DOCSLIB.ORG

City of Elk Grove Public Transit Fares

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
City of Elk Grove Public Transit Fares AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.6 CITY OF ELK GROVE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT AGENDA TITLE: Receive an update and provide direction on the transit incentives for the California Department of Correctional Health Care Services MEETING DATE: December 14, 2011 PREPARED BY: Tiffani Fink, Transit System Manager DEPARTMENT HEAD: Richard Shepard, Public Works Director / City Engineer RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff will be presenting the City Council with an overview of the transit incentives being developed for the California Department of Correctional Health Care Services (CCHCS) move to Elk Grove. Staff requests direction regarding the noticing of Fare Modifications and Service Adjustments to benefit the CCHCS project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In August 2011, the California Correctional Health Care Services (CCHCS) Department announced that it had chosen the Laguna Springs Corporate Center on Laguna Springs Drive as the future home of its new headquarters. A primary factor in the selection of this site was the City of Elk Grove’s State Office Incentive Program. At its September 14, 2011 meeting, the City Council awarded $3.3 million in incentives under this program to both CCHCS and the property owner. At that time, Council also authorized staff to engage in discussions regarding other potential incentives. One of the incentives discussed was transit enhancements. These include reduced fares and additional transit service for CCHCS Elk Grove City Council December 14, 2011 Page 2 of 3 employees who would now be commuting to Elk Grove through Sacramento. Service Adjustments With the relocation of the CCHCS facility from Downtown Sacramento, many CCHCS employees will now be commuting into Elk Grove. Many of these employees currently utilize Transit services from many of our regional partners to access their current job site. With the move to Elk Grove, employees questioned how they could utilize Transit to access the new location. As part of the package to attract CCHCS to Elk Grove, the implementation of reverse commute routes from Downtown Sacramento to Elk Grove was offered. While the City’s current commute service is constrained by the number of buses available into Sacramento, the reverse commute routes would be able to make use of vehicles currently returning empty and not servicing passengers (deadheading) to Elk Grove. By placing these vehicles into service on several of the return trips to Elk Grove in the morning and again on the drive to Sacramento in the afternoon, the City is able to offer CCHCS employees access to transit service, without adding additional cost to purchase more buses. Staff has worked with the CCHCS to survey employees on their transit use and needs. A copy of the first survey and its responses are included as Attachment 2. From this survey, staff has identified a “need” for 5-6 daily round trips to serve the CCHCS facility. In addition, two shuttle routes are proposed to link the CCHCS facility and the Meadowview Light Rail Station for later evening linkages to Sacramento. Staff is developing a follow-up survey for CCHCS staff to determine their preference for different levels of service (frequency vs. coverage, for example). From this follow-up survey, preliminary routes will be designed for staff to discuss the proposed routes and gather feedback from CCHCS employees. From that feedback, the final routes will be designed. Service is anticipated to begin in April 2012. Fare Incentives To encourage transit usage from Sacramento to Elk Grove, and to benefit the employees of the CCHCS, staff has proposed an $80/month fare for passengers riding the reverse commute service in lieu of the normal commute fare of $100/month. 