HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/07/1990, C-15 - AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR FIVE YEAR SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN (SRTP) - MEETING 9o:
�111111 city o� san qui s 091SPO
NoZe COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: ��'
FROM: Ken Hampian, Assistant City Administrative Officer
Prepared by: Harry Watson, Transit Manager ��
SUBJECT: Award of Contract for Five Year Short Range Transit Plan
(SRTP)
CAO RECOMMENDATION: By motion, approve the award to, and authorize
the Mayor to execute, a contract with Nelson/Nygaard in the amount
of $12,000 for completion of a SLO Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP)
DISCUSSION:
Background
The San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council (SLOACC) awarded the
City of San Luis Obispo a Section 8 UMTA Grant in the amount of
$8, 000. Through the grant application process the City of San Luis
Obispo has contributed $4,000, to provide a total of $12,000 to
complete a Short Range Transit Plan.
The general purpose of the SRTP is to set the direction for the
next five years for public transit in the City of: San Luis Obispo.
Some of the items contained in the work program of the STRP are a
review and evaluation of the system as it exists today, the
development of clear and measurable future goals, the
identification of objectives and standards of performance,
recommended alternatives for system improvements, a comprehensive
marketing plan, projected costs and capital requirements for a five
year capital improvement plan, and a projected growth rate for the
use of public transit in San Luis Obispo.
Two important subsections contained in the work program include an
assessment of alternatives for the relocation of the Transit
Transfer Center and an assessment of the parameters of the long-
term operation of a downtown shuttle service.
The trolley portion of the Scope of Work will be scheduled first,
especially input dealing with the type and number of trolleys
needed to continue the downtown shuttle service, should Council
elect to do so. A report to acquire direction regarding the future
of the trolley is planned for the Council meeting of November 20.
A detailed outline of the Scope of the Consultant's work is
provided as Exhibit 1 to the attached agreement.
Consultant Selection Process
The RFP was approved by Council on June 19, 1990, and issued to 22
vendors. The RFP closed on August 15, 1990. There were three
submittals, one of which was deemed to be non-responsive. The two
responsive bidders were: Nelson/Nygaard and R. & F. Transportation
Consultants.
c _�
43111111$PIIJBJU city of San tuts OBIspo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Council Agenda Report
Page Two
On August 30, 1990 a proposal review committee made up of Joe
Risser, Chairman of the Mass Transportation Committee, Dan Herron
of the SLOACC staff, Dave Elliott of SLO . Public Works Department,
and Richard Randise of the San Luis Obispo Regional Transit
Authority, along with Harry Watson, Transit Manager, were convened
to rate the two responsive bids. Prior to convening the meeting,
each panel member was given score sheets and was asked to prescore
the RFP's as to their experience, methodology, scope of work,
commitment of resources, project projections, and analysis. Also,
prior to convening the committee, all references of the respondents
were contacted by this office and the results of the reference
contacts were made known to the review committee.
Nelson/Nygaard was the consensus choice of the review committee due
to their response to the RFP criteria and their experience in the
San Luis Obispo area. Nelson/Nygaard was the contractor on the
City's recent performance audit and on the Regional System's Short
Range Transit Plan. Other references also highly recommended this
firm.
CONCURRENCES:
This item was on the agenda of the Mass Transportation Committee
which met on October 3, 1990. The results of the recommendation
from the proposal review committee were presented to the Mass
Transportation Committee, and the MTC concurs with the award of the
contract to the firm of Nelson/Nygaard.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The total contract amount is $12,000. As mentioned above, $8,000
is from a Section 8 Federal UMTA Grant; $4,000 is from the City of
San Luis Obispo. Eighty percent of the contract amount is to be
paid in monthly installments during the contract period. Twenty
percent will be paid upon receipt of the final report. Sufficient
funds are in the operating budget to cover the City's $41,000
contribution to the UMTA grant for this project.
ATTACHMENT:
Agreement/Scope of Work
HW\srtp
OPROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE ADVERTISING SERVICES
This agreement is made this day of
1990 by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, California
(hereinafter referred to as "City") , and NELSON/NYGAARD,
hereinafter referred to as "Contractor") .
