to view Short Range Transit Plan FY 2007/2008 - Tri Delta Transit

More documents

Recommendations

Info

and the many vacant parcels continue to be developed. The expectedopening of the Highway 4 bypass directly serving this area will alsoallow introduction of direct express bus service, a factor that mayincrease connecting patronage on these local routes if a reliable localtransfer point can be established.In contrast, Route 386 is a lifeline connector route between DiscoveryBay, an affluent exurban development, and Brentwood, a rapidlygrowing suburban city. Route productivity is low compared to the TriDelta Transit system average, but is comparable to many rural transitsystems and is significantly higher than the dial-a-ride system.Productivity is likely to increase as more planned development occursin the Discovery Bay area.Figure 3.6 summarizes the average cost recovery ratio from operatingrevenues (fares and other related revenues) for each Tri Delta Transitroute in 2003-04 and FY 2006-07. The system average was 18.4%during FY 2003-04 and 15.8% in FY 2006-07. The 49’er football gamespecials covered more than all their expenses, while all other shuttleswere free. Neither productivity nor fares/other operating revenuesrecovery ratio is necessarily useful as a performance indicator by itself.In contrast to their productivity performance, in FY 2006-07, RoutesDX-1 and DX-2 had the highest fare box cost recovery ratios of anyregular Tri Delta Transit routes, at 36.1% and 24.9%, respectively.Route 300 was the most productive express route, but had a fare boxcost recovery ratio (12.1%) below the system average. Route 300passengers pay the estimated average fare, but travel much fartherthan the overall Tri Delta Transit average trip length. Route 200 hadboth low productivity, as measured by boardings/RVH (7.3) and farebox cost recovery ratio (6.9%).Figure 3.6 Operating Revenue Cost Recovery Ratios FY 2006-0760.0%50.0%40.0%30.0%20.0%10.0%0.0%DXDX-1DX-2200300Shuttles70201BDR380383384385386387388389390391Sat-BDRSat-392Sat-393Sat-394Sun-392Sun-393Sun-394FY 2003-04 FY 2006-0736
The best performing local routes during in terms of operating revenuesto cost ratio were: Route 389 (23.5%), Route 387 (22.5%), Route 380(18.4%), Route 391 (17.7%), and the Brentwood Dimes-A-Ride(14.6% including City of Brentwood fare subsidies of $0.80 per ride)and Route 388 (14.2%). Except for the Dimes-A-Ride route, theseoverall best performers are located in the older, more denselydeveloped portions of the Tri Delta Transit service area, e.g., BayPoint, Pittsburg and Antioch generally north of the Highway 4 freeway.These areas also have the highest density of transit dependence asshown by data from the Contra Costa County Low IncomeTransportation Plan.The next best performers were Route 390 (13.4%) and Route 383(12.8%). All other routes (70, 384, 385, 386) had operating revenuecost recovery ratios of less than 10%, matching their relatively lowproductivity in terms of boardings/RVH. As previously noted, Route 70provides a community shuttle within Pittsburg. Routes 384 to 386serve the newest, most affluent and least densely developed portion ofthe service area. Productivity and fare box cost recovery on theselatter routes should increase over time as vacant areas are developedand more people are served.Other Fixed Route Statistics & Performance IndicatorsTable 3.7 summarizes other operating statistics and performanceindicators for fixed route service.Most of these standards were met. In one case, Average Miles BetweenRoad calls, Tri Delta Transit greatly exceeded the standard adopted inthe previous Short Range Transit Plan.Table 3.7 Fixed Route Operating Statistics & Performance IndicatorsStatistic/ or MeasureValueMeetStandard?CommentNumber of Late Buses 2,028 -- Used to calculate performance measureNumber of