HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/05/1991, 2 - FIVE YEAR SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN (SRTP) MEETING DATE:
�����bH►IVIIIIIII�pllUlll city of San tuts OBISpo 11-5-91
MINE COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: /7
FROM: Ken Hampian, Assistant City Administrative Officer, ",
Prepared by: Harry Watson, Transit Manager 1W
SUBJECT: Five Year Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP)
CAO RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Approve the third and final component of the Short Range
Transit Plan, 1991/92 - 1995/96 Operating and Capital Program,
including modifications recommended by staff in Attachment 1.
2 . Direct staff to return at a later time with necessary
modifications to the transit program budget.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF:
This entire staff report is in essence the "Report-In-Brief" for
the 90+ page Short Range Transit Plan.
DISCUSSION:
Background
.The City Council authorized a grant application for the completion
of a Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) during the Fiscal Year 1990-
91. Council directed that the SRTP include three separate
sections: a trolley evaluation; a multi-modal transfer center
evaluation; and a five year operating and capital plan.
A. Federal Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) grant was
obtained and the consulting firm of Nelson/Nygaard was retained to
complete the three phases of the SRTP. On March 19, 1991 the City
Council reviewed and approved the trolley evaluation component of
the plan. On September 3 , 1991 Council reviewed alternatives for
a multi-modal transfer center and authorized a grant application
for a feasibility study on the block bordered by Santa Rosa,
Monterey Street, Toro and South Higuera.
This report focuses on the third phase of the SRTP, the 1991/92 -
1995/96 five year operating and capital plan (for simplicity, this
third component will be referred to as the "SRTP" throughout this
report) . Development and implementation of the SRTP is a Major
City Goal included in the 1991-93 Financial Plan.
SRTP Purpose and Scope
The purpose of the SRTP is to provide general direction for public
transit in the City of San Luis Obispo for the next five years.
The Plan is intended to be a "road map" which moves the system
toward certain goals, but allows for flexibility in its actual
implementation. While the fundamental goals outlined in the plan
city of san s OBISpo
11u11 ► ��p
COUNCt AGENDA REPORT
Page 2
should be adhered to, flexibility on the more detailed operating
and "timing" issues is needed, given the possibility of changes and
constraints in the funding environment, priorities, and operating
demands.
Summary of Current SLO Transit Operation and Performance
SLO Transit's productivity is among the highest in the State for
small transit systems. Citywide, productivity is at 55 boardings
per hour, much higher than the standard of 30 boardings per hour.
Conversely, cost per unit of service is quite low, due to a
combination of the high ridership and good management (e.g. , $0. 65
per passenger versus $2 .69 for the regional system) . Over 600, 000
riders are now using SLO Transit annually. This is quite a
remarkable number, given that SLO Transit currently operates only
four fixed routes using four "all-day" buses, periodically two
"tandem" buses, and the trolley.
In essence, SLO Transit is transitioning from a "small town" system
to a much more sophisticated and complex "urban" system. Routes
need . adjustment and service must be expanded as a part of this
transition. The consultant calls the current route structure "a
combination of history and quick fixes" which has resulted in route
patterns which resemble "spaghetti" . This can be attributed to
the many incremental decisions made over the years as the system
has grown. The SRTP provides an opportunity for more comprehensive
and rational adjustments to SLO Transit.
Aspects of SLO Transit service requiring significant expansion
include developing "two way service" and reducing "headways" .
Currently, most of the City' s bus routes provide only one way
service, which often causes passengers to take circuitous and
indirect transit routes in order to reach destinations faster. In
addition, individual. route service is now provided only on an
hourly headway basis. This problem is most immediately evident on
routes entering or exiting the Cal Poly campus.
Cal Poly ridership composes 71% of total system ridership, and is
a major reason for the system's success. It is also the reason the
system is reaching the "break point" at certain times. The
buses, which seat 35, commonly arrive and depart the Cal Poly
campus with 65 people on board and frequently pass up passengers
due to lack of room. Despite this level of demand, which remains
constant from 7 : 15 a.m. until 5: 30 p.m. , the campus continues to
be served with hourly routes.
The recommendations outlined in the SRTP are intended to not only
increase service levels to accommodate existing peak ridership as
outlined above, but to attract new users to the system. In
addition to transit dependent persons, SLO Transit wants to attract
JAW /%00
������► ►�Illllll�p j��lll city of San LUIS OBI iSPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Page 3
"choice" riders - persons who choose to use transit even though
they have alternative means of transportation. In particular, the
goal is . to encourage people to use the bus as opposed to the
automobile.