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, City desires to retain certain professional services
in conjunction with an Short Range Transit Plan as recommended by
the Mass Transportation Committee (MTC) . The services being
provided by the Contractor- under this contract are the preparation
of a Short Range Transit Plan, Alternatives for the relocation of
the Transit .Transfer Center and the Parameters of a Downtown
Shuttle System; and
WHEREAS, City desires to engage Contractor to provide these
services by reason of its qualifications and experience for
performing such services, and Contractor has offered to provide
the requested services on the terms and in the manner set forth
herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual covenants,
the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. PROGRAM COORDINATION:
a. CITY. The City Administrative Officer or his designated
representative shall be the Program Manager representing
the City for all purposes under this agreement. He shall
supervise the progress and execution of this agreement.
b. CONTRACTOR. Contractor shall assign a single Program
Manager to have overall responsibility for the progress
and execution of this agreement for Contractor. Bonnie
Nelson is hereby designated as the Program Manager for
Contractor. Should circumstances or conditions
subsequent to the execution of this document require a
substitute Project Manager for any reason, the Project
Manager designee shall be subject to the prior written
approval by City Project Manager.
2. DUTIES OF CONTRACTOR:
a. Services to be. furnished. Under general direction of the
Program Manager, Contractor shall provide all specified
services as set forth in "Exhibit 1", attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference.
b. Laws to be observed. Contractor shall:
1. Procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges
and fees, and give all notices which may be
CYc�"J
necessary and incidental to the due and lawful
prosecution of the services to be performed by
contractor under this agreement;
2. Keep itself fairly informed of all existing and
proposed. federal, state and local laws, ordinances,
regulations, orders, and decrees which may affect
those engaged or employed under this agreement, and
materials used in Contractors' performance under
this agreement, or the conduct of the services under
this agreement;
3. At all times observe and comply with and cause all
of its employees to observe and comply with all of-
said laws, ordinances, decrees and orders mentioned
above.
4. Immediately report to the City's Project Manager in
writing any discrepancy or inconsistency it
discovers in said laws, ordinances, regulations,
orders and decrees mentioned above in relation to
plans, drawings, specifications, or provision of
this agreement.
C. Release of reports and information. Any reports,
information, data or other material given to, or prepared
or assembled by, Contractor under this agreement shall
be the property of City and shall not be made available
to any individual or organization by Contractor, without
the prior written approval of the City's Program Manager.
d. Copies of reports and information. If City requests
additional copies of reports, drawings, specifications,
or any other material in addition to what the Contractor
is required to furnish in limited ,quantities as part of
the services under this agreement, Contractor shall
provide such additional copies as are requested, and City
shall compensate Contractor for the costs of duplicating
of such copies at Contractor's direct expense.
e. Oualifications of Contractor. Contractor represents that
it is qualified to furnish the services described under
this agreement. ,
f. Use of Recycled Paper and Recycled _Products. The
Contractor agrees to use recycled paper and recycled.
products in connection with furnishing the services
contained in this agreement whenever possible.
3. DUTIES OF THE CITY:
City agrees to cooperate with Contractor in its performance
of that work described in Exhibit 6111, attached hereto and
incorporated by this reference.
O4. COMPENSATION:
Contractor will bill City and be compensated in accordance
with Exhibit "1" attached hereto and incorporated by this
reference, as currently exists or may be amended. Exhibit 1
consists of the Request for Proposal and Nelson/Nygaard
Proposal.
5. TIME FOR COMPLETION OF THE WORK: $WnI
/ks.tiok,3/,199/
Program is for the period December 1, 1990 to F
-IAJT.. Contractor shall perform services in a timely manner
upon direction and guidance from City Project Manager.
Contractor acknowledges timing is at the sole discretion of
City.
6. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION:
The City Program Manager shall have the authority to suspend
this agreement wholly or in part, for such period as he deems
necessary due to unfavorable conditions or to the failure on
the part of the Contractor to perform any provision of this
agreement. Contractor will be paid the compensation due and
payable to the date of temporary suspension.
