DOCSLIB.ORG

Westside Subway Extension

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Westside Subway Extension STATE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION MODERNIZATION, IMPROVEMENT, AND SERVICE ENHANCEMENT ACCOUNT GOVERNMENT CODE 8879.55(a)(3) ELIGIBLE ALLOCATION DETAIL - FISCAL YEAR 2009-2010 GC 8879.55(a)(3) Regional Entity and Operator(s) Eligible Allocation SACOG City of Davis 114,789 City of Elk Grove 36,895 City of Folsom 12,379 Sacramento Regional Transit System 3,996,687 Yolo County Transportation District 92,922 Yuba Sutter Transit Authority 45,078 Regional Entity Totals 4,298,750 Alpine None Amador Amador Regional Transit System 13,673 Butte Butte County Association of Governments 37,859 Calaveras None Colusa County of Colusa 8,039 Del Norte None El Dorado El Dorado County Transit Authority 59,668 Fresno City of Clovis 5,173 City of Fresno 527,501 Fresno County Rural Transit Agency 24,414 Regional Entity Totals 557,088 (Continued) 2 STATE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION MODERNIZATION, IMPROVEMENT, AND SERVICE ENHANCEMENT ACCOUNT GOVERNMENT CODE 8879.55(a)(3) ELIGIBLE ALLOCATION DETAIL - FISCAL YEAR 2009-2010 GC 8879.55(a)(3) Regional Entity and Operator(s) Eligible Allocation Glenn None Humboldt City of Arcata 9,524 City of Eureka 22,982 City of Fortuna 548 Humboldt Transit Authority 64,264 Regional Entity Totals 97,318 Imperial None Inyo None Kern City of Arvin 3,435 City of California City 1,147 City of Delano 2,927 Golden Empire Transit District 234,798 County of Kern 34,578 City of McFarland 647 City of Ridgecrest 5,765 City of Shafter 3,048 City of Taft 14,873 City of Tehachapi 343 City of Wasco 1,546 Regional Entity Totals 303,107 Kings City of Corcoran 3,318 Kings County Area Public Transit Agency 132,169 Regional Entity Totals 135,487 Lake Lake Transit Authority 16,336 (Continued) 3 STATE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION MODERNIZATION, IMPROVEMENT, AND SERVICE ENHANCEMENT ACCOUNT GOVERNMENT CODE 8879.55(a)(3) ELIGIBLE ALLOCATION DETAIL - FISCAL YEAR 2009-2010 GC 8879.55(a)(3) Regional Entity and Operator(s) Eligible Allocation Lassen County of Lassen 8,170 Los Angeles Antelope Valley Transit Authority 541,861 City of Arcadia 56,900 City of Claremont 17,383 City of Commerce 120,734 City of Culver City 373,867 Foothill Transit Zone 1,850,921 City of Gardena 434,072 City of La Mirada 45,832 Long Beach Public Transportation Company 2,099,367 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 44,156,702 City of Montebello 858,151 City of Norwalk 405,185 City of Redondo Beach 51,666 City of Santa Monica 1,510,926 Southern California Regional Rail Authority Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 3,474,212 Orange County Transportation Authority ** Riverside County Transportation Commission ** San Bernardino Associated Governments ** Ventura County Transportation Commission ** City of Torrance 653,208 Regional Entity Totals 56,650,987 Madera None Mariposa County of Mariposa 938 Mendocino Mendocino Transit Authority 41,249 Merced County of Merced 49,121 Modoc None (Continued) ----------------- ** The amounts allocated to the member agencies of Southern California Regional Rail Authority are paid by their corresponding regional transportation authority. 4 STATE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION MODERNIZATION, IMPROVEMENT, AND SERVICE ENHANCEMENT ACCOUNT GOVERNMENT CODE 8879.55(a)(3) ELIGIBLE ALLOCATION DETAIL - FISCAL YEAR 2009-2010 GC 8879.55(a)(3) Regional Entity and Operator(s) Eligible Allocation Mono Eastern Sierra Transit Authority 17,921 Monterey City of Greenfield 531 City of King City 462 Monterey-Salinas Transit 327,355 City of Soledad 434 Regional Entity Totals 328,782 Nevada County of Nevada 25,451 Orange City of Laguna Beach 29,865 Orange County Transportation Authority 4,565,811 Orange County Transportation Authority - Corresponding to Southern California Regional Rail Authority 1,261,654 Regional Entity Totals 5,857,330 Placer City of Auburn 3,924 City of Lincoln 1,317 County of Placer 80,554 City of Roseville 32,080 Regional Entity Totals 117,875 Plumas None Riverside City of Banning 6,688 City of Beaumont 4,058 City of Corona 14,576 Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency 5,307 City of Riverside 