The City Council has expressed its desire to increase the use of
its transit system in order to reduce air pollution and traffic
congestion. To do so, it is necessary to plan for a system which
is convenient and reliable, and which can be aggressively promoted
as such. While the "optimum" City system will not be achieved
through the 1991/92 - 1995/96 SRTP, the recommendations for
improvement and expansion will represent a major "step forward"- for
SLO Transit and residents of San Luis Obispo.
SRTP Consultant and Staff Recommendations
The recommendations of the consultant for the improvement and
expansion of SLO Transit is outlined on pages 3 - 5 of the SRTP.
Outlined in Attachment 1 is a staff response to each of these
recommendations. Council will note that while staff concurs with
nearly all recommendations, there is disagreement with some -
particularly, the elimination of certain existing route "kinks"
recommended by the consultant to improve on-time performance.
Council should focus its review heavily on Attachment 1, since the
key SRTP recommendations are outlined and discussed in this
document. These recommendations will be the focus of the public
hearing set for November 5, 1991.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This section discusses the overall transit funding environment, as
well as the specific financial program outlined in the SRTP.
Overall Transit Funding Environment
It is extremely difficult to predict what the funding environment
will be for a transit program over the next several years.
Operating and capital costs continue to increase dramatically as
a result of several factors, including fuel costs, handicapped
accessibility requirements and clean air requirements. In terms
of revenues, transit funding is highly dependent upon Federal
budget decisions and the overall economy (TDA funds are based on
a percentage of the sales tax) . Transit revenues are also
dependent upon local fare box policies, the percent of TDA funds
allocated to transit, the amount of TDA allocated to regional
transit, and special local revenue sources (e.g. , the contract with
Cal Poly) .
2-3
°ii�1�n►►►���IIIIIIIII��' �II�III city of san s osIspo
aiis COUNCI AGENDA REA RT
Page 4
!
Major factors that could affect SRTP expenditure and revenue
projections in the short term are:
1. The cost of operations for the Regional Transit System and the
resulting impact on the City of San Luis Obispo's
contribution. Last year the City's contribution was $135, 080.
This year's contribution is unknown at this time, because the
County is currently operating the system and is in the process
of soliciting bids for vendor operation. When the Regional
System's permanent operator is selected, a Fiscal Year 1991-
92 budget will be prepared and the City will be advised as to
our required contribution. The initial Regional System staff
proposal had the City' s contribution at $280, 000, which is a
1075 increase. This proposal, however, was rejected by the
Regional Authority Board.
i
All of the City' s operating funds come from two sources: (1)
Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds, which is one
quarter cent of the sales tax; and (2) a combination farebox
and Cal Poly contract. The Regional System contribution comes
off the top of our TDA funds before the City receives them,
so any substantial increase in our Regional contribution
requirement could result in City Transit service reductions.
i
2. While staff has negotiated significant increases over the last
two years in the Cal Poly contract, State financial problems
► create limits on what can be expected from this source.
3 . There may be a substantial contract increase to provide City
Transit service. The current contract rate of $1.90 per mile
terminates on June 30, 1992 . The consultant has projected
that the new rate increase will be in the 3-5% range. Rates
in California are commonly between $2 . 50 to $3 . 50 per mile for
fixed route service. Although it is difficult to compare
rates due to the many differences between operations, if in
this range, it will mean a 32% to 84% increase over the
current rate. The current contract cost is $480, 000. A 3246
to 84% increase would result in a status quo system costing
$153, 000 to $403, 200 more per year.
4 . On the "up side" , designation of the City as an "urban" area
could mean up to an additional $300, 000 annually for capital i
and operating purposes.
SRTP Financial Program
Chapter 8 details the specific financial plan for implementation
of the SRTP through FY 1995/96.
�►������►►�IfIIIIIIIPa ��UIN city of San LUIS OBISpo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Page 5
To summarize, to implement the SRTP recommendations, operating
expenditures will need to increase by an estimated 60% from the
current fiscal year to FY 1995-96 (from $677 ,500 to $1, 081,700
annually) . The total five year capital investment needed is
estimated to be over $5. 3 million. Capital funds will be used
primarily to acquire additional buses and related equipment, and
to develop a new transit transfer center. The total operating and
capital investment for the five year period is estimated at nearly
$10 million.
These cost projections are based on somewhat optimistic
assumptions, as outlined on the "SLO Transit Five Year Financial
Plan" summary on the last page of the SRTP (p. 8 - 15) . These
assumptions include:
that grants will cover 100% of the transfer center and 75% of
all other capital costs;
that per mile operating cost will increase by only $. 08 per
mile annually, to $2. 24 in 1995/96;
that the regional system will not severely undermine net
available TDA revenues to the City system (which will be
almost entirely allocated to transit) ; and
that there will be no major expansion in transit staffing
levels.