C7. TERMINATION:
a. Right to terminate. The City retains the right to
terminate this agreement for any reason by notifying
Contractor in writing sixty (60) days prior to
termination and by paying the compensation due and
payable to the date of termination; provided, however,
if this agreement, is terminated for :fault of Contractor,
City shall be obligated to compensate Contractor only for
that portion of contractor services which are of benefit
to city. Said compensation is to be arrived at by mutual
agreement of the City and Contractor. Should they fail
to agree, then an independent arbitrator is to be
appointed by mutual agreement and his decision shall be
binding upon the parties.
b. Return of materials. Upon such termination, Contractor
shall turn over to the City immediately any and all
copies of studies,, sketches, drawings, computations, and
other data, whether or not completed, prepared by
Contractor, and for which. Contractor has received
reasonable compensation, or materials given to Contractor
in connection with this agreement. Such materials shall
become permanent property of City. Contractor, however,
shall not be liable for City's use of incomplete
materials or for City's use of. complete documents if used
O for other than the project contemplated by this
agreement.
8. INSPECTION•
Contractor shall furnish City with every reasonable
opportunity for City to ascertain that the services of.
Contractor are being performed in accordance with the
requirements and intentions of this agreement. All work done
and all materials furnished, if any, shall be subject to the
City Program Manager's inspection and approval. The
inspection of such work shall not relieve Contractor of any
of its obligations to fulfill its agreements as prescribed.
9. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIATS:
All original drawings, plans, documents, photographs, and
other materials prepared by or in possession of Contractor
pursuant to this agreement shall become the permanent property
of the City, and shall be delivered to the City upon demand.
In cases where Contractore uses a subcontractor to perform
photographic services in connection with fulfilling the terms
of this contract, the subcontractor may retain their
Photographic rights to the original negatives and
transparencies.
10. INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT:
Failure of the City to agree with Contractor's independent -�
findings, conclusions, or recommendations, if the same are
called for under this agreement, on the basis of differences
in matters of judgment shall not be construed as a failure on
the part of the Contractor to meet the requirements of this
agreement.
11. ASSIGNMENT• SUBCONTRACTORS: EMPLOYEES:
This agreement is for the performance of professional services
of the Contractor and is not assignable by the Contractor
without prior consent of the City in writing. The Contractor
may employ other specialists to perform special services as
required with prior approval by the City.
12. NOTICE:
All notices hereunder shall be given in writing and mailed,
postage prepaid, by Certified Mail, addressed as follows:
To City: Harry Watson, Transit Manager
City of San Luis Obispo
P. 0. Box 8100
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
To Contractor: Nelson/Nygaard
206 Missouri Street
San Francisco, CA 94107
13. INTEREST OF CONTRACTOR;
Contractor covenants that it presently has no interest, and
shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial
or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree
with the performance of the services hereunder. Contractor
further covenants that, in the performance of this agreement,
no subcontractor or person having such an interest shall be
employed. Contractor certifies that no one who has or will
have any financial interest under this agreement is an officer
or employee of the City. It is expressly agreed that, in the
performance of the services hereunder, Contractor shall at all
times be deemed an independent contractor and not an agent or
employee of the City.
14. INDEMNITY:
Contractor hereby agrees to indemnify and save harmless City,
its officers, agents and .employees from:
a. Any and all claims and demands which may be made against
City, its officers, agents or employees by reason of any
injury to or death of any person or corporation caused
by an negligent act or omission of Contractor under this
agreement or of Contractor's employees or agents.
b. Any and all damage to or destruction of the property of
City, its officers, agents or employees, occupied or used
by or in the care, custody or control of Contractor, or
in proximity to the site of Contractor's work, caused by
any negligent act or omission of Contractor under this
agreement or of Contractor's employees or agents.