13,166 Riverside County Transportation Commission - Corresponding to Southern California Regional Rail Authority 475,299 Riverside Transit Agency 382,706 Sunline Transit Agency 406,216 Regional Entity Totals 1,308,016 San Benito None (Continued) 5 STATE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION MODERNIZATION, IMPROVEMENT, AND SERVICE ENHANCEMENT ACCOUNT GOVERNMENT CODE 8879.55(a)(3) ELIGIBLE ALLOCATION DETAIL - FISCAL YEAR 2009-2010 GC 8879.55(a)(3) Regional Entity and Operator(s) Eligible Allocation San Bernardino Morongo Basin Transit Authority 27,652 Mountain Area Regional Transit Authority 18,597 Omnitrans 727,295 San Bernardino Associated Governments - Corresponding to Southern California Regional Rail Authority 874,339 Victor Valley Transit Service Authority 105,741 Regional Entity Totals 1,753,624 SANDAG North San Diego County Transit Development Board 1,378,385 San Diego MTS 5,176,408 San Joaquin Altamont Commuter Express Authority Alameda County Congestion Management Agency *** Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority *** San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission 104,444 City of Lodi 21,108 City of Ripon 49 San Joaquin Regional Transit District 615,942 Regional Entity Totals 741,543 San Luis Obispo City of Atascadero 3,170 City of Morro Bay 2,403 City of Paso Robles Transit 7,223 City of San Luis Obispo 25,803 County of San Luis Obispo 3,639 San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority 134,893 South County Area Transit 19,735 Regional Entity Totals 196,866 (Continued) ----------------- *** The amounts allocated to the member agencies of Altamont Commuter Express Authority are paid by their corresponding regional transportation authority. 6 STATE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION MODERNIZATION, IMPROVEMENT, AND SERVICE ENHANCEMENT ACCOUNT GOVERNMENT CODE 8879.55(a)(3) ELIGIBLE ALLOCATION DETAIL - FISCAL YEAR 2009-2010 GC 8879.55(a)(3) Regional Entity and Operator(s) Eligible Allocation Santa Barbara City of Lompoc 8,000 County of Santa Barbara 2,992 Santa Barbara Metropolitan Transit District 468,618 City of Santa Maria 38,667 City of Solvang 2,507 Regional Entity Totals 520,784 Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District 1,290,739 Shasta Redding Area Bus Authority 42,066 Sierra None Siskiyou County of Siskiyou 9,458 Stanislaus City of Modesto 144,853 County of Stanislaus 14,203 City of Turlock 7,342 Regional Entity Totals 166,398 Tehama None Trinity County of Trinity 1,310 Tulare City of Exeter 601 City of Porterville 16,886 City of Tulare 11,449 County of Tulare 6,776 City of Visalia 51,155 Regional Entity Totals 86,867 (Continued) 7 STATE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION MODERNIZATION, IMPROVEMENT, AND SERVICE ENHANCEMENT ACCOUNT GOVERNMENT CODE 8879.55(a)(3) ELIGIBLE ALLOCATION DETAIL - FISCAL YEAR 2009-2010 GC 8879.55(a)(3) Regional Entity and Operator(s) Eligible Allocation Tuolumne None Ventura Gold Coast Transit 152,131 Ventura County Transportation Commission - Corresponding to Southern California Regional Rail Authority 276,622 Regional Entity Totals 428,753 STATE TOTALS $ 169,709,034 8 STATE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION MODERNIZATION, IMPROVEMENT, AND SERVICE ENHANCEMENT ACCOUNT GOVERNMENT CODE 8879.55 ESTIMATED REMAINING ELIGIBLE ALLOCATION GC 8879.55(a)(2) GC 8879.55(a)(3) Total Remaining Regional Entity Eligible Allocation Eligible Allocation Eligible Allocations TRPA $ 3,121,085 $ 197,178 $ 3,318,263 MTC 253,670,208 683,982,783 937,652,991 SACOG 61,536,211 33,428,388 94,964,599 Alpine 44,646 0 44,646 Amador 1,351,356 106,329 1,457,685 Butte 7,710,875 294,401 8,005,276 Calaveras 1,614,294 0 1,614,294 Colusa 756,787 62,515 819,302 Del Norte 1,035,774 0 1,035,774 El Dorado 5,028,369 463,996 5,492,365 Fresno 31,825,285 4,332,090 36,157,375 Glenn 1,015,358 0 1,015,358 Humboldt 4,710,965 756,774 5,467,739 Imperial 5,865,592 0 5,865,592 Inyo 661,557 0 661,557 Kern 27,388,845 2,357,054 29,745,899 Kings 5,222,669 1,053,589 6,276,258 Lake 2,278,082 127,035 2,405,117 Lassen 1,263,028 63,531 1,326,559 Los Angeles 365,002,168 440,535,290 805,537,458 Madera 5,088,099 0 5,088,099 Mariposa 646,064 7,298 653,362 Mendocino 3,219,879 320,768 3,540,647 Merced 8,692,752 381,977 9,074,729 