Service Proposal for the City of Ashland, Oregon

Similar documents
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PLAN FOR THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN

1999 On-Board Sacramento Regional Transit District Survey

CITY OF ELK GROVE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT

PASSENGER SURVEY RESULTS

4 Ridership Growth Study

Executive Summary. TUCSON TRANSIT ON BOARD ORIGIN AND DESTINATION SURVEY Conducted October City of Tucson Department of Transportation

Pocatello Regional Transit Master Transit Plan Draft Recommendations

Title VI Fare Change Equity Analysis

Rochester Area Bike Sharing Program Study

Topics To Be Covered. Summarize Tier 2 Council Direction Discuss Mill and Ash Alternatives Next Steps

CARTA East Cooper Transit Service Transportation Committee Town of Mount Pleasant. February 5, 2013

To secure Council approval for a pilot expansion of Transit service to the villages of St. Davids and Queenston.

Transit Workshop with MPO Board

January Project No

Arterial Transitway Corridors Study. Ave

Bus Riders of Saskatoon Meeting with City of Saskatoon Utility Services Department October 23, :30pm 2:30pm th Street West, Saskatoon

TRANSIT & NON-MOTORIZED PLAN DRAFT FINAL REPORT Butte County Association of Governments

Capital Metro Monthly Ridership Report September 2017 (Fiscal Year-end 2017)

FY2006 Budget Board Budget Committee request for information. Board Request: Detailed information on bus route 5A DC-Dulless Airport

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Understanding Rail and Bus Ridership

Bus Rapid Transit ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS. Open House

Typical Rush Hour Commute. PennyforTransportation.com

Arlington County 10-Year Transit Development Plan & Premium Transit Network Briefing. May 2016

SCAG EMERGING REGIONAL ISSUES: GOMONROVIA OVERVIEW. City of Monrovia

BUILDING THE CASE FOR TRAVEL OPTIONS IN WASHING TON COUNTY. Image: Steve Morgan. Image: Steve Morgan

Evan Johnson, Tindale Oliver & Associates. Alan Danaher, P.E., PTOE, AICP, PTP

Peterborough Council on Aging

Konstantin Glukhenkiy Economic Affairs Officer

Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council

Everett Transit Action Plan. Community Open House November 16, 2015

Craig Rempp, Transit Superintendent Mary Karlsson, Kimley-Horn. Mankato City Council Meeting 6/25/2018

Community Transit Solutions for the Suburbs APTA Annual Meeting Steve Fittante, New Jersey Transit Corporation September 30, 2013

EASTERN SHORE ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION MODE STUDY FOR DISABLED, ELDERLY, LOW-INCOME, AND YOUTH POPULATION

Multi-Modal Transportation Assessment and Development Strategy. January 13, 2014 Madison County Commission Meeting

Working with School Bus Operators to Provide Community Transportation

I 35 Xpress Bus on Shoulder

Transportation Master Plan Advisory Task Force

Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations APPENDIX C TRANSIT STATION ACCESS PLANNING TOOL INSTRUCTIONS

Calgary Transit Route 302 Southeast BRT Year One Review June

Drivers of Ridership and Revenue

BEAR CREEK PARK AND RIDE

Arterial Transitway Corridors Study

TRANSPORTATION TOMORROW SURVEY

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

Appendix C: Online Survey Comments

Market Factors and Demand Analysis. World Bank

Transportation-Demand Management Community Presentation

Dear City Council Members,

Members of the Board of Directors. Wendy Knowles, Clerk of the Board. Metrolink Ridership and Revenue Annual Report

Sustainable Transportation Plan Draft 4/24/2012

CONTENTS PREFACE 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE 2.0 POLICY AND GOVERNANCE 3.0 SUMMARY OF PROGRESS 4.0 NATURE OF DEMAND 5.0 TRAVEL AND PARKING INITIATIVES

2017 COAST TRANSIT AUTHORITY SERVICE REVIEW

WALK- AND bike-friendly TURLOCK

Public Event 1 Community Workshops

Where We Live and Work Today

Purpose and Need. Chapter Introduction. 2.2 Project Purpose and Need Project Purpose Project Need

Capital Metro Monthly Ridership Report January 2018 (Fiscal Year 2018)