C. Any and all claims and demands which may be made against
City, its officers, agents or employees by reason of any
injury to or death of or damage suffered or sustained by
any employee or agent of Contractor under this agreement,
however caused, excepting, however, any such claims and
demands which are the result of the negligence or willful
misconduct of City, its officers, agents, or employees.
d. Any and all claims and demands which may be made against
City, its officers, agents, or employees by reason of any
infringement or alleged infringement of any patent rights
or claims caused by the use of any apparatus, appliance,
or materials furnished by Contractor under this
agreement; and
e. Any and all penalties imposed or damages sought on
account of the violation of any law or regulation or of
any term or condition of any permit, when said violation
of any law or regulation or of any term or condition of
any permit is due to negligence on the part of the
Contractor.
15. WORRERS_COMPENSATION_: �''
Contractor certifies that it is aware of the provisions of the
Labor Code of the State of California, which require every
employer to be insured against liability for workers
compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with
the provisions of that code, and it certifies that it will
comply with such provisions before commencing the performance
of the work of this agreement.
16. INSURANCE:
Contractor shall provide proof of comprehensive general
liability insurance in the amount of $500,000.
17. AGREEMENT BINDING:
The terms, covenants, and conditions of this agreement shall
apply to, and shall bind, the heirs, successors, executors,
administrators, assigns, and subcontractors of both parties.
18. WAIVERS:
The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any
term, covenant, or condition of this agreement or of any
provision, ordinance, or law shall not be deemed to be a
waiver of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or
of any other term, covenant, condition, ordinance, or law.
The subsequent acceptance by either party of any fee or other
money which may become due hereunder shall not be deemed to
be a,waiver of any preceding breach or violation by the other
party of any term, covenant, or condition of this agreement
or of any applicable law or ordinance.
19. COSTS AND-ATTORNEY"S FEES:
The prevailing party in any action between the parties of this
agreement brought to enforce the terms of this agreement or
arising out of this agreement may recover its,reasonable costs
and attorney's fees expended in connection with such an action
from theother party.
20. DISCRIMINATION:
No discrimination shall be made in the employment of persons
under this agreement because of race, color, national origin,
ancestry, religion, secual orientation, or sex of such person.
If Contractor is found to be in violation of the
nondiscrimination provisions of the State of California Fair
Employment Practices Act or similar provisions of federal law
or executive order in the performance of this agreement, it
shall thereby be found in material breach of this agreement.
Thereupon, City shall have the power to cancel or suspend this
agreement, in whole or in part, or to deduct from the amount
payable to Contractor the sum of Twenty-Five Dollars ($25) for
each person for each calendar day during which such person was
discriminated against, as damages for said breach of contract,
or both. Only a finding of the State of California Fair
Employment Practices Commission or the equivalent federal
agency or officer shall constitute evidence of a violation of
contract under this paragraph.
If Contractor is found in violation of the nondiscrimination
provisions of this agreement or the applicable affirmative
action guidelines pertaining to this agreement, Contractor
shall be found in material breach of this agreement.
Thereupon, City shall have the power to cancel or suspend this
agreement, in whole or in part, or to deduct from the amount
payable to the Contractor the sum of Two Hundred Fifty Dollars
($250) for each calendar day during which the Contractor is
found to have been in noncompliance as damages for said breach
of contract, or both.
21. AGREEMENT CONTAINS ALL UNDERSTANDINGS:
This document represents the entire and integrated agreement
between City and Contractor and supersedes all prior
negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written
or oral. This document may be amended only by written
instrument, signed by both City and Contractor. All
provisions of this agreement are expressly made conditions.
This agreement shall be governed by the laws of. the State of
California.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Contractor have executed this
agreement on the day and year first above written.
NEL N/NYGAARD
1
z
P esident
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
John Dunn, City Administrative Officer
�.
Afr)jo rgse Ci Attorney
e
EXHIBIT 1: CONSISTS OF PAGE 6 THROUGH 16 OF NELSON/NYGAARD PROPOSAL..
WORK SCOPE
The following work scope describes what we plan to do and the
methods we propose for doing it. The work scope divides the
overall project into three separate sub-projects, which can stand
alone. They are, the Transit Development Plan, Transit Center Site
Selection, and Downtown Shuttle Plan. Work tasks for each
subproject are described below:
Subproject-As Transit Develormment Plan
Task 1. Finalize Project Work Plan
An initial planning meeting will be held with City staff and
members of the Technical Advisory Committee. This meeting will
review the proposed work plan, identify availability of
information, review the project schedule, finalize the study
objectives, and expected report content, and set a preliminary
schedule for further meetings.