What this financial picture demonstrates is both the uncertainty
of the transit funding environment and the high cost of
implementing service enhancement and expansions. It points out
that more dramatic changes to the system, while perhaps desireable,
would impose substantial costs on the system which would be very
difficult to accommodate financially, even with the availability
of Section 9 funds through the urban designation. Such change's,
which have been raised through the staff and MTC review process,
and periodically by Councilmembers, include:
systemwide 15 minute headways;
no fares;
- abandoning large buses and replacing them with several smaller
buses (increases capital costs (e.g. more buses, larger
transfer center] and substantially increases operating costs) .
� z-s
�����i��►�IIIIIII�Iii��u��IlUll city of San 's OBIspo .
INNEEMMMi COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Page 6
Although not the "ultimate" system, staff believes that the
recommended SRTP represents a substantial step forward for SLO
Transit. . It will serve as a "bridge" from SLO Transit' s "small
system" roots to a much more convenient and sophisticated system
which serves not only transit dependent persons, but those who have
the alternative of an automobile.
In terms of budget adjustments, staff will return at a later time
to appropriate operating funds needed to implement the "Scenario
All , the five bus expansion (capital funds are already available).
Funds for the enhanced marketing program. will be requested this
fiscal year, consistent with the recommendation outlined in
Attachment 1. Funds now available in the TDA Fund Balance should
be retained to support these and subsequent phases of SRTP
implementation.
CONCURRENCES:
An earlier draft of the SRTP was presented by the consultant
"internally" during a workshop which included staff from the
Finance Department, Administration (including Transit) , Community
Development, and the Public Works Department. This draft reflects
changes recommended by staff during this workshop. The Finance
Director has also been heavily involved in the revenue and
expenditure projections provided on Figure 8-4B, p. 8 - 15.
The SRTP has also been reviewed by the Mass Transportation
Committee, San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council staff, and
Regional Transit Authority staff. All three of these groups
support the adoption of the SRTP.
The Mass Transportation Committee particularly agrees with the
consultant assessment that.: SLO Transit has been developing
deficiencies with on-time performance; SLO Transit has a lack of
capacity throughout the day on certain routes; SLO Transit should
set a direction for expansion and marketing as presented by the
consultant. Actual comments from each group are available in the
Council reading file for Council 's review.
This item has been scheduled as a public hearing on November 5 to
provide residents with an enhanced opportunity to comment directly
on the plan.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve modifications to the staff recommendations outlined
in Attachment 1.
2-�
1
•
city of san Luis oBispo
ON COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Page 9
2. Do not approve the SRTP. This would result in a status quo
transit system. This alternative is not recommended because:
(1) the stated need for additional services as recommended in
the SRTP, and (2) the direction given in the County's Clean
Air Plan.
3 . Receive the SRTP but delay its implementation . to a future
date. This alternative is not recommended. There are
sufficient funds to begin implementation of the SRTP at this
time, and the City has already obtained a Federal grant to
purchase one replacement bus and one expansion bus, so the
Scenario A expansion can move forward perhaps before the end
of the fiscal year.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Response to Consultant Recommendations
2 . Short Range Transit Plan (previously distributed)
Planrpt.kh
ATTACHMENT l:
SRTP FIVE YEAR OPERATIONS
AND CAPITAL PLAN
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
PRIORITY DEFINITIONS
• Priority #1: Implement as soon as possible
• Priority #2: Implement in next year
• Priority #3: Implement after #1 and #2 priorities, and when feasible
CONSULTANT RECOMMENDATIONS (in order shown in Figure 1-1 of SRTP, pp. 3-
5).
1. Adopt the recommended performance monitoring system (Priority 1)
Staff Response: Agree. Chapter 2 correctly points out that currently there is no
comprehensive system for the on-going performance monitoring of SLO Transit.
Currently, goals and objectives are outlined in the budget process, a small
quarterly 'operations report" is provided to the Mass Transportation Committee
(MTC), and the system's performance against certain standards is measured
every three years through the "tri-annual performance audit". However, there is
no day-to-day comprehensive system currently in place.
Chapter 2 outlines four primary performance goals to be included in the
recommended system, summarized as follows:
• Provide a transit system which conveniently meets the needs of residents.
• Manage the system in an efficient and effective way to maximize service
and minimize costs
• Insure the financial stability of the system by providing adequate funds for
both operations and capital purposes
• Cooperate with other agencies in the area to insure a complimentary
transportation system
1
Z- 7
There are numerous objectives and standards outlined under each goal. Key
standards to be achieved by SLO Transit include:
- Assure that 75% of residents live within one quarter mile of a bus stop.
- Transit travel time should take no longer than 1.5 times the equivalent auto'
trip.
- Achieve one half hour headways on all routes.
- Buses should arrive at stops within 0 - 5 minutes after the scheduled time,
at least 90% of the time.