Modoc 349,287 0 349,287 Mono 484,756 139,361 624,117 Monterey 15,154,404 2,556,712 17,711,116 Nevada 3,546,124 197,917 3,744,041 Orange 109,322,704 45,548,384 154,871,088 Placer 9,189,794 916,631 10,106,425 Plumas 762,422 0 762,422 Riverside 68,353,089 10,171,526 78,524,615 San Benito 2,054,866 0 2,054,866 San Bernardino 70,286,423 13,636,712 83,923,135 SANDAG 27,134,643 10,718,743 37,853,386 San Diego MTS 82,015,231 40,253,317 122,268,548 San Joaquin 23,573,606 5,766,469 29,340,075 San Luis Obispo 9,356,354 1,530,890 10,887,244 Santa Barbara 15,004,115 4,049,765 19,053,880 Santa Cruz 9,340,769 10,037,179 19,377,948 Shasta 6,428,065 327,116 6,755,181 Sierra 125,372 0 125,372 Siskiyou 1,639,145 73,547 1,712,692 Stanislaus 18,186,752 1,293,961 19,480,713 Tehama 2,172,452 0 2,172,452 Trinity 495,986 10,188 506,174 Tulare 14,826,865 675,507 15,502,372 Tuolumne 2,075,044 0 2,075,044 Ventura 29,080,818 3,334,113 32,414,931 State Totals $ 1,319,709,034 $ 1,319,709,034 $ 2,639,418,068 ** All estimated amounts will be reduced due to interest on Pooled Money Investment Account Loans and State administrative charges.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Short Range Transit Plan (PDF)
    Short Range Transit Plan FY 2020/21 - 2024/25 Golden Empire Transit District Adopted September 2020 Golden Empire Transit District Board of Directors Cindy Parra Jim Baldwin Chair Vice Chair City of Bakersfield County of Kern Carlos Bello Leasa Engel Rueben Pascual Director Director Director City of Bakersfield At-Large County of Kern A five-member Board of Directors governs Golden Empire Transit District. Two members are appointed by the Bakersfield City Council, two members are appointed by the Kern County Board of Supervisors, and one member is appointed at-large by the four other Board members. GET coordinates with City of Bakersfield, the County of Kern, and the Kern Council of Governments. Karen King Chief Executive Officer Short Range Transit Plan FY 20/21 – 24/25 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................... iv CHAPTER 1 SYSTEM DESCRIPTION ......................................................1 CHAPTER 2 SERVICE & PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ......................... 28 CHAPTER 3 SERVICE ANALYSIS .......................................................... 39 CHAPTER 4 PREVIOUS SERVICE REVISIONS ........................................ 77 CHAPTER 5 RECOMMENDED SERVICE PLAN ...................................... 81 CHAPTER 6 FINANCIAL PLAN ............................................................ 93 CHAPTER 7 GLOSSARY ...................................................................... 98 REFERENCE MAPS .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Real Time Arrival Information Using the Farebox How to Plan Your Trip
    Real Time Arrival Information How to Plan Your Trip Smart phones: Use the Golden Empire Transit Start by finding your destination on the Free App for iphones and androids System Map located in the middle of the Computers/tablets: Go to getbus.org book. Regular phones: Using the number on the GET offers trip planning at getbus.org. stop, call 869-2GET (2438) and put in the stop Next, find the starting point where you will number. board the bus. To speak with a Customer Service Representa- Decide which route or routes you need to take. tive, call 869-2GET (2438) Some trips require more than one bus, which Customer Service Representatives are on duty means you will need to transfer from one bus Monday through Friday from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 to another. If you will need to transfer, find the intersection of the two routes. This is where you p.m. and on Saturday and Sunday from 6:30 will exit the first bus and board the second. a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Check the schedule to determine what time GET now offers Real Time Information on you need to arrive at your bus stop. The buses computers and mobile devices travel through the schedule from left to right. Computer/Tablets: Click on real time infor- Choose the timetable section that refers to mation at getbus.org. Choose a route. Hold the direction you will be traveling, for example the clicker over a stop (red dot) for location Route 21- Bakersfield College/Eastbound.