Lift Passengers 25,334 -- Less expensive to carry on FR buses than DARNumber of Bicycles Carried 16,685 -- Bicycles carried on fixed route buses only.Preventable Accidents 41 -- Used to calculate performance measureCustomer Complaint Calls Received 458 -- Used to calculate performance measureNumber of Mechanical Failures 71 -- Used to calculate performance measureNumber of Road Calls 46 -- Used to calculate performance measureFTA Road Calls – Other 31 -- Used to calculate performance measureTotal Road Calls 148 -- Used to calculate performance measureOn-Time Performance – Fixed Route 90.07% Yes Standard is 90%Miles Between Preventable Accidents 68,239 Yes Nearly meets high end of standard (70,000 miles)Percentage of Riders Complaining 0.018% Yes Measure changed from 2005 SRTPAverage Miles Between Road calls(based on RVM)16,625 Yes Previous SRTP standard exceeded by a widemargin; recommend increasing the standard.37
Page 1: Short Range Transit PlanFY 2007/08
Page 9 and 10: List of TablesTable 1.1 ECCTA Servi
Page 11 and 12: Executive SummaryChapter One of thi
Page 13 and 14: Introduction & OverviewCHAPTER1Purp
Page 15 and 16: Table 1.1 ECCTA Service Area Popula
Page 17 and 18: For purposes of discussions relativ
Page 19 and 20: Commute & Other Travel PatternsAs p
Page 21 and 22: This data is presented in Table 1.4
Page 23 and 24: • Marketing and Operations Commit
Page 25 and 26: Figure 1.2a. Tri Delta Transit Rout
Page 27 and 28: Route 200 -Martinez/Pittsburg links
Page 29 and 30: ECCTA Dial-a-RideDial-a-Ride is the
Page 31 and 32: Fare StructureThe ECCTA Board of Di
Page 33 and 34: ModelYearNumberFixed RouteTable 1.7
Page 35 and 36: Goals, Objectives & StandardsBackgr
Page 37 and 38: Table 2.2 Summary of ECCTA Objectiv
Page 39 and 40: CHAPTER3System & Service Evaluation
Page 41 and 42: DestinationsTotalBoardingsTotalRVHE
Page 43 and 44: In FY 2002-03, increases in unit op
Page 45: Individual Fixed Route PerformanceP
Page 51 and 52: Figure 3.7 DAR Total Boardings, FY
Page 53 and 54: Dial-A-Ride/Paratransit Trends by T
Page 55 and 56: City of Antioch. The farebox cost r
Page 57 and 58: DAR Evaluation SummaryTri Delta Tra
Page 59 and 60: The Brentwood park-ride lot is phys
Page 61 and 62: Each completed survey provides info
Page 63 and 64: Those aged 12 to 30 constitute 60%
Page 65 and 66: Most transit users (77%) ride the b
Page 67 and 68: Figure 3.21 shows in another way th
Page 69 and 70: MTC Sponsored Survey, February 2007
Page 71 and 72: the adopted productivity standard,
Page 73 and 74: Federal Title VI ProgramECCTA has e
Page 75 and 76: CHAPTER4Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Opt
Page 77 and 78: While left-hand doors reduce EmX ve
Page 79 and 80: According to the FTA report “Las
Page 81 and 82: Figure 4.9 Typical MAX StationEach
Page 83 and 84: Figure 4.12 Orange Line BRT Vehicle
Page 85 and 86: The Bus way has suffered from many
Page 87 and 88: Figure 4.17 Pittsburgh South Bus wa
Page 89 and 90: Mixed traffic BRT routes with trans
Page 91 and 92: Figure 4.19 Tri Delta Transit Fixed
Page 93 and 94: to the proposed Railroad Avenue and
Page 95 and 96: Figure 4.21 Elevated BRT Station Co
Page 97 and 98:
CHAPTER5Operations Plan and BudgetT
Page 99 and 100:
Transit ChallengesTri Delta Transit
Page 101 and 102:
Another potential opportunity for i
Page 103 and 104:
The orig inal eBART proposal would
Page 105 and 106:
Based on the principles listed abov
Page 107 and 108:
Future Tri Delta Transit route revi
Page 112 and 113:
100
Page 114 and 115:
Table 6.1 ECCTA Planned CapitalPrio
Page 116 and 117:
Capital Project DetailsFR Fleet Enh
Page 118 and 119:
AppendixRESOLUTION #080123cBay Area
Page 120 and 121:
Goals1. Everyone in the Bay Region
show all

to view Short Range Transit Plan FY 2007/2008 - Tri Delta Transit

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?