The deliverable from this task will be a final work plan and
schedule, which will be monitored throughout the project.
Task 2. Goals and Objectives
The recently completed Transit Performance Audit identified the
need to establish specific targets for the various measures of
performance. While there is substantial reason to believe that San
Luis Obispo Transitoutperforms most systems in nearly all of the
standard indicators, specific targets are still needed to provide
a framework for future policy.
Based on our experience from the Performance Audit and
consultations with the TAC, we will draft a structured set of
goals, objectives, and performance indicators, along with methods
to evaluate how well the system is meeting its objectives.
The draft goals, objectives, and performance standards will be
discussed with the TAC and other appropriate staff. This review
will provide a forum to identify areas of conflict, set priorities
among competing goals, and tailor the system to the needs of the
organization. The relationship of these goals and objectives to
the City's biennial budget process will be further explored. The
draft goals and objectives will then be modified to reflect the
input received.
j
6
� We
OTask 3. Existing System Evaluation
The evaluation of existing conditions combines a review of existing
data, and extensive original data collection. The deliverable for
this task will be a working paper evaluating existing service
conditions, including an identification of performance issues which
require further evaluation in the operating plan section of this
TDP.
3.1 Review of Existing Data
Any existing data on system performance will ke analyzed in this
subtask. Existing data includes Contractor's State Controller's
reports, TDA Claim forms, City budgets, and the recently completed
Performance Audit.
3.2 Ride Check
The Performance Audit revealed a lack of general data about on-
time performance or ridership. To provide a complete snapshot of
system performance, we will perform a 100% weekday ride check of
the system. Data collectors will be assigned to ride all scheduled
trips throughout a typical service day. The checkers will collect
the following data:
On-time performance, by trip and timepoint.
Passenger boardings by fare type.
• Passenger boardings and alightings by location and time
of day.
• Passenger loads by time of day and route segment.
The purpose of. the ride check is not to "reinvent thewheel^ , but
to fill in where existing data is missing. Such checks frequently
bring to light problems and/or opportunities that had not
previously been identified, often leading to new ideas for refining
service design, scheduling, and operations.
Task 4. Recommend System Improvements
The objective of this task is to develop and evaluate a range of
potential improvements which will increase service efficiency
and/or effectiveness. Though we do not anticipate the need for
major service changes, we will closely evaluate basic service
characteristics, including:
• Connectivity, both intra-system and between operators
(including City-Regional connections)
• Areas which are currently underserved, or which may be
underserved in the future, given development proposals.
• Changes required in frequencies and/or service hours to
meet changing demand.
• Schedule adjustments required to improve on-time
performance and better meet demand.
• Changes in service required to meet the challenges of
Clean Airlegislation and other initiatives.
If changes are recommended, they will proceed through the following
subtasks:
4.1 Develop Preliminary -Alternatives'
Recognizing that there is often more than one way to serve a
market, a wide range of alternatives will be evaluated. These
could include:
• Extending fixed route service into unserved areas.
• Deleting or consolidating unproductive services.
• Changing service hours or schedules.
• Introducing specialized services such as demand-response
or route-deviation service in some areas.
• Improved coordination with other providers.
4.2 Develop Evaluation Criteria
We will develop a set of general criteria to evaluate the proposed
alternatives. These could include:
Cost (operating and/or capital) .'
Revenue impact
Ridership impact
Farebox recovery impact
Impact on system productivity or efficiency
Impact on service quality or effectiveness
Compatibility to goals and objectives identified in Task 2.
4.3 Select_Recommended Alternatives
The criteria developed in Task 4.2 will be used to conduct a
general evaluation of the proposed alternatives. The pros and cons
of each alternative will be enumerated. The initial list will then
be narrowed to a more limited number of improvements that are
believed to best serve the needs of the City. Recommended service
changes will be reviewed with staff prior to development of the
Operating Plan in Task 5.