    [Show full text]
  • CNG As a Transit Bus Fuel
    TheThe TransitTransit BusBus NicheNiche MarketMarket ForFor AlternativeAlternative Fuels:Fuels: ModuleModule 3:3: OverviewOverview ofof CompressedCompressed NaturalNatural GasGas asas aa TransitTransit BusBus FuelFuel CleanClean CitiesCities CoordinatorCoordinator ToolkitToolkit PreparedPrepared byby TIAXTIAX LLC,LLC, IrvineIrvine OfficeOffice DecemberDecember 20032003 TIAX LLC One Park Plaza, 6th Floor Irvine, California 92614 949-833-7131 / [email protected] Options for Natural Gas Fueling in Transit • Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) – Pipeline natural gas: methane with other hydrocarbons – Pressurized to 3,600 psi – Fueling accomplished by pressure transfer to vehicle – About 12% of transit buses in the U.S. now use conventional CNG – Largest users include LACMTA, MARTA, NY DOT, Pierce Transit, Washington D.C. (WMATA), Cleveland, Sacramento • Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) – Nearly pure methane (~98%) liquefied at very low temperatures – Liquid transfer to vehicle – Largest users are Phoenix, Orange County (CA), Dallas, and Tempe – Newer users include Santa Monica, Long Beach • LNG to CNG (“LCNG”) – Vaporized LNG (also nearly pure methane) – Liquid to gas conversion, then pressure transfer to vehicle – Sun Metro, OmniTrans, others use this approach Document Code 1 Methane Content in Pipeline Natural Gas Varies Regionally Methane Molecule Typical Composition of Pipeline Natural Gas What are the Implications of the Resulting CNG Fuel Quality Variations? • CNG with lower methane content (higher levels of ethane, propane, or butane) has resulted in some adverse affects on heavy-duty NG engine performance (e.g., misfire, stumble and underrated operation, engine knock, overheating) • However, today’s lean-burn closed-loop NG engines for transit (e.g., C Gas Plus and DDC S50G) are better able to tolerate and compensate for variations • Compromises in emissions performance have been found to be modest Document Code 2 Numerous OEMs Offer Natural Gas Transit Buses and Paratransit Vehicles Natural Gas Bus Manufacturer Models Available Champion Bus, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Homelessness in Transit Environments Volume I: Findings from a Survey of Public Transit Operators
    UC Office of the President ITS reports Title Homelessness in Transit Environments Volume I: Findings from a Survey of Public Transit Operators Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/55d481p8 Authors Loukaitou-Sideris, Anastasia Wasserman, Jacob Caro, Ryan et al. Publication Date 2020-12-17 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California RESEARCH REPORT Institute of Transportation Studies Homelessness in Transit Environments Volume I: Findings from a Survey of Public Transit Operators Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris, PhD, Distinguished Professor of Urban Planning, UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs Jacob Wasserman, Research Project Manager Ryan Caro, Graduate Student Researcher Hao Ding, Graduate Student Researcher UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies December 2020 Report No.: UC-ITS-2021-13 | DOI: 10.17610/T6V317 Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. UC-ITS-2021-13 N/A N/A 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Homelessness in Transit Environments December 2020 Volume I: Findings from a Survey of Public Transit Operators 6. Performing Organization Code UCLA-ITS 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris, Ph.D., https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0186-4751; Jacob N/A Wasserman https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2212-5798; Ryan Caro, https://orcid. org/0000-0002-2795-7270; Hao Ding, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5286-3367 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. Institute of Transportation Studies, UCLA N/A 3320 Public Affairs Building 11. Contract or Grant No. Los Angeles, CA 90095-1656 UC-ITS-2021-13 12.