JAUNT in Albemarle County FY11

VI. Market Factors and Deamnd Analysis

Customer Service and Operations Committee. Board Information Item III-A. March 12, 2015

Travel and Rider Characteristics for Metrobus

Philadelphia Bus Network Choices Report

CITY OF COCOA BEACH 2025 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. Section VIII Mobility Element Goals, Objectives, and Policies

2012 Transit Study Randolph County

City of Novi Non-Motorized Master Plan 2011 Executive Summary

Appendix A-1: Purpose and Need Statement

PROJECT OVERVIEW. Auburn Station Access Improvements Project

CITY OF LOS ANGELES INTER-DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE SUBJECT: UPDATE ON DODGER STADIUM SHUTTLE SERVICE FOR THE 2009 BASEBALL SEASON (CF )

Appendix 1 Transit Network Analysis

City of Davenport CitiBus Public Transportation Study. April 2015

Best Southwest Transportation Committee. North Central Texas Council of Governments Transportation Department

2014 Metro Transit Customer Survey Highlights

Corpus Christi Metropolitan Transportation Plan Fiscal Year Introduction:

REVENUE & RIDERSHIP REPORT SEPTEMBER 2018

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT

Seattle Transit Master Plan

4 DISRUPTION MANAGEMENT PLAN HIGHWAY 7 RAPIDWAY CONSTRUCTION BETWEEN BAYVIEW AVENUE AND WARDEN AVENUE TOWNS OF MARKHAM AND RICHMOND HILL

SANTA CLARA COUNTYWIDE BICYCLE PLAN August 2008

Feasibility of Commuter Bus Service Between Wahpeton-Breckenridge and Fargo-Moorhead

2017 LYNX RIDERSHIP YEAR END REVIEW

BICYCLE PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION UPDATE. Transportation and Trinity River Project Council Committee June 13, 2016

TORONTO TRANSIT COMMISSION REPORT NO.

Central Jersey Transportation Forum. March 2007

Bus Rapid Transit Plans

Transit Operations in the I-95 Express Lanes

95 th Street Corridor Transportation Plan. Steering Committee Meeting

Transit Ridership - Why the Decline and How to Increase. Hosted by the. Virginia Transit Association

Customer Satisfaction Tracking Report 2016 Quarter 1

Eliminate on-street parking where it will allow for a dedicated bus only lane %

Chapter 2. Bellingham Bicycle Master Plan Chapter 2: Policies and Actions

Factors that Affect Fixed-Route Ridership Frequency Connections and accessibility Travel time Travel cost Service area coverage Reliability

Planning for tennis in your Local Government Area. A resource from Tennis Australia

Transit System Performance Update

University of Leeds Travel Plan

Planning Regionally With Transit

RTC TRANSIT OPERATING STATISTICS RTC RIDE RTC RAPID RTC INTERCITY SIERRA SPIRIT

AGENDA ITEM G-2 Public Works

Sound Transit Permit Parking Program


Transcription:

Rogue Valley Transportation District 3200 Crater Lake Avenue Medford, Oregon 97504-9075 Phone (541) 608-2429 Fax (541) 773-2877 Visit our website at: www.rvtd.org 2009-2011 Service Proposal for the City of Ashland, Oregon March 9, 2009 Honorable Council Members and City of Ashland Staff, With your demonstrated support for providing access to all modes of transportation, RVTD is pleased to forward a proposal for transit service enhancements during the 2009-2011 Fiscal Years. Also included is a presentation of the surveying and marketing efforts completed recently in the City of Ashland. Transit Service History 1997 - Exclusive Loop Service Started w/ $0.25 fare 1999 - Loop Discontinued 2001 - Loop Resumed w/ $0.25 fare 2002 - Both Loop and Route 10 Free Fare 2006 to Present Day- Loop Discontinued, Route 10 fare at $0.50 Based on discussions with City Staff members Mike Faught and Ann Seltzer, it was determined that a cafeteria of options should be presented. Ultimately, there are two variables between the options. Those are: the cost of the fare and the hours of operation. RVTD is seeking a 22-month contract starting September 7, 2009 and ending June 30, 2011. The contract is based on the District s direct cost per mile of operations (fuel and maintenance only) and the cost of the driver(s) wages and benefits. This contract amount would be billed to the City on a quarterly basis and reduced by the total fare box collected from the Loop route. This proposal would only affect the Route #10 agreement in that the fare charged on the Loop must be the same fare charged on the Route #10 within the City. The Valley Lift paratransit service area would not be extended because the Loop route follows the same path as Route #10. The Valley Lift service clauses are still in effect and tied to the fare.