2 Elk Grove City Council December 14, 2011 Page 3 of 3 Following receipt of direction from City Council, staff will begin the public outreach process for the Fare Adjustment in accordance with Federal Transit Administration requirements. Staff plans to post the proposed Fare Schedule, included as Attachment 1, in all buses beginning January 2, 2012. The item will be scheduled for a public hearing at the second meeting in January and will be brought for consideration of adoption by the Council, to the second meeting in February. If adopted, the fare schedule would become effective in April. In addition to identifying preferred routes and proposing an alternate fare, staff has offered to coordinate bus pass sales with CCHCS through payroll deduction. FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed service adjustments are not included in the Fiscal Year 2011-12 Budget. Subject to direction from the Council, staff will include the item in the mid-year budget, as well as a discussion regarding potential funding sources for the service. Based on the proposed service levels above, the estimated annual cost of the service is $190,000. This cost will be defrayed by additional income received from new fares for the reverse commute. At this time, it is unknown how many new reverse commuter fares will be purchased. Assuming 100 new monthly fares purchased at $80/month, the annual income will be $96,000 leaving a net expense of $94,000. As ridership patterns become more consistent, it is expected that routes can be optimized. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Fare Schedule with CCHCS adjustments 2. Survey Results 3 ATTACHMENT 1 City of Elk Grove Public Transit Fares e-tran CASH FARE GENERAL PUBLIC $ 2.25 SENIOR/DISABLED/MEDICARE $ 1.10 STUDENT $ 1.10 GENERAL PUBLIC TRANSFER $ 0.50 SENIOR/DISABLED/TRANSFER $ 0.25 DAILY PASS GENERAL PUBLIC $ 6.00 SENIOR/DISABLED/MEDICARE $ 3.00 STUDENT $ 3.00 10-RIDE PASS GENERAL PUBLIC $ 22.50 SENIOR/DISABLED/MEDICARE $ 11.00 STUDENT $ 11.00 UNRESTRICTED MONTHLY PASS GENERAL PUBLIC $ 100.00 SENIOR/DISABLED/MEDICARE $ 50.00 STUDENT $ 50.00 LOCAL/REVERSE COMMUTE MONTHLY PASS GENERAL PUBLIC $ 80.00 SENIOR/DISABLED/MEDICARE $ 40.00 STUDENT $ 40.00 ROUTE DEVIATION REQUEST $ 0.50 e-van CASH FARE LOCAL $ 3.50 REGIONAL $ 7.50 GENERAL PUBLIC $ 7.00 SACRAMENTO AIRPORT $ 11.50 10-RIDE PASS LOCAL $ 35.00 REGIONAL $ 75.00 MONTHLY PASS (all passes capped at 44 trips a month) LOCAL $ 150.00 REGIONAL $ 150.00 4 Revised Bus Survey #1 1. How many days per week do you currently commute from home to work using the following: Response 1 2 3 4 5 Count Walk 8.7% (2) 4.3% (1) 13.0% (3) 8.7% (2) 82.6% (19) 23 bike 20.0% (3) 20.0% (3) 13.3% (2) 13.3% (2) 66.7% (10) 15 Drive 7.8% (24) 7.2% (22) 7.2% (22) 5.9% (18) 82.1% (252) 307 Amtrak 20.7% (6) 17.2% (5) 13.8% (4) 13.8% (4) 62.1% (18) 29 Light Rail 9.8% (8) 14.6% (12) 9.8% (8) 15.9% (13) 73.2% (60) 82 Bus 14.6% (15) 15.5% (16) 14.6% (15) 14.6% (15) 72.8% (75) 103 answered question 463 skipped question 3 2. If you use any Transit services, do you currently ride (check all that apply): Response Response Percent Count Sacramento Regional Transit 57.2% 131 e-tran 12.2% 28 Yolobus 4.4% 10 Amtrak 13.5% 31 Another Transit Provider 24.0% 55 answered question 229 skipped question 237 1 of 82 5 3. If you currently use transit service, where do you currently catch transit? (Please provide location of bus stop, light rail station or train station.) Response Count 226 answered question 226 skipped question 240 4. When the office is relocated to Elk Grove, will you be using transit to get to work? Response Response Percent Count Yes 25.4% 117 No 31.0% 143 Undecided 43.6% 201 answered question 461 skipped question 5 5. If you currently use Amtrak to get to work, what time do you arrive in Sacramento? Response Count 62 answered question 62 skipped question 404 6 2 of 82 6. For those who ride Amtrak: Assuming that it will take additional time to get to Elk Grove, what train would you likely take instead? Response Count 57 answered question 57 skipped question 409 7. For planning purposes, please provide your home ZIP code. Response Count 461 answered question 461 skipped question 5 8. What time do you need to be at work? Response Count 457 answered question 457 skipped question 9 9. What time do you expect to leave in the afternoon? Response Count 457 answered question 457 skipped question 9 3 of 82 7 10. What is the maximum number of transit transfers you would be willing to make each way? Response Response Percent Count 1 76.5% 260 2 21.5% 73 3 2.1% 7 answered question 340 skipped question 126 8 4 of 82 5 of 82 9 Q2. If you use any Transit services, do you currently ride (check all that apply): 1 Placer Commuter Express Nov 30, 2011 2:42 PM 2 Yuba City 99 transit Nov 28, 2011 7:52 AM 3 van pool five days a week. Nov 23, 2011 9:35 AM 4 Yuba/Sutter Regional Transit Nov 17, 2011 4:04 PM 5 RTD San Joaquin Commuter Nov 17, 2011 7:49 AM 6 Roseville Commuter