8
Task 5. Operating Plan
This task will take all specific recommendations from Task 4 and
place them in the context of the overall operation, producing an
Operating plan for the next five years.. The operating plan will
take into account the lead time for such items as adding vehicles,
hiring staff, conducting a public input process, and marketing.
The plan will include both short term and longer term scenarios and
a clear method for measuring progress in meeting the plan.
The operating plan will also address the important issue of
coordination with the regional system. Since the. City of San Luis
Obispo expends a large percentage of its local TDA funds for the
regional system, it is important that it's residents receive
maximum benefit from the system. Possible coordination potentials
include development of a single RFP for service, allowing for
sharing of facilities and vehicles, and allowing for economies of
scale for both systems. In addition, the potential for
consolidation under a single administration could be explored if
appropriate.
Task 6. Marketing Plan
SLO Transit already has a substantial captive market in University
and other school trips. Our marketing study will examine how the
agency can diversify and compete for a wider market, including
recreational and other discretionary trips. A key element of this
effort will be to look at potential new disincentives to driving,
such as the upcoming increase in gas tax, parking costs,
congestion, and environmental concerns, and to suggest ways to
tailor transit marketing to take advantage of these disincentives.
Since effective marketing also requires good data about user
demand, we will also suggest appropriate user survey methodologies
for the agency to pursue. Joint marketing strategies,
incorporating the regional system will also be included.
These assessments and recommendations will be combined into a
comprehensive plan for attracting - more riders to the transit
system, along with a proposed budget for implementation.
Task 7. Capital Improvement Plan
7.1 Fleet Replacement/Expansion
We will evaluate the age and condition of the current vehicles,
and determine their expected useful life given the proposed
operating plan. From this information, we will develop a schedule
for fleet rebuilding and replacement, identifying which vehicles
should be rebuilt or replaced in each fiscal year.
O
9
L1�7
1 �
If additional vehicles are required to implement proposed service
changes, we will identify the type of vehicles required and
recommend a schedule for these :acquistions.
Emphasis will be placed on alternatives for expanding peak period
capacity. Until recently, the City transit system has been able
to "borrow" regional transit vehicles during their down time
between runs to supplement City services. With the recent change
in contractor on the regional system, this -is no longer possible,
creating a peak period problem for the City system, that may
warrant immediate capital expansion.
7.2 Passenger Amenities
In addition to our study of the main transit center relocation
project we will review of the number, location, and condition of
passenger stop signage, benches and shelters. Any new facilities
needed for the proposed plan will be costed and included in the
funding needs schedule.
Cost estimates will be based on standard industry data adjusted
for local experience.
7.3 Other Capital Needs
Other capital needs will also be assessed and scheduled. These
could include radio equipment, wheelchair lift replacements, or
other facilities and equipment not described in the sections above.
Task S. Financial Plan
The objective of this task is to developa financial plan that
supports the operating plan developed in Task 5 and the capital
plan developed in Task 7. The financial plan will provide a
five-year forecast of revenues and expenditures, and provide a
framework for improved budgeting of capital and operating funds.
This task will include the following steps:
8.1 Analyze 'Existing Revenue Sources
Historical information will be reviewed to identify current revenue
sources, changes that have occurred in the amount derived by
source, and the factors that will influence future changes. This
step will include evaluation of existing sources and projections
of growth/decline in future years. These sources will include
fares, TDA funding, Section 8 capital funding and other state and
local sources.
10
i
8.2 Proiect Overating Costs
Operating costs will be projected for five years for both the
existing base service and the recommended service changes
identified in Task 4. The assumptions used in these .projections
will be specified, and the factors that would impact them will be
identified. This subtask will include evaluating the City,s
contribution to regional services, and defining methods for
establishing inflation cost increases that are appropriate for San
Luis Obispo.
8.3 Proiect Capital Costs
Capital costs will be projected based on the programs developed in
Task 7. A five year program will be developed showing estimated
expenditures by year and projected funding sources.