Ashland Ridership and Service Levels Premium transit service, such as a lower fare and frequent bus arrivals, will generate the most citizens, visitors and students choosing to use transit. This effect is demonstrated well in the City s history of fluctuating levels of transit service. When the Free Fare and Loop were both in place, ridership was at it s highest ever seen; between January and June 2006 RVTD and the City provided 152,606 transit trips. When the Loop was discontinued and fare raised to 50 cents, ridership plummeted to 46,021 between July and December 2006. Ashland Ridership 1997-2008 160,000 140,000 120,000 Ridership 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 Jan.-June 1997 Jan.-June 1998 Jan.-June 1999 Jan.-June 2000 Jan.-June 2001 Jan.-June 2002 Jan.-June 2003 Jan.-June 2004 Months and Year Jan.-June 2005 Jan.-June 2006 Jan.-June 2007 Jan.-June 2008 Total Ashland trips Rt 5 & Rt 10 - $0.25 Total Ashland trips Rt 5 & Rt 10 - Free Ashland Ridership on Rt 10, No Rt 5 Total Ashland trips Rt 10 - $0.50 Because the Loop and Free Fare were in place at the same time during the ridership boom years, it has been difficult to state which was more important for the rider: frequency or cost. The City s ridership since 2006 has not grown as would be expected after the residual effects of a fare shock would have occurred, usually in the first year. This has lead RVTD to determine frequency as a more important factor than fare cost for someone deciding whether to use transit in the City of Ashland. 2

Route description- The Ashland Loop is a five-mile route that begins and ends at the Ashland Plaza. The route would serve the Plaza, E. Main St., the University, Ashland St., Tolman Creek Rd. and Siskiyou Blvd. The route can travel in either direction while in south Ashland however 15-minute service would only be possible with both Route #10 and the Loop traveling in the same direction. A passenger activity survey completed in 2008 generated useful information about the highest and best use of a Loop route. The previous Loop, Route #5, ran from the Plaza to Ashland St. and around E. Main and back. It did not travel along Tolman Creek Rd. or Siskiyou Blvd. The survey showed that Tolman Creek and Siskiyou Blvd generate considerably more ridership than the E. main loop. Since the proposed loop cannot serve both areas within the time span available, RVTD used the passenger activity data to determine where the loop could run to be efficient and cost-effective. 3

Service Hours- As one of the components to minimize costs, RVTD has analyzed a route that would run: 6.5 hours per day (requiring 1 FT Driver) 9.0 hours per day (requiring 1 FT Driver and 1 PT Driver) 13.0 hours per day (requiring 2 FT Drivers) A 6.5-hour operating day at the cost quoted is only possible with continuous service, meaning the driver cannot have a split shift with this scenario. This is the most economical, however it will not cover both an AM and a PM peak. The day could for example begin at 11:00AM and end at 5:30 PM capturing the majority of afternoon and work commute home travel. Or, the day could begin at 7:30AM and end at 2:00PM to capture early morning commute to work and school (SOU especially) trips. A 9.0-hour operating day at the cost quoted is only possible with continuous service, one driver works 4X10.5 s and a part-time driver picks up the Friday shift. This is the second most economical however will barely cover both an AM and a PM peak. The day could, for example, begin at 7:30AM and end at 5:30 PM. A 13.0-hour operating day at the cost quoted is a full-day service day requiring two fulltime drivers and a relief trip midday. This is the most costly option however will cover both an AM and a PM peak. The day would begin at 6:00AM and end at 7:00 PM. Fare Considerations Fare Shock often causes ridership to decrease within the first six-months (if in a small increment -$0.25 is standard) but eventually ridership recovers. This recovery can take longer if the increase is more drastic. RVTD increased fares from $1.00 to $2.00 in 2006 and ridership decreased 14% system-wide within the first six months but since has recovered and is near the 2005-2006 ridership levels again. The City of Ashland also increased fares in 2006, but from free to $0.50. Ridership plummeted and has not regained 2005-2006 levels. Evidence from each of the service types and fares the City has supported within the past decade suggests that ridership should have regained just as RVTD s did. RVTD is confident that frequency is a stronger determinant for generating higher levels of ridership than we see today. If the City moves forward with a fare increase, RVTD strongly suggests a move to $1.00 with increases of $0.25 during years when the budget is constrained to ensure a Loop service is maintained. 4