Nov 17, 2011 7:48 AM 7 Yuba Sutter Transit Nov 16, 2011 10:53 AM 8 Placer Commuter Express Bus Nov 16, 2011 9:56 AM 9 ElDorado Transit Nov 16, 2011 9:40 AM 10 RTD Nov 15, 2011 4:02 PM 11 Placer Commuter Express Nov 15, 2011 2:53 PM 12 Light Rail Nov 15, 2011 11:34 AM 13 Natomas Flyer Nov 15, 2011 10:53 AM 14 VPSI vanpool Nov 15, 2011 8:24 AM 15 Natomas Flyer to downtown Nov 15, 2011 8:11 AM 16 CAR POOL TO SACRAMENTO Nov 15, 2011 8:00 AM 17 Carpool Nov 15, 2011 7:26 AM 18 Yuba/Sutter Transit Nov 14, 2011 2:55 PM 19 El Dorado Transit Nov 14, 2011 1:51 PM 20 light rail Nov 14, 2011 1:42 PM 21 Amador Regional Transit Nov 14, 2011 12:33 PM 22 Roseville Transit - Commuter Nov 14, 2011 11:50 AM 23 Lt.Rail Nov 14, 2011 10:59 AM 24 Greyhound Bus Service Nov 14, 2011 10:56 AM 25 Van pool Nov 14, 2011 10:12 AM 26 Solano Express Nov 14, 2011 10:06 AM 27 VPS vanpool Nov 14, 2011 10:05 AM 10 6 of 82 Q2.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Save the Cost of Parking and Take Sacrt to The
    SAVE THE COST OF PARKING AND TAKE SACRT TO THE MARAFUNRUN 5K! Thanks to a partnership between the Runnin' for Rhett Foundation and SacRT, MaraFUNrun 5K participants and attendees can ride free on SacRT buses and light rail trains on Saturday,December 1, 2018, with a printed MaraFUNrun flyer (only one flyer needed per couple). A copy of the flyer is on the back of this paper and is your pass to ride for free on Saturday, December 1. GETTING THERE § SacRT recommends parking at one of our key light rail stations for better service (Sunrise, Watt/Manlove, Franklin or Roseville Road) § On weekends, light rail trains operate every 30 minutes. § Visit sacrt.com. for light rail schedules. DOWNTOWN ARRIVAL STATIONS (Closest to the race start on 13th & L Streets) § Passengers riding to the maraFUNrun race start (13th & L Streets) on the Blue Line from Citrus Heights/Roseville, from South Sacramento/Elk Grove, OR on the Gold Line from Folsom/Rancho Cordova should exit the train at the 13th Street Station. DOWNTOWN DEPARTURE STATIONS (Closest to the race start on 13th & L Streets) § Passengers taking the Blue Line toward Citrus Heights/Roseville should board a “Watt/I-80” train (check the train sign) at the 13th Street Station. § Passengers taking the Blue Line toward south Sacramento/Elk Grove should board a “Cosumnes River College” train (check the train sign) at the 13th Street Station. § Passengers taking the Gold Line toward south Folsom/Rancho Cordova should board a "Sunrise" or “Historic Folsom” train (check the train sign) at the 13th Street Station.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Elk Grove Public Transit Fares
    AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.2 CITY OF ELK GROVE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT AGENDA TITLE: Consider 1) approving a proposal by MV Transportation for a new reverse commute service rate of $25/hour; and 2) authorizing staff to notice new fare rates and services for reverse commuting MEETING DATE: January 25, 2012 PREPARED BY DEPARTMENT HEAD: Richard Shepard, Public Works Director / City Engineer RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: Staff recommends the City Council consider: 1) Approving a proposal by MV Transportation for a new reverse commute service rate of $25/hour; and 2) Authorizing staff to notice new fare rates and services for reverse commuting. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On December 14, 2011, City Council heard an item discussing costs of implementing reverse commute services between Elk Grove and Downtown Sacramento in order to support the relocation of the California Correctional Health Care Services (CCHCS) Department. Consistent with existing contract requirements, it was estimated that the net cost of this service would be approximately $94,000 per year. This net cost was estimated assuming the following: 1 Elk Grove City Council January 25, 2012 Page 2 of 6 Estimated Cost of New Reverse Commute Service New service costs at the $190,000 contracted rate of $53.09/hour Less new revenue based on 100 new monthly permits at a reduced <$96,000> cost of $80/month Estimated net annual cost $94,000 Since a majority of the reverse commute service would come from using buses that are “dead-heading” (returning empty), Council requested that staff negotiate with MV Transportation, Inc. (MV) to reduce the contracted rate to a level that would make the service revenue neutral to the City.