8.4 Develop Funding Recommendations
The plan will include an evaluation of possible new funding
opportunities, including both traditional and °creative^ sources.
These sources will be evaluated to determine how much revenue they
can be expected to generate, as well as their likelihood of
success, ease of implementation, and political viability.
O8.5 Financial Plan
The draft financial plan will then be prepared. It will be
reviewed in detail with staff so that they have a full
understanding of its assumptions and projection methods. It will
be organized so as to be useful as an ongoing tool for financial
planning.
Task 9. Draft and Final Plan
This task produces the actual document that reflects the agreements
reached in the earlier stages of the project. The plan will go
through the following steps:
9.1 Draft Five Year Plan
The draft plan will be prepared and submitted with a summary that
could be used for public distribution. This will be submitted over
30 days in advance of the ' _planned public hearing to allow adequate
time for notification. The draft plan will be presented to the TAC
and to the City Council.
9.2 Public Hearing
Our team will be available to present the draft report-at a public
hearing in San Luis Obispo. An Executive Summary of the draft
O report will be printed for distribution at the public hearing.
11
Comments from staff, City Council, and the public will be
documented and incorporated into the final plan as appropriate.
9.3 Final Plan
The final Transit Development Plan will include the input from
staff, TAC members, and members of the public.
Subnroiect B. Transit Center Relocation
The relocation of the downtown San Luis Obispo transit center is
a pivotal project for the future of transit in the region. An
effective timed transfer operation is essential for maintaining a
versatile transit network, and providing a foundation for future
growth.
Our approach to the site selection study will include the following
steps:
Task 1. Finalize Project Work Plan
In the initial meeting with staff, we will determine an exact work
scope for the site selection study, and identify the necessary
information required to complete the scope. At this meeting, we
will determine what resources can be expected to come from the City
such as zoning, land value and ownership information. Due to the
regional nature of the transit center, we recommend that a broader
Advisory Committee be designated for this project, including
appropriate County and SLOACC staff.
Task 2. Heeds Assessment/Functional Analysis
Working with City and County staff, we will assess the operational
and functional needs of the new transit center. This analysis will
be designed to answer the following questions:
• What size facility is needed to provide adequate bus capacity?
What size is minimally needed, and what is desirable,
including the needs of the City system, regional system, and
other potential carriers?
• What amenities should be available at the transit center,
apart from shelters_ and information displays? What provision
should be made for restrooms, phones, and vendors? Will the
transit agency staff an information/supervisor booth on-site?
• What design criteria should be included to make the center
function optimally, and what criteria should be included to
improve the usability of the center from the passenger's
perspective.
12
I
Task 3. Evaluation Criteria
Based on the functional analysis completed in Task 2, we will
develop a set of criteria on which each potential site can be
judged. These could include the following:
• Acreage. Can the site accommodate enough buses in a single
pulse? is it large enough to permit future expansion?
• Access and Safety. What are the adjacent street conditions
at the site? Can transit vehicles maneuver in/around the
site? Does the site allow for safe transfers for both
ambulatory and disabled passengers?
• Reliability. Running times have been a serious problem for
the present transit center, especially during the afternoon
peak. Does the new site add, reduce, or shift running times
on existing routes? How would these running time changes
impact the reliability' of timed transfer connections? Would
the changes affect operating costs, and if so, how?
• Proximity to Trip Generators. Though the primary purpose of
a transit center is to permit direct connections between
routes, a major secondary benefit is to bring all routes
directly to major destinations.
• Convenience for Transferring Passengers. At the present timed
transfer site, passengers must,cross a busy street to transfer
between City and regional services. What constraints does
the new site present? Do streets or other barriers impede
transferring passengers? What is the typical walking distance
for transferring at each site, assuming An optimal
arrangement of buses?
• Amenities. Does the site already have some .amenities for
passengers and/or drivers, such as phones and restrooms? Does
the site constrain what amenities can be provided?
• Cost. Is the site on public or private property? . If the
latter, should it be acquired or developed by the owner? What
will be the ultimate cost to the public?