    [Show full text]
  • Zeroing in on Zebs 2020 Edition
    ZEROING IN ON ZEBS 2020 EDITION THE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY TRANSIT BUS INDEX: A NORTH AMERICAN ZEB INVENTORY REPORT December 2020 A CALSTART Report By John Jackson, Bryan Lee, and Fred Silver www.calstart.org Zeroing in on ZEBs: 2020 Edition Copyright © 2020 by CALSTART. All rights reserved. This report was funded by funding from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Hybrid and Zero-Emission Truck and Bus Voucher Incentive Project (HVIP). No part of this document may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior written permission by CALSTART. Requests for permission or further information should be addressed to CALSTART, 48 S. Chester Ave, Pasadena, CA 91106. This document is based on information gathered in December 2020. This is the 2020 edition of this document. i Zeroing in on ZEBs: 2020 Edition List of Acronyms APTA American Public Transit Association BEB Battery Electric Bus CAA Clean Air Act CARB California Air Resources Board FCEB Fuel Cell Electric Bus FAA Federal Aviation Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration GVWR Gross Vehicle Weight Rating HVIP Hybrid and Zero-Emission Truck and Bus Voucher Incentive Project ICT Innovative Clean Transit kW kilowatt LoNo Federal Transit Administration Low or No Emissions Program MOU Memorandum of Understanding MW Megawatt TIRCP Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program TIUOO Total In-Use or On-Order U.S. United States of America ZEB Zero-Emission Bus ii Zeroing in on ZEBs: 2020 Edition Table of Contents List of Acronyms ............................................................................................................................ ii Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • COVID-19 Recovery Practices in Transit
    COVID-19 Recovery Practices in Transit Version 6 DISCLAIMER: To assist public transportation agencies, FTA has collected information on practices used by transit agencies worldwide. FTA has not assessed the efficacy of any of the practices listed. This list is provided for technical assistance only. Inclusion on this list does not imply endorsement by FTA of any of these practices, tools, or other information. Some transit agency websites may not be up to date. In addition, some transit agency websites may not reflect current CDC guidance or include specific information about their COVID-19 recovery efforts. News articles are used in this document only for informational purposes. The contents of this document do not have the force and effect of law and are not meant to bind the public in any way. This document is intended only to provide clarity to the public regarding existing requirements under the law or agency policies. Grantees and subgrantees should refer to FTA’s statutes and regulations for applicable requirements. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration COVID-19 Recovery Practices in Transit Overview The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) public health emergency has had a significant impact on public transportation operations throughout the Nation. As communities recover from COVID-19, transit agencies are implementing new and enhanced measures to ensure the safety of their employees and passengers, and increase public confidence in transit, including enhanced cleaning and disinfection, personal protective equipment (PPE) and face coverings, and social distancing. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) is committed to helping the U.S. public transportation industry recover.