    [Show full text]
  • Travel Characteristics of Transit-Oriented Development in California
    Travel Characteristics of Transit-Oriented Development in California Hollie M. Lund, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Urban and Regional Planning California State Polytechnic University, Pomona Robert Cervero, Ph.D. Professor of City and Regional Planning University of California at Berkeley Richard W. Willson, Ph.D., AICP Professor of Urban and Regional Planning California State Polytechnic University, Pomona Final Report January 2004 Funded by Caltrans Transportation Grant—“Statewide Planning Studies”—FTA Section 5313 (b) Travel Characteristics of TOD in California Acknowledgements This study was a collaborative effort by a team of researchers, practitioners and graduate students. We would like to thank all members involved for their efforts and suggestions. Project Team Members: Hollie M. Lund, Principle Investigator (California State Polytechnic University, Pomona) Robert Cervero, Research Collaborator (University of California at Berkeley) Richard W. Willson, Research Collaborator (California State Polytechnic University, Pomona) Marian Lee-Skowronek, Project Manager (San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit) Anthony Foster, Research Associate David Levitan, Research Associate Sally Librera, Research Associate Jody Littlehales, Research Associate Technical Advisory Committee Members: Emmanuel Mekwunye, State of California Department of Transportation, District 4 Val Menotti, San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit, Planning Department Jeff Ordway, San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit, Real Estate Department Chuck Purvis, Metropolitan Transportation Commission Doug Sibley, State of California Department of Transportation, District 4 Research Firms: Corey, Canapary & Galanis, San Francisco, California MARI Hispanic Field Services, Santa Ana, California Taylor Research, San Diego, California i Travel Characteristics of TOD in California ii Travel Characteristics of TOD in California Executive Summary Rapid growth in the urbanized areas of California presents many transportation and land use challenges for local and regional policy makers.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix G-1: Frameworks for the 2016 MTP/SCS Update Process
    Appendix G-1: Frameworks for the 2016 MTP/SCS Update Process Table of Contents 1) Schedule of Board Actions Leading to Final Plan Adoption ………………………………….. 2 2) Policy Framework for the MTP/SCS Update Process ………………………………………… 3 3) MTP/SCS Approach to Scenario Development ………………………………………………… 27 4) Framework for a Draft Preferred Scenario ……………………………………………………… 30 5) Endorse 2016 Draft Preferred Scenario …………………………………………………………. 53 Appendix G-1 Draft 8/19 Page 1 2016 MTP/SCS Update: Schedule of Board Actions Leading to Final Plan Adoption Board Action Date of Action Contents/Direction Framework 1.0: Adopted December 2013 • Set implementation-focused theme for plan update with Policy Framework five policy themes: transportation funding, investment strategy, investment timing, land use forecast, plan effects. • Set region-level growth projections of population, employment and housing for the plan horizon year (2036). • Set overall schedule for the plan update. Framework 1.5: Adopted March 2014 • Set parameters for three regional land use and Scenarios transportation scenarios for use in public workshops and Development plan development. Framework • Initiated phasing analysis of transportation investments in current plan. • Initiated analysis of different levels and types of transportation revenue sources. • Set schedule for creation of Framework 2.0. Framework 2.0: Targeted for November or • Sets guidelines, task and process for developing a draft December 2014 adoption Draft Preferred preferred scenario (land use forecast, revenue forecast, Scenario project list, performance outcomes). Framework • Sets a minimum of six weeks for review and vetting of a preliminary draft preferred scenario. Framework 3.0: Targeted for April 2015 • Sets details of Draft Preferred Scenario (for years 2020, Draft Preferred 2035, and 2036) for use in development of Draft Plan and Scenario EIR: o Land use forecast o Revenue Forecast o Budget and Project List o Performance Outcomes Draft Plan (2016 Targeted for September 2015 • Release Draft 2016 MTP/SCS for public comment.