- Arrival at the transfer center or other timed-transfer points should be no
more than 0 - 3 minutes later than printed schedule, 90% of the time.
While SLO Transit does not currently have documented goals, objectives, and
standards identical to those outlined in Chapter 2, in actual practice there is
substantial consistency with the recommended program. Staff concurs with the
adoption of the performance monitoring system recommended in chapter 2.
2&3. Perform regular performance monitoring, and provide quarterly
performance reports to the transit board (City Council) (Priority 1)
Staff Response: Agree. A performance monitoring system is only beneficial if
it is actually implemented. Recommendations 2 & 3 relate to the implementation
of the system and the distribution of reports outlining performance working with
the new contractor, staff believes that-a system can be implemented for the .
1992-93 fiscal year with reports distributed quarterly to the MTC and City Council.
The system may not be identical to the consultant's proposal; the scope will
depend in part on the availability of staffing (currently, transit is staffed by the
Transit Manager and an intern, with periodic assistance) and the content of
Section 9 requirements. However, staff can work with the MTC to develop a
system which captures the key indicators.
4. Adopt the proposed service design guidelines for service expansion
(Priority 1)
Staff Resg_onse: Agree. As outlined in Chapter 4, any transit service
modifications and/or expansion should be designed to adhere to the following
guidelines and objectives.
• Restore public confidence in timed connections
• Increase service frequency
• Minimize duplication of service
2
• Reduce travel times through direct routes
• Provide two-way service throughout the system
• Serve unserved markets with demonstrated needs
• Provide service that is easy to understand and use
5. Eliminate unnecessary kinks in current routes to increase reliability
(Priority 1)
Staff Resg_onse: AareelDisagree. In order to shave minutes on certain routes
and improve on-time performance, beginning on page 4-8 of Chapter 4 the
consultant recommends the elimination of five "kinks". Staff agrees with some
of the recommendations made but disagrees with others due to our more
intimate knowledge of our system, and the specific needs of the ridership on
certain routes within the system. Specific recommendations on the five
suggestions are outlined below:
A. Eliminate "j-oa" in Route 1 inbound on Johnson Avenue. This jog occurs
when the bus turns right on Marsh to California, left to Monterey, and left
back towards the City Hall transfer center. The consultant's
recommendation is that rather than making the jog, route 1 proceeds
straight on Johnson and left on Monterey to the transfer center at City
Hall.
Staff agrees with that recommendation as we frequently encounter major
delays at the railroad crossing on Marsh and must deviate from this route
whenever that obstacle is encountered. Additionally the ridership at the
California and Monterey stop is very light. The change would require
those riders to walk an additional two blocks down Monterey from
California to Johnson to catch the bus. This service change will not affect
the senior ridership at the Johnson and Marsh stop.
B. Discontinue service on Route 1 to the backside of Sierra Vista Hospital.
When exiting Cal Poly University, route 1 proceeds on Foothill, turns left
on Casa, right on Murray, right on Santa Rosa, and left onto Foothill
again. This adds two to three minutes to the running time.
Staff does not agree with this recommendation due to the large number
of senior and frail riders using route 1 to access the medical facilities at
Sierra Vista Hospital. By eliminating this loop, our riders would be required
to leave the bus, cross Foothill Boulevard and walk the two blocks to the
medical facilities near Casa and Murray. Several of the riders on the
system require the kneeling feature of our buses to get on and off the
buses which gives indication to their frail physical condition.
3
z-10
However, staff strongly agrees with the need to "save" 1 - 3 additional
minutes on this route and will continue to explore other alternatives which
do not reduce service to the hospital.
C. Reroute eastbound service on routes 1 and 4 from Ramona Drive to
Foothill. Currently, Ramona is collectively the largest stop in the transit
system because of the volume of student housing along that street.
However, although routes 1 and 4 use Ramona, route 2 uses Foothill and
also has very heavy ridership from the same student apartments. Thus,
by shifting 1 and 4 to Foothill from Ramona no ridership decrease is
expected.
Staff agrees with this recommendation. With the addition of 40' buses, the
turn from Foothill onto Tassajara for Routes 1 and 4 could not be made
if a car is waiting for a red light on Tassajara. By staying on Foothill, one
to two critical minutes can be gained on both routes. Westbound routes
would continue to use Ramona to avoid crossing Foothill without the
assistance of a signalized intersection.
D. Eliminate service to the Senior Center "front door" on route 1 on the Broad
and Johnson loon. Currently route 1 travels south on Osos Street, turns
left on Marsh, right on Santa Rosa, right on Buchan, and left on Osos
once again. The recommendation is that the bus continue straight on
Osos Street through Buchan on out to its Broad Street loop.