RVTD s current fare strata would also apply. For example: $1.00 - Full Fare (18-61 years of age) $0.50 - Reduced Fare (62 years and older, 10-17 years of age and disabled) Free - For transfers made within the City and for children 0-9 with paying adult Hardship Programs The City of Ashland has a program that was implemented in 2007 to provide monthly bus fare cards for eligible citizens who meet certain income criteria. RVTD also offers a bus pass program for employers, schools and other congruent populations. The RVTD bus pass cost for each person is heavily reduced due to passes being purchased in bulk for every person in the population. The current cost is $3.85 per person per month. These programs are alternatives for citizens who may experience hardship from a fare increase within the City. Partnership with SOU Each year, RVTD encourages SOU to adopt a bus pass program for its students. The students and the Administration have thus far declined a bus pass program to their students even after a campus-wide survey demonstrated the majority of students wanted the program and were willing to pay for it in increased parking fees. SOU could be a financial contributor and is a major benefactor of special transit services. 2008 Passenger Survey RVTD completed its system-wide triennial passenger survey in May 2008. A total of 288 surveys were collected on the Route #10. The surveys collected on this route demonstrated slightly higher incomes but on the whole there were no major demographic differences between Route #10 and the rest of the system. The following are selected highlights that likely include passengers traveling within Ashland: 77% of the passenger survey pool was between the ages of 19 and 64 63% did not have a valid driver s license 36% reported annual income of less than $15,000 72% walked to catch the bus; 66% boarded at a bus stop 57% reached the bus in less than five minutes, and 55% reached their final destination within five minutes after departing from the bus 29% used the bus to get to work 79% used the bus three to five days per week 50% used the bus five days per week 34% would not have made the trip if bus service were not available 5

Surveying of Ashland Passengers and Stop Activity RVTD completed a year-long passenger activity survey in accordance with Federal Transit Administration guidelines and practices. The stop activity will assist RVTD staff with planning and stop improvements. The following are the most frequently used bus stops in the City of Ashland: Ashland Plaza Albertson s Lithia Way and Oak Bi-Mart Lithia Way north of Oak Ashland Library Beanery (at the Y ) 6

Marketing Outreach of transit scheduling and availability to the public is an important component of any successful transit line. As part of the 2005 service agreement, RVTD proposed marketing activities that would be completed that service year. These included: RVTD s Interactive Education offered to primary education schools Bus Advertising sign advertising the Free Fare (now obsolete) Hosting transportation exhibits at local events Placing placards in each shelter with a map and schedule- 12 were posted in 2006 since then 6 have been vandalized or stolen and not yet replaced. Distributing transit schedules to be available at local venues Partnering with SOU Capstone students to increase support for transit Lastly, an effort to create a TV and Radio commercial was under way to promote the Free Fare when the message became obsolete due to the fare increase. 2009-2011 Marketing Proposal: RVTD would like to establish a marketing plan for a Loop system or any fare changes with through local resources. The City of Ashland, the Chamber of Commerce, the Student Affairs office of SOU and others could actively promote using transit. RVTD will commit to doing the following: Replacing the removed placards in the shelters Updating the information on all placards with new route/schedule information Provide free bus advertising space on one vehicle Continue to promote Ashland s system at local events In partnership with the City of Ashland, RVTD would like to see the following: Create a tri-fold specific to the Ashland system for distribution Distribute promotional information through utility bill stuffers Coordinate a public relations event to launch the new service Approach SOU Administration to request ongoing support of a fare buy-down Approach the Chamber of Commerce and local employers to encourage employees to use transit, especially in downtown Creation of a bus ad to utilize free ad space offer from RVTD 7