    [Show full text]
  • FY 2011-2012 Capital Budget Represents the One Year Capital Spending Plan for RT
    Fiscal Year 2011-2012 Budget Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of Contents ................................................................................ 1 General Manager/CEO Budget Message ........................................... 3 Board of Directors Board of Directors .................................................................................6 Budget Adoption Resolutions................................................................7 Budget Presentation Award......................................................................8 Executive Management Team ............................................................. 9 Organizational Structure ................................................................... 10 District Overview District Profile ......................................................................................11 Service Area Map................................................................................15 Strategic Plan......................................................................................17 Long-Term Financial Policies ..............................................................19 Budget Process...................................................................................27 Voting System .....................................................................................29 Trends.................................................................................................31 Peer Comparison ................................................................................34
    [Show full text]
  • PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION August 16, 2017 Advice Letter 5042-E Erik Jacobson Director, Regulatory Relations Pacific Gas An
    STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 505 VAN NESS AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3298 August 16, 2017 Advice Letter 5042-E Erik Jacobson Director, Regulatory Relations Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street, Mail Code B10C P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 94177 SUBJECT: Encroachment Agreement with Sacramento Regional Transit District Request for Approval Under Section 851 and General Order 173 Dear Mr. Jacobson: Advice Letter 5042-E is effective as of August 10, 2017, per Resolution E-4856 Ordering Paragraph. Sincerely, Edward Randolph Director, Energy Division Erik Jacobson Pacific Gas and Electric Company Director 77 Beale St., Mail Code B10C Regulatory Relations P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 94177 Fax: 415-973-1448 March 30, 2017 Advice 5042-E (Pacific Gas and Electric Company ID U 39 E) Public Utilities Commission of the State of California Subject: Encroachment Agreement with Sacramento Regional Transit District – Request for Approval Under Section 851 and General Order 173 Purpose Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) requests approval under Public Utilities Code Section 851 (Section 851) and General Order 173 to grant an encroachment agreement (Agreement) to the Sacramento Regional Transit District, a Public Corporation (RT). The Agreement permits the encroachment of a light rail system and passenger station platform (Improvements) within PG&E’s Easement Area (PG&E Easement). A copy of the Agreement is attached hereto as Attachment 1. PG&E has inspected the encroachment agreement and has determined that granting the encroachment will not interfere with PG&E’s operations or its ability to provide utility services to its customers.
    [Show full text]
  • Sac County Folsom Blvd Butterfi
    Applicant: Sacramento County Department of Transportation Project: Butterfield Way @ Folsom Blvd Intersection Bike Lanes P. PROJECT APPLICATION Project Title Butterfield Way @ Folsom Blvd Intersection Bike Lanes SACOG ID number (if available) 30433 PPNO and/or EA number (if applicable) N/A Federal ID number (if applicable) N/A Responsible Project Manager/Contact Name: Ron Vicari II, P.E. Position: Principle Civil Engineer Address: 906 G Street, Suite 510, Sacramento CA 95814 Phone: (916) 874-5164 desk, (916) 591-2257 cell E-mail: [email protected] Co-sponsor/Partner Agencies N/A Project Location In Rosemont at the intersection of Butterfield (Also attach a map) Way and Folsom Boulevard adjacent to the Butterfield light rail station and the Franchise Tax Board. (See Context Map) Project Scope/ Description (250 word limit) Modify the intersection at Butterfield and Folsom to eliminate the barrier presented by