    [Show full text]
  • Tcrp Legal Research Digest 48: Legal Issues Concerning Transit Agency Use of Electronic Customer Data
    TCRP LEGAL RESEARCH DIGEST 48: LEGAL ISSUES CONCERNING TRANSIT AGENCY USE OF ELECTRONIC CUSTOMER DATA Appendix A—List of Transit Agencies Responding to the Survey Appendix B—Survey Questions Appendix C—Summary of the Transit Agencies’ Responses to the Survey Appendix D—Documents Provided by Transit Agencies Responding to the Survey A-1 APPENDIX A—LIST OF TRANSIT AGENCIES RESPONDING TO THE SURVEY 1. Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, Ann Arbor, MI 2. Antelope Valley Transit Authority, Lancaster, CA 3. Belle Urban System, The, Racine, WI 4. Berkshire Regional Transit Authority, Pittsfield, MA 5. Capital Area Transportation Authority, Lansing, MI 6. Capital District Transportation Authority, Albany, NY 7. Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority d/b/a Lynx, Orlando, FL 8. Central Ohio Transit Authority, Columbus, OH 9. Centre Area Transportation Authority, State College, PA 10. City of Cheyenne Transit Program, Cheyenne, WY 11. City of Alexandre, LA 12. City of Glendale Transit, Glendale, AZ 13. City of Madison Metro Transit, Madison, WI 14. City of Raleigh, GoRaleigh, Raleigh, NC 15. City of Visalia, Transit Division, Visalia, CA 16. City Utilities of Springfield, Springfield, MO 17. Cobb Community Transit, Marietta, GA 18. Connecticut Department of Transportation, Newington, CT 19. Corpus Christi Regional Transportation Authority, Corpus Christi, TX 20. CT Transit, Hartford, CT 21. Durham Area Transit Authority, GoDurham, Durham, NC 22. Fresno Area Express, Fresno, CA A-2 23. Golden Empire Transit District, Bakersfield, CA 24. Greater Attleboro Taunton Regional, Taunton, MA 25. Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority, Cleveland, OH 26. Greater Hartford Transit District, Hartford, CT 27. Greater Lynchburg Transit Company, Lynchburg, VA 28.
    [Show full text]
  • Eastern Kern Guide 03 1/5/15 1:07 PM Page 1
    East Kern Guide 27_Eastern Kern Guide 03 1/5/15 1:07 PM Page 1 EAST KERN FARES / TARIFAS EAST KERN DIAL-A-RIDE 800-323-2396 IMPORTANT FACTS / DATOS IMPORTANTES GUIDE CONTENT All Fares Shown are One-Way. Exact change is required. Todas las tarifas que se muestran son para viajes de ida. Kern Transit provides curb-to-curb Dial-A-Ride service in Kern Transit tiene el servicio Dial-A-Ride ‘puerta a puerta’ en Holidays Días Festivos Inside This Guide Drivers do not make change. Up to two children, 4 and Debe pagar con la cantidad exacta. Los conductores no Rosamond, Mojave and Tehachapi. Rosamond, Mojave y Tehachapi. Kern Transit will not provide service on the following holidays: Kern Transit no provee servicios los siguientes días festivos: Año Kern Transit operates transit services throughout Kern younger, may ride for free with each fare paying adult. disponen de cambio. Hasta 2 niños (de edad 4 años y menor) Mojave Dial-A-Ride Mojave Dial-A-Ride New Year’s Day, Easter, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Nuevo, Pascua, Día de los Caídos, Día de la Independencia, County. This guide includes information about transit routes pueden viajar gratis con cada adulto pagado Monday-Saturday . 7:00 AM-6:00 PM Lunes a sábado . 7:00 AM-6:00 PM Reduced Fares Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Call to Día del Trabajo, Día de Acción de Gracias y Navidad. Llame and Dial-A-Ride services in East Kern County. Tarifas con descuento Rosamond Dial-A-Ride Rosamond Dial-A-Ride inquire about special service hours on Christmas Eve and New para pedir información sobre horarios especiales de servicios en For information about Kern Transit services in other parts of Reduced fares are for: Monday-Saturday .
    [Show full text]
  • Performance Standards
    SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FY 19/20-23/24 Golden Empire Transit District 1830 Golden State Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 661-324-9874 www.getbus.org June 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction/Executive Summary . 2 Section 1: System Description . .22 Section 2: Service & Performance Standards. .65 Section 3: Service Analysis. .77 Section 4: Previous Service Revisions . .139 Section 5: Recommended Service Plan. 143 Section 6: Financial Plan. .156 Section 7: Glossary. .162 GOLDEN EMPIRE TRANSIT DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS AS OF JUNE 2019 Cindy Parra Jim Baldwin Carlos Bello Leasa Engel Rueben Pascual Chair Vice Chair City of Bakersfield At Large County of Kern City of Bakersfield County of Kern Karen King, CEO Golden Empire Transit Short Range Transit Plan 19/20-23/24 1 INTRODUCTION/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) is the primary planning document which guides the routine decisions associated with operating a public transit system. This document is updated annually to chart the course of the agency over a five-year period. Updating the plan annually reveals deficiencies in the current service and suggests improvements to the public transit service. Most important, the objective of the Plan is to achieve the District’s goals by following the Mission Statement, which appears below. MISSION STATEMENT We make life better by connecting people to places one ride at a time. Overview of the System The Golden Empire Transit District (GET) was formed in July 1973 and is the primary public transportation provider for the Bakersfield Urbanized Area. (The Kern County Transit system, operated by the County of Kern serves the community of Lamont, which is part of the Bakersfield Urbanized Area, as defined by the Census Bureau.) It is the largest public transit system within a 110 mile radius.