Staff would like to try this recommendation on a TRIAL basis after
extensive work with passengers using the Senior Center to make sure that
it would not present undue hardship on those riders. The current
diversion to the Senior Center "front door" is very costly in time because
the bus often gets delayed on the corner of Santa Rosa and Buchan (if
an auto is at the stop sign on eastbound Buchan). Although the ridership
numbers at the Senior Center would not warrant a passenger shelter, staff
would recommend that one be eventually installed on Osos at Buchan to
accommodate the senior riders that would be awaiting a bus at that
intersection. Currently seniors wait in the Senior Center doorway, or in
the shade of a tree by the bus stop.
E. Eliminate service on Oceanaire Drive on route 2.
Staff does not agree with this recommendation. Although the Oceanaire
loop does take considerable time, it provides service to a substantial area
of the City that would be required to walk in excess of our quarter mile
criteria to gain access to the transit system either on Madonna Road or
Los Osos Valley Road. Although ridership numbers do not warrant this
loop routing (only four boarding s were recorded the day of the ride
check), the users of the system along Oceanaire are primarily seniors who
would have difficulty making long walks to and from the bus system,
4
particularly since many of their trips are for shopping. Some years ago
an attempt was made to drop this loop and sufficient public outcry resulted
in returning Oceanaire to SLO Transit's service area.
6. Scenario A: Move to a 5 bus plus 2 tandem system as soon as vehicles
become available, adding two-way service between Cal Poly and Laguna
Lake (Priority 2)
Staff Response: Agree. The SRTP includes on page 4-13 a description of a five
bus, all day system plus two tandems. The Scenario A phase of the expansion
uses additional equipment which will be available through an existing approved
grant, so this expansion can be implemented within existing resources. The
timing of its implementation is dependent on receiving additional bus equipment
which is projected to arrive in the late Summer or Fall of 1992.
The benefits of adding a single, all-day bus, coupled with a modest restructuring
of services in the Cal Poly and Foothill areas is as follows:
1. Half hourly, all day service between downtown, Central Coast Plaza,
Madonna Corridor and Laguna Lake area (Present service is half-hourly
outbound, but only hourly inbound.)
2. Half hourly, all day service between downtown and Cal Poly via Grand and
Mill Streets
3. Two-way service between Cal Poly and Laguna Lake. The fifth bus route
would turn the present one-way loop of Route 4 (City Hall-Madonna-
Laguna Lake to Foothill-Cal Poly-City Hall) into a two-way directional route.
4. Extension of Thursday night service until nearly 9:00 p.m., and earlier
Saturday morning service to the Farmers Market at Madonna Plaza.
The new route, when combined with the existing routes 1, 2, and 4 would give
half-hourly service to all of the most heavily used corridors in the system. The
fifth route would also eliminate one of the largest complaints of our system - that
it takes 45 to 50 minutes to transport Cal Poly students from campus to the
Laguna Lake area. The new fifth route would provide express service from Poly
to Laguna Lake and greatly enhance the service for the shoppers from the
Madonna Road area back into town for connections to all other points in the
City.
The existing tandem service on routes 1 and 4 would be continued with the fifth
route. Even with the existing tandems on these routes, passengers are
consistently left at the more heavily used stops due to lack of space on the
buses. After initiating the fifth route and monitoring its success, tandem routes
will be monitored to assure their appropriateness.
5
2-/2�
This additional route is estimated to increase bus ridership by a total of 18%
annually, and 17% on weekdays (in comparison to existing levels).
7. Scenario B: Move to a 7 bus system as soon as vehicles and funding
become available, adding half hourly service on most corridors and
simplifying the route structure (Priority 3)
Staff Response: Agree. Scenario B outlined on page 4-18 takes the system in
subsequent years to seven buses running all day with 0 - 1 tandems depending
upon demand. It involves substantial route restructuring including the elimination
of most current loops, resulting in a simplification of the service pattern. This
scenario takes the previous five routes and condenses them into three two-way
loops for more frequent, evenly spaced service. It expands the half hourly
service to most major corridors, including Foothill, Laguna Lake, Madonna,
Johnson, and the Highland area. It provides 15 minute service between the
Foothill highland area and Cal Poly. It also adds service to the airport and the
commercial area on Los Osos Valley Road and Highway 101. Staff would
attempt to negotiate a reduction of our City contribution to the Regional System
to offset the expense of providing airport service within the County.
This expansion phase is estimated to increase bus ridership by a total of 35%
annually and 42% on weekdays.
8. Scenarios C & D: Eventually complete the network with an 8 bus system,
with two-way half hourly service on all lengths and service to the airport
(Priority 3)
Staff Response: Agree, Scenario C.
Disagree, Scenario D.
Scenario C on page 4-24 adds an eighth all day bus by introducing half hourly
service on Route 3 - South Higuera/Broad. With this change, half hourly
service is possible on all parts of the system. This scenario also offers an
opportunity to serve SLO Airport. Other than these changes, there are no other
network differences between the seven bus system and the Scenario C eight bus
system.