a high voltage steel power pole between Folsom Blvd and the light rail right-of-way and extend the bike lanes to the crosswalks and stop bars on Folsom Blvd. The proposed modification will reconfigure the traffic lanes and medians to accommodate bike lanes on the Folsom Blvd approaches and departures to the intersection with Butterfield within existing right-of-way. This can be accomplished by removing one of the two westbound left turn lanes on Folsom Blvd, increasing the length of the remaining left turn lane, and optimizing the signal timing for the improved intersection geometry. Project Schedule (estimated month and year): 1. Start environmental/preliminary engineering 1. Environmental process is underway, 2. Final ED approved - Start preliminary engineering is complete engineering/design 2.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Elk Grove Short Range Transit Plan
    CITY OF ELK GROVE SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FISCAL YEARS 2014-2020 Prepared by: Sacramento Area Council of Governments Prepared For: City of Elk Grove ELK GROVE SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FISCAL YEARS 2014-2020 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Prepared by: Sacramento Area Council of City of Elk Grove Governments 1415 L Street, Suite RAQUEL CHAVARRIA, TRANSIT PLANNER 300 EDWARD COVIELLO, TRANSIT PLANNER Sacramento, CA 95814 JEAN C. FOLETTA, TRANSIT MANAGER Tel: 916.321.9000 Fax: 916.321.9551 BETH MARASIGAN, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT www.sacog.org KARA REDDIG, ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER RICHARD SHEPARD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR Prepared for: City of Elk Grove Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) 8401 Laguna Palms Way SHARON SPROWLS, SENIOR PROGRAM SPECIALIST (PROJECT MANAGER) Elk Grove, CA 95758 LAURA BELL, ASSISTANT RESEARCH ANALYST VICTORIA CACCIATORE, PLANNING ANALYST RENÉE DEVERE-OKI, SENIOR PLANNER TINA GLOVER, ASSOCIATE RESEARCH ANALYST GAYLE GREENE, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT III CLINT HOLTZEN, ASSISTANT PLANNER AMY MARTIN, TRANSIT PLANNING INTERN CHRISTINE O’ROURKE, ASSISTANT PLANNER GARY TAYLOR, SENIOR PLANNER BARBARA VAUGHANBECHTOLD, ASSOCIATE PLANNER THIS SRTP WAS COMPLETED AS PROJECT #14-003-17 OF THE SACOG OVERALL WORK PROGRAM (OWP) WITH GENEROUS FUNDING PROVIDED BY CALTRANS THROUGH THE STATEWIDE OR URBAN TRANSIT PLANNING STUDIES GRANT PROGRAM. City of Elk Grove Short Range Transit Plan Page i ELK GROVE SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FISCAL YEARS 2014-2020 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ES-1 Chapter 1—Introduction
    [Show full text]
  • Ridership Report (October 2019)
    Ridership Report (October 2019) Year to Date Summary Category FY20 YTD FY19YTD Difference % Change Trailing 12 Month Trend Bus 3,518,921 3,415,852 103,069 3.0% 11,500,000 Light Rail 3,848,176 3,641,112 207,064 5.7% Rail Bus System Total 7,367,097 7,056,964 310,133 4.4% 11,000,000 10,500,000 Current Month Summary 10,000,000 Category October 2019 October 2018 Difference % Change Bus 1,059,668 1,014,352 45,316 4.5% 9,500,000 Light Rail 1,063,740 1,025,613 38,127 3.7% System Total 2,123,408 2,039,965 83,443 4.1% 9,000,000 Daily Summary Category October 2019 October 2018 Difference % Change Bus (M-F) 41,415 40,275 1,140 2.8% Bus (Sat) 15,390 13,266 2,124 16.0% Bus (Sun) 10,371 7,915 2,456 31.0% October Ridership by Mode Light Rail (M-F) 40,939 40,510 429 1.1% 6% Light Rail (Sat) 17,127 13,500 3,627 26.9% Light Rail Light Rail (Sun) 12,229 9,500 2,729 28.7% Fixed Route 48% Other Services E-Tran Ridership Summary (E-Van included) 46% Category Current Year Prior Year Difference % Change E-Tran (YTD) 280,319 266,440 13,879 5.2% E-Tran (Monthly) 84,775 81,648 3,127 3.8% Other services include E-Tran, Folsom, SmaRT Ride, CBS and Special Services E-Tran (Weekday) 3,560 3,426 134 3.9% Route Level Ridership Comparison (Bus) Weelday Route Comparison Saturday Route Comparison Route Oct 2019 Oct 2018 Difference % Change Route Oct 2019 Oct 2018 Difference % Change 1 2,067 2,190 (124) -6% 1 768 777 (9) -1% 11 972 715 257 36% 11 447 282 165 59% 13 678 315 362 115% 13 426 - 426 15 795 1,215 (420) -35% 15 381 558 (176) -32% 19 423 658 (234) -36% 19 209 271
    [Show full text]
  • City of Sacramento