• Funding Possibilities. Does the site provide benefits to
other interested parties, such as neighboring businesses or
institutions? Does it offer possibilities of joint
development? Are there other possible funding sources that
are specific to the site? For example, Proposition 116
funding may be available for a development at or near the
AMTRAK station, which will not be available elsewhere.
O
13
A4G'/ 7
" Neighborhood Impact. What impacts, positive or negative,
would a transit center have on the immediate area around the
site? How does the site fit into other planning activities
in the area? Would relocations be required, adding to cost
and impact?
We will work with staff and the Technical Advisory Committee to
develop a consensus .on the exact list of criteria and the weights
that will be assigned to each. This weighted list will be the
deliverable from this task.
Task 4. Identify Possible Sites
Working with City staff, we will develop a list of candidate sites
that potentially meet the functional needs identified in Task 2.
These will include those sites already under consideration, but
may also include otherpossibilities that arise in the course of
the study. To provide a "do nothing" option, the present transit
center will be included in the list for evaluation.
Task S. Evaluate Possible Sites
Each proposed site will then be evaluated according to the agreed
criteria. A Site Selection Scorecard or evaluation matrix will be
developed for each candidate site. For each of the criteria
established in Task 3, each proposed site will be assigned a score
between 1 and 5, based on how well it meets that criterion. The
resulting scorecard will provide a concise summary of the
advantages and disadvantages of each site.
The scores for each site will then be combined, according to the
system of weights agreed on in Task 3, to produce an overall
ranking of the proposed sites.
Task 6. Draft and Final Site Selection Study
A draft and final Site Selection report will be prepared as a
"stand alone" document separate from the Transit Development Plan.
The draft document will be presented to Staff and to the Technical
Advisory Committee and City Council. Comments will be incorporated
in the final study report. Public hearing support will be provided
as needed.
Subproject C Downtown Shuttle Study
Because the downtown shuttle service has been implemented since the
original draft of the Proposal Request, we recommend a slightly
revised scope. The new scope recognizes that the shuttle is
currently operating as an integral part of the transit system.
Accordingly, the following activities will proceed in close
conjunction with the TDP activities documented in section A.
14
�,�18
OTask 1 Goals and Objectives
In our early meetings with the. TAC, we will- clarify the agency's
goals for the shuttle. This would not be limited to ridership and
efficiency standards, but would also identify the rolethat the
City wants the shuttle to play in supporting pedestrian activity
downtown, and the desired relationship between the shuttle and
other transit services. .
To assist the TAC in establishing reasonable goals, we will provide
information on the performance of similar services in other
communities.
Task 2 Ride Check and User Survey `
Our system ride check will include a complete check of the shuttle,-
including on-time performance and ridership by stop. This will
help identify any operational problems with the present service,
and help us to identify possible improvements to the route,
schedules, or service hours.
In addition, an on-board survey will be conducted on the shuttle.
The questionnaire developed for this purpose will be intended to
be filled out on the vehicle, and returned to the data collector
on board. The questionnaire will be designed to give a profile
of:
• Passenger demographics - who is' using the shuttle?
• Origins and Destinations - where are passengers going to/from?
• Mode of access to downtown (parking, bus, walking, etc. )
• Trip purpose - Why are passenger's on-board
• Passenger attitudes - what improvements are needed from the
passenger's perspective?
Task 3 Operating Plan
This task will include an evaluation of the present operation of
the shuttle service, and will identify potential improvements
required for continued operation. Particular attention will be
given to the problem of accessibility for the disabled, since
this issue is not addressed by the present service.
Task 4 Marketing Plan
As part of our TDP marketing plan, we will evaluate the existing
marketing efforts for the shuttle, and recommend improvements in
� i marketing strategy.
15
This analysis will be based both on the performance of the existing
operation, and the experience of other agencies with similar
shuttle services.
Task 5 Capital Plan
The current shuttle vehicles are being leased for a trial period.
While they provide a very visible and distinctive vehicle, they
have several drawbacks including their lack of access for disabled
riders. A capital plan for the shuttle will include the
development of a permanent vehicle fleet, and other passenger
amenities necessary for continued operation.
O
.16