    [Show full text]
  • Item #E2 – Consolidation Study Update – Attachment
    ATTACHMENT A SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY CONSOLIDATION STUDY AND INNOVATIVE TRANSIT REVIEW TASK 2 — FINAL CONSOLIDATION REPORT AUGUST 27, 2020 FINAL jasonwittenphoto.com CONSOLIDATION STUDY AND INNOVATIVE TRANSIT REVIEW TASK 2 FINAL CONSOLIDATION REPORT SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY SUBMITTAL (VERSION 5B) FINAL PROJECT NO.: 12771C70, TASK NO. 2.1 2020 DATE: AUGUST 2020 WSP SUITE 350 862 E. HOSPITALITY LANE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408 TEL.: +1 909 888-1106 FAX: +1 909 889-1884 WSP.COM PRODUCTION TEAM WSP Project Manager Cliff Henke Project Lead Eryca Dinsdale Project Support Simon Mosbah Ruby Lee Senior Advisors Tom Lichterman Quality Control John Heaton Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................... 1-1 INTRODUCTION .................................................. 2-1 2.1. Study Overview ................................................................ 2-1 TABLE OF 2.2. Report Organization and Methodology ............... 2-2 CONTENTS CONSOLIDATION REPORT OVERALL FINDINGS ............................................................... 3-1 3.1. Summary of Findings ..................................................... 3-1 3.2. Comparison of key agency elements .................... 3-2 3.3. Comparison of key consolidation factors between case study agencies and this potential consolidation .................................................................... 3-4 3.4. Areas of Organizational Impacts ............................. 3-7 3.5. Areas of Legal/Contractual Impacts ....................
    [Show full text]
  • Zeroing in on Zebs
    ZEROING IN ON ZEBS THE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY TRANSIT BUS INDEX October 17, 2019 A CALSTART Report By Fred Silver, John Jackson and Bryan Lee www.calstart.org Copyright © 2019 by CALSTART. All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior written permission by CALSTART. Requests for permission or further information should be addressed to CALSTART, 48 S. Chester Ave, Pasadena, CA 91106. This document is based on information gathered on September 27th, 2019. This is the second edition of this document. i Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................................ 1 Results and Analysis of Survey .............................................................................................................................. 3 Important Notes About This Report ........................................................................................................................ 4 State-By-State Zero-emission Bus Distribution ................................................................................................... 5 Transit Properties with Battery Electric or Fuel Cell Transit Buses ................................................................ 7 United States Zero-Emission Bus Map ................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Golden Empire Transit District REQUEST for PROPOSALS
    GET RFP G035 Golden Empire Transit District Contracts and Procurement Department REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS RFP G035 Automated Vehicle Location (AVL) & Passenger Information System (PIS) January 2, 2012 Primary Contact: Chris James Manager of Maintenance (661) 324-9874 [email protected] Page 1 / 256 Pages GET RFP G035 Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................................... 1.0 INTRODUCTION / BACKGROUND .......................................................................................... 9 1.1 Project Objectives ....................................................................................... 9 1.2 Agency Overview ...................................................................................... 10 1.3 Project Overview ....................................................................................... 11 1.4 Project Description .................................................................................... 11 1.5 Optional Technologies .............................................................................. 12 1.6 Cost and Payment .................................................................................... 12 1.7 Special Considerations ............................................................................. 13 2.0 PROPOSER BACKGROUND / QUALIFICATIONS ................................................................ 14 3.0 INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS.......................................................................................
    [Show full text]