    CITY OF SACRAMENTO LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT LAND USE POLICIES AND GUIDELINES April 2005 Prepared by Planning Division Long Range Planning Section Development Services Department Todd Leon, Project Manager Jim McDonald AICP, Senior Planner Stacia Cosgrove, Associate Planner Christopher Jordan, Student Assistant Nathan Stephens, Student Assistant http://www.cityofsacramento.org/dsd/planning/plngserv/lngrng/policies.htm TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...............................................................................................................I I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................1 II. CITY OF SACRAMENTO GENERAL PLAN...........................................................................5 SECTION 1: POLICIES........................................................................................................7 SECTION 2: RESIDENTIAL LAND USE ELEMENT.........................................................12 SECTION 4: COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY LAND USE ELEMENT ...............................15 SECTION 5: CIRCULATION ELEMENT............................................................................20 III. REGIONAL TRANSIT PLANS .............................................................................................25 A. REGIONAL TRANSIT MASTER PLAN (1993) ............................................................26 B. REGIONAL TRANSIT DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR BUS AND LIGHT RAIL FACILITIES...............................................................................................................33
    [Show full text]
  • Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program
    - 2021-2024 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program SACOG MISSION BOARD MEMBERS AND MEMBER JURISDICTIONS Provide leadership and a Karm Bains, Sutter County dynamic, collaborative public Krista Bernasconi, City of Roseville forum for achieving an efficient regional transportation system, Gary Bradford, Yuba County innovative and integrated Chris Branscum, City of Marysville regional planning, and high quality of life within the greater Pamela Bulahan, City of Isleton Sacramento region. Trinity Burruss, City of Colfax Jan Clark-Crets, Town of Loomis Rich Desmond, Sacramento County Lucas Frerichs, City of Davis Sue Frost, Sacramento County Jill Gayaldo, City of Rocklin Lakhvir Ghag, City of Live Oak Bonnie Gore, Placer County Martha Guerrero, City of West Sacramento Shon Harris, City of Yuba City Rick Jennings, City of Sacramento Paul Joiner, City of Lincoln Patrick Kennedy, Sacramento County Mike Kozlowski, City of Folsom Rich Lozano, City of Galt Porsche Middleton, City of Citrus Heights Pierre Neu, City of Winters David Sander, City of Rancho Cordova Michael Saragosa, City of Placerville Don Saylor, Yolo County Jay Schenirer, City of Sacramento Matt Spokely, City of Auburn Tom Stallard, City of Woodland Darren Suen, City of Elk Grove Wendy Thomas, El Dorado County Rick West, City of Wheatland Amarjeet Benipal, Ex-Officio Member 2021-2024 MTIP Contents A Guide to the Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program Contents Page Number Introduction .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Rider Alert Service Changes 6/17/19 September 8, 2019 Route Changes Route Changes Route Changes Route Changes
    Updated Changes take effect on Rider Alert Service Changes 6/17/19 September 8, 2019 Route Changes Route Changes Route Changes Route Changes Improve evening frequency and reduce early morning Combine with Route 22 and extend north and west in Shift trips beginning from Arden/Del Paso station at Combine Routes 30 and Route 38. Both routes would frequency. Add new trips from Sunrise Mall at 6:29, 6:59, Natomas. Discontinue part of existing route through 9:45 and 10:45 p.m. later approximately 5 minutes for use J/L Street from Sacramento Valley Station to 39th and 7:29 p.m. and from Watt/I-80 at 7:04, 7:34, 8:04, and Natomas. Improve headways to 45 minutes. Add train transfers. Adjust schedules to maintain more even Street. Route 30 would continue to CSUS as it does 8:34 p.m. Eliminate trips from Sunrise Mall at 5:14 and Saturday/Sunday service with 45 minute frequency from headways and passenger loads. Add outbound trips today. On weekdays, each route would have 30 minute 1 5:44 a.m. and from Watt/I-80 at 5:49 and 6:19 a.m. 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Extend north on Truxel Road, west from approximately 1:30 to 3:00 p.m. to help with base frequency. From downtown to 39th Street, 23 Eliminate weekend trips from Watt/I-80 at 5:06, 5:36, and on Del Paso Road to El Centro Rd. From Arden/Del Paso heavy passenger loads from Arden/Del Paso to Watt weekday customers would be able to catch either 6:06 a.m.
    [Show full text]