Under Scenario C, the most productive ridership route would have half hourly
service at the expense of service to the less productive areas. Bus ridership
would increase by an estimated total of 37% annually, and 49% on weekdays.
Scenario D on page 4-26 uses eight buses. However, it maintains service to
every area that currently has service, even if that area has infrequent ridership.
The former scenarios are designed to maximize ridership while requiring the
elimination of service to some unproductive parts of the City. This scenario
would have six buses pulsing at the transfer center, and would result in an
increase of total annual bus ridership of only 33% (less than Scenario C or the
seven bus expansion). Weekday bus ridership would increase 40%.
6
z-13.
.9. Either expand the capacity of the current transit center or relocate transit
center allowing a 6 bus meet in the 8 bus system (Priority 3)
Staff Response: Agree with relocation. The lack of an adequate transit
transfer center poses a major obstacle to system expansion. If, for
example, tandem service is required under the seven bus scenario, the current
facility will be inadequate to accommodate the six buses which will meet when
the morning tandem service is running. Even if tandem service is not needed,
the transfer center will be inadequate under Scenarios C and D. Therefore, it is
essential to either expand the existing transit transfer center or relocate the
center to another location.
In September the City Council approved the second component of the SRTP,
which identified a location bounded by Santa Rosa, Monterey, Toro, and Higuera
Streets as a priority location for a new transit transfer center. Staff is currently
completing a workscope for a feasibility study of this site, to be completed in
conjunction with the Regional Transit System. Staff will aggressively pursue this
project, as any substantial expansion of our existing system is dependent upon
its ultimate development.
10. Expand evening service beginning with the 7 bus system to include routes
4 and 1 (Priority 3)
Staff Response: Agree. By implementing evening service on Route 1 and Route
4, we would be providing two buses on the hour to Cal Poly and once per hour
service on the Madonna/Los Osos Valley Road corridor and the Broad and
Johnson corridor. This will extend evening service to approximately half of the
City. It should be noted that if and when the regional system provides evening
service to the evening classes at Cuesta College, SLO Transit may need to make
service available throughout the City so as not to strand students at City Hall
when the regional system terminates its run.
11. Expand weekend service beginning with the 7 bus system, running all
routes on an hourly schedule (Priority 3)
Staff Response: Agree. Currently, routes 1 and 4 do not operate on weekends
and holidays. Route 2 and 3 run on an abbreviated schedule, with route 3
beginning at 7:52, route 2 beginning at 8:52 a.m. and both terminating at 5:51
p.m. By implementing the consultant's recommendation, hourly service would
be available throughout the City on all weekends and holidays.
12. Replace vehicles at the end of the UMTA life (Priority 1)
Staff Response: Agree. Starting with the current budget cycle, we now have in
place a 10 year cycle for bus replacement, which is consistent with UMTA
guidelines. The currently approved UMTA grant replaces a 10 year old bus and
provides for a second expansion bus.
7
13. All new buses should be 40' for maximum capacity (Priority 1)
Staff Response: Agree�/Disagree. Staff agrees that the next several buses
purchased should be 40' in length, and is currently preparing specifications for
two grant funded buses consistent with the 40' standard. These buses should
be assigned to perimeter routes (route 4 and eventually the new route 5) and
tandem service. The industry standard for maximum bus capacity is 1.4 times
seated capacity. With our current larger buses having 36 seats, a 1.4 factor
would indicate a maximum comfortable load of 50 passengers. Frequently
throughout the day SLO Transit experiences loads of 60 and 65 people on routes
1, 2, and 4. Loads of that magnitude are not acceptable to either riders, the
rolling stock, or the drivers. Forty foot buses would allow for 63 passengers on
board at the maximum ratio of 1.4.
Staff does not feel, however, that a decision must be made now that All buses
in the fleet must be 40'. With the current potential for having three existing 30'
buses rehabilitated, the smaller buses can be used on the lighter loaded and
somewhat more constrictive downtown street routes. Forty foot buses can also
be tested on these routes, with a long-term decision about the size of the entire
fleet to be made when the 30' buses become due for replacement.
An option to the 40' bus would be to replace buses in the entire'fleet with
smaller more maneuverable 30' buses. This would require a larger fleet to meet
ridership demands. This alternative is not recommended due to substantial
operational expense increases without proportionately increasing the number of
passengers carried. Additionally, by increasing the fleet size the system's impact
on the traffic circulation is increased while not reducing the amounts of pollutants
put into the air as measured by a "per passenger carried" standard. By using
40' buses for expansion purposes and keeping the core three 30' bus fleet in
effect, we are able to blend both need and function within the system. When the
30' buses require replacement, a decision can be made on size based on the
trial experience.
