needed
- I commute from Los Osos to SLO, and the bus stop isn't near my work. Even with
the SLO Transit.
During the day when I have meetings or appointments that I need to get to in
SLO its hard to because the timing of the bus routes.
I would like to commute by bus, rather than drive but its just so inconvenient
when I need to get around for work meetings etc.
- LOVE THIS! I gave up my car 5 years ago to be more eco friendly living in SLO,
but uber is expensive; when buses aren’t running.
- Microtransit pilot program should be available to users who struggle the most to
get around (college students, people with disabilities, people without reliable
access to personal vehicles). Microtransit access should be available city wide.
Microtransit access should be reliable (all users should be able to book it without
delays).Microtransit should share stops with passengers along the way to
maximize efficiency.
- Especially on weekends when the 4B and 3B busses don’t run it’s really hard to
get home
- Increase times passing through Cal poly campus
- Microtransit, if set up to assist the present SLO systems, could be very helpful. In
my opinion the present system is not disabled or senior friendly. The distance to
bus stops can be great
- Public transportation is useful for all communities as long as it is reliable and
clean
Page 78 of 78