14. Purchase two expansion vehicles as soon as possible (Priority 2)
Staff Response: Agree. Staff is currently in the process of putting together
specifications and developing a RFP to implement the currently approved UMTA
grant for the purchase of two new heavy duty 40' transit coaches.
15. Move to an 11 bus fleet by 1993 (Priority 3)
Staff Response: Agree. The capital improvement plan in Chapter 5 includes
expansion of the system to an 11 bus fleet in FY93-94 in order to achieve
Scenarios C or D. The assumption is made that all grant applications applied
for will be approved to allow this expansion to be successful, and that optimistic
cost assumptions will be achieved. In any case, staff strongly supports the
concept, although the timing may be somewhat later than 1993/94.
8
16. Consider alternative fuels for future bus purchases; mandated in 1994
(Priority 3)
Staff Response: Agree. Staff has taken initial steps to (1) explore availability of
compressed natural gas conversions to existing diesel engines; (2) explore
availability of engineered compressed natural gas engines to replace existing
diesel engines; and (3) monitoring the local efforts to establish a compressed
natural gas fueling facility in San Luis Obispo.
17. Use standards to. place shelters at 27 locations over 5 years (Priority 3)
Staff Response: Agree. Staff has recently placed the first expansion shelter on
Tank Farm Road. Staff is currently working to place shelters at two heavily used
stops at Mill and Grand and Grand and Abbott Streets. Property owner approval
has been granted. Encroachment permits have been approved and building
permits are currently in the application process. As mentioned earlier, some
latitude is requested to place shelters in locations where the ridership may not
be heavy, but either the frail nature of people using a particular stop or extreme
weather/wind conditions, may warrant the installation of a shelter.
18. Implement bus stop amenity program as recommended over 3 year period
(Priority 2)
Staff Response: Agree. See responses to goal #17 and goal #20.
19. Develop and maintain a marketing budget at 2-3% of operating costs
(Priority 1)
Staff Response: Agree. Staff supports a more aggressive marketing program,
with 2-3% of the contractual operating expenses being the base for a marketing
budget. That would result in a $10,000 to $12,000 marketing budget similar to
the Water Conservation marketing program. Staff recommends that an outside
marketing firm be contracted with, and paid for out of the marketing budget to
develop and implement the program. This firm would bring expertise necessary
to maximize the impact of any marketing program. Also, adequate staff time is
not currently available to handle an aggressive marketing program. An
appropriate budget will be brought forward in the current fiscal year to include
an enhanced marketing program.
20. Develop a system wide map on a single base map (Priority 2)
Staff Response: Agree. Staff has taken the initial steps in developing conceptual
maps of the system to be used in a future schedule printing. A program of
signing at existing bus stops to make them more user friendly is also underway.
This bus stop signing component is a mandate from the San Luis Obispo Area
Coordinating.Council and is tied to our continued TDA funding.
9
z-1(0
21. Implement a student monthly discount pass (Priority 1)
Staff Response: Agree. Staff would hope to have a summer student discount
program in effect in FY92-93 for students 18 and under. Staff is currently
soliciting input from other successful transit operators throughout the State in an
attempt to implement the best of each of their programs.
22. Consider hiring a marketing consultant for an annual contract (Priority 2)
Staff Response: Agree. Staff agrees with this recommendation as spelled out
above under goal #19.
23. Increase fares as needed to support cost increases. First increase in 1992
(Priority 3)
Staff Response: Agree/Disagree. First, a 1992 fare increase would be
premature as we will not know the cost of operation until we have gone through
the RFP process and a new contract has been awarded. Second, we agree with
the concept of tying farebox recovery to cost increases, but SLO Transit is in a
unique position. With the free fare pass program currently in effect with Cal Poly
University, the Cal Poly contractual contribution is tied directly to the average
farebox return paid by the general public, which relates to the actual cost of
transporting each passenger. Fare increases which fully offset the actual cost
of operation increases are frequently not attainable due to the substantial
reduction in ridership that is often associated with major fare increases in public
transit. Staff would propose that no new fare increases be introduced until 1993
or 1994, depending upon actual cost-revenue experience, and whether an
increase is essential in order to fund critical components of the SRTP. So, staff
conceptually supports periodic fare increases, but only when absolutely essential
to support critical system needs. Staff does support the consultant's
recommended target of a 30% farebox return by the system (TDA requirement
is 10%).
24. Explore ways to share spare vehicles with County (Priority 1)
Staff Response: Disagree. Staff disagrees due to (1) currently the County has
no spare vehicles that we could use; (2) the County fleet would not be
recognizable as a SLO Transit vehicle when the County's identification program
is fully implemented; (3) County vehicles potentially may be stored from Nipomo
to Paso Robles, depending upon the regional vendor contract; (4) there is a
potential for more than one contractor operating the two systems. This would
require more than one driver group sharing the same fleet with all of the
mechanical and insurance implications that would bring with it.
25. Consider a single bid document for City and County systems (Priority 2)
Staff Response: Disagree. The County system is scheduled to award a contract
October 24, 1991 with service to begin January 1, 1992. SLO Transit is
10 f'J
scheduled to go out to RFP in January of 1992 with a new service contract to
begin in July 1992. In addition, the Regional System has been experiencing
substantial operational and organizational issues which could detrimentally impact
the management of the City system, which has not been experiencing similar
problems.
26. Include the County in planning for a new transfer facility (Priority 1)
Staff Response: Agree. Staff is currently in the process of soliciting Regional
Transit Authority support both conceptually and financially in any and all future
endeavors to site a new multi-modal transfer facility. Staff is also working closely
with the County CAO and the Area Coordinating Council on this issue as well.
27. Maximize the use of new funding sources (Priority 1)
Staff Response: Agree. Staff is currently pursuing all funding sources currently
targeted as being available which include State Transit Assistance, Transit Capital
Improvement Funds, Proposition 116 funds, Section 8, 9, and 18 UMTA grant
funding. Funding for Transit will also be a component of any future traffic impact
fee that the City may impose.
28. Allocate nearly 100% TDA for transit annually (Priority 1)
Staff Response: Agree. Council has established a policy that all TDA is available
for alternative transportation. Most of this goes toward the support of the transit
system.
29. Consider all discretionary sources of funding before General Fund funding.
(Priority 1)
Staff Response: Agree, as explained above under goal #27. Staff strongly
recommends against the use of General Fund sources, given the other demands
placed on this source. Transit should remain an enterprise fund.
30. Incorporate recommendations in Trolley Report and Transit Center Study
in this report (Priority 1)
Staff Response: Agree. Council has previously accepted the above reports as
part and parcel of the Short Range Transit Plan.
\planrpt.att
11
z-i4
Water Treatment EIR - Response to Comments 3
6. Water treatment capacity is not a threshold which constrains growth.
Response: The City's Development Impact Review Procedures (Municipal
Code Chapter 2.44, once known as "Ordinance 604," and
Resolution 4379) set a rate of water treatment which, if exceeded,
require a public hearing and formal determination on appropriate
action. The action may include capital facility projects to expand
capacity, postponing approval of development projects, or both.
That rate of treatment was exceeded during hot fall weather
several years ago, prompting the required hearing and
determination. Some changes were made to allow water to be
drawn more quickly from the reservoirs, and to more easily switch
from one reservoir to the other. This project is proposed in part
to increase the treatment capacity, in response to those
requirements, so additional development may occur.
The recently established water impact fees confirm that additional
treatment capacity is needed to serve growth. If the capacity was
not expanded, the city would have to build additional facilities to
store treated water so peak demands could be met, risk not
meeting peak demands with increasing frequency, or curtail
development (even if annual water supply was adequate).
7. The initial study unrealistically implies that growth will stop in the year 2015.
Response: The general plan establishes a development capacity, which may
be reached in about 25 years. As that build-out capacity is
approached, the community will have to decide whether it wants
to maintain that capacity or expand it. Measures which would
delay reaching the water-treatment capacity, which would be
expanded by the proposed project, include:
A. Slower growth;
B. Water conservation;
C. Use of other sources, such as groundwater and reclaimed
water, which would not be treated at the Stenner Canyon
plant.
gmD:wTR-COM.wP
3 - 7
STENNER CANYON WATER TREATMENT PLANT EIR
STATUS OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING
Status of impacts
Potentially significant as originally proposed, but reduced to insignificant levels due to
mitigation measures to be incorporated in the project:
Community plans and goals (consistency with general plan Energy Conservation
Element);
Energy use.
Potentially significant as originally proposed, but found not to be significant in initial
study or EIR:
Population distribution and growth;
Transportation and circulation;
Noise levels;
Air quality;
Aesthetics;
No impact, or not potentially significant:
Land use;
Public services;
Utilities;
Geologic & seismic hazards & topographic modifications;
Surface water flow and quality;
Plant life;
Animal life;
Archaeological/historical;
Public safety - toxics.
Mitigation
Mitigation for increased energy use will include the following:
Thirteen general and 24 lighting measures recommended for the existing plant,
summarized on pages 17 and 18 of the draft EIR;
Use of variable-frequency drives on 65-horsepower water pumps for the ozone
cooling process;
Use of T8 fluorescent lamps and electronic ballasts in place of T12's in 14
applications;
Use of PL fluorescent lamps in place of incandescent lamps